natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In the present case, it should be pointed out straight away that, inasmuch as the tax measure at issue can benefit only the users of certain assets and the members of the EIGs financing them and in fact benefits mainly the transport and financial sectors, the condition of specificity is already fulfilled.
V tem primeru je treba najprej opozoriti, da so do zadevne davčne določbe upravičeni le uporabniki nekaterih sredstev in člani gospodarskih interesnih združenj, ki jih financirajo, ter imajo večinoma dejansko koristi le v sektorju prometa in finančnemu sektorju, s čimer je pogoj specifičnosti že izpolnjen.
Other financing schemes, concerning assets in sectors other than transport and/or having a depreciation period of less than eight years, might include safeguards of such a character as to rule out any attempt at tax optimisation.
Dejansko so lahko drugi načrti financiranja, ki zadevajo sredstva iz sektorjev razen sektorja prometa in/ali katerih amortizacija traja manj kot osem let, zagotovilo za izključitev možnosti namena davčne optimizacije.
Consequently, in view of the limited scope of this tax measure, it is not necessary, in order to establish the selective character of the measure, to determine whether the competent national authorities have a discretionary power in the measure’s application.
Zato za ugotovitev selektivnosti spornega ukrepa glede na omejeno področje uporabe tega davčnega mehanizma ni treba dokazati, da imajo pristojni nacionalni organi diskrecijsko pravico glede uporabe omenjenega ukrepa.
When questioned about the scope of the examination they carry out to establish whether the investment in question is of significant economic and social interest both in general and from an employment standpoint in particular, the French authorities stated that that interest was determined in the light of six criteria, including that of ‘the impact of the investment on the economic environment of the area in which it is to be carried out and in which the user operates’.
Francoski organi so na vprašanje o pomenu preverjanja, ki ga po njihovem mnenju uporabljajo glede pogoja, ki se izhaja iz tega, da zadevna naložba z vidika splošnega interesa in zlasti na področju zaposlovanja prinaša znatne gospodarske in socialne koristi, odgovorili, da se ta korist oceni na podlagi šestih meril, ki temeljijo na „učinkih naložb v gospodarsko okolje na območju, na katerem se izvaja in v katerem se razvija uporabnik“.
In the Commission’s opinion, the assessment of that criterion necessarily involves giving the national authorities a margin of discretion.
Tako Komisija ocenjuje, da izpolnjevanje tega pogoja nacionalnim organom nujno zagotavlja diskrecijsko pravico.
Despite the legitimacy of such a goal, there is no link between this criterion as to the existence of an economic interest on the part of the investment and the objective sought by the legislature in making the carrying out of the investment subject to the prior grant of ministerial approval.
Kljub legitimnosti takšnega cilja se lahko ugotovi, da ni povezave med tem pogojem, ki se nanaša na obstoj gospodarske koristi naložbe, in smotrnostjo, za katero si prizadeva zakonodajalec s predhodno dodelitvijo soglasja ministra za izvedbo naložb.
The criteria governing the grant of approval are said to be intended to help establish that recourse to the method of financing via an EIG does not pursue any tax optimisation goal.
Dejansko morajo pogoji za dodelitev soglasja omogočati ugotovitev, da cilj uporabe načina financiranja s strani gospodarskega interesnega združenja ni davčna optimizacija.
The criterion as to the economic interest of the investment is, however, not likely to prevent such optimisation.
Tako pogoj, povezan z gospodarsko koristjo naložb, ne preprečuje takšne optimizacije.
Irrespective of the period of depreciation of the assets concerned, such financing operations may well not pursue any tax optimisation goal, but this does not necessarily mean that they are deprived of any significant economic and social interest primarily in terms of employment.
Cilj takšnih postopkov financiranja, ne glede na trajanje amortizacije zadevnih sredstev, ni nujno davčna optimizacija, vendar je lahko hkrati tudi brez znatnih gospodarskih in socialnih koristi, zlasti na področju zaposlovanja.
Reference may be made once more here to Senate Report No 413, which states that the criterion as to the existence of a significant economic and social interest is ‘a means to promote goods manufactured in France or financing operations for the benefit of a French user’.
V tem smislu se je treba ponovno sklicevati na poročilo Senata št. 413, iz katerega je razvidno, da je pogoj, povezan z obstojem znatnih gospodarskih in socialnih koristi, „način, na katerega se zagotovi prednost za sredstva, proizvedena na nacionalnem ozemlju, ali za financiranja, izvršena v korist francoskega uporabnika“.
More generally, the report also states that the approval procedure leaves the authorities too wide a margin of discretion.
Bolj splošno je v tem poročilu tudi navedeno, da postopek soglasja upravi zagotavlja preveliko diskrecijsko pravico.
The unsuitability of the criterion as to the economic interest of the investment in the light of the objective pursued therefore increases, in the Commission's opinion, the margin of discretion enjoyed by the national authorities in its application.
Po mnenju Komisije se zaradi neustreznosti pogoja, povezanega z gospodarsko koristjo vlaganj v zvezi z zastavljenim ciljem, torej krepi diskrecijska pravica nacionalnih organov pri njegovi uporabi.
Still concerning the margin of discretion enjoyed by the French authorities for approval granting purposes, it should be noted that the Constitutional Council decision of 30 December 1987, which was referred to by the French authorities and some interested parties, is irrelevant in the present context.
Glede diskrecijske pravice francoskih organov v zvezi z dodelitvijo soglasja je treba ugotoviti tudi, da se sklep ustavnega sveta z dne 30. decembra 1987, na katerega se sklicujejo francoski organi in zainteresirane stranke, v tem primeru ne upošteva.
What was involved in that instance was a tax measure which provided that a new legal person resulting from the merger of two companies could take over for a limited period all or part of the losses of the merged companies and that, in the event of the partial contribution of capital to a company in the group, any losses not yet deducted before the merger could be set off, with the approval of the Minister for the Budget and within the limits of that approval, against any future profits.
V tej zadevi je bil sporen davčni mehanizem, s katerim je omogočeno, da nova pravna oseba, ki nastane pri združitvi dveh družb, za določen čas prevzame celotni ali delni primanjkljaj združenih družb ter po predhodnem soglasju ministra za proračun in v okviru tega soglasja v primeru delnega vložka aktive v eno od družb v skupini omogoči prenos primanjkljaja, ki še ni bil odbit pred združitvijo, na poznejši dobiček.
The Constitutional Council was asked to rule on the conformity of that approval procedure with Article 34 of the Constitution, which entrusts to the legislature the task of determining the scope of a tax advantage.
Ustavni svet je bil pozvan, da poda svoje mnenje glede skladnosti tega odobritvenega postopka s členom 34 Ustave, v skladu s katerim zakonodajalec opredeli področje uporabe finančne ugodnosti.
It held that the measure in question did not allow the legislature to subdelegate its taxation powers to the Minister and that the latter had conferred on him only the power to ensure, in keeping with the legislature's objective of preventing tax avoidance, that the conditions laid down by law were met.
V zvezi s tem je upošteval, da zadevna določba zakonodajalcu ne omogoča nadaljnjega prenosa davčne pristojnosti na ministra in da je slednjemu podeljena le pravica, da v skladu s ciljem zakonodajalca o preprečevanju izogibanja davku, zagotovi spoštovanje pogojev, ki jih določa zakon.
On that occasion, what the Constitutional Council was being called on to do was to rule on compliance with the respective powers of the legislative and regulatory authorities in tax matters and not at all on whether the Minister had a discretionary power when adopting the individual measures needed to implement the law.
V tem sklepu je bil ustavni svet pozvan, naj predstavi svoje stališče o upoštevanju zakonodajnih in ureditvenih pristojnosti na davčnem področju, ne pa o obstoju pristojnosti vodje ministrstva za presojo sprejetja posameznih ukrepov, potrebnih za izvajanje zakonodaje.
In any event, the Commission considers that the conditions of Article 87(1) of the Treaty cannot be called into question by decisions of national courts.
Komisija vseeno ocenjuje, da sodna praksa nacionalnih sodišč ne sme zbujati dvomov v pogoje iz člena 87(1) Pogodbe.
Fourthly, in response to the argument that the national authorities did not have arbitrary power since their decisions could be appealed against before the national courts with a view to reviewing the grounds for withholding approval, it should be pointed out that, in order to preclude characterisation as a general measure, it is not necessary to determine whether the conduct of the tax administration is arbitrary.
Četrtič, glede argumenta, v skladu s katerim nacionalni organi nimajo diskrecijske pravice, saj se lahko na odločitev teh organov pritoži na nacionalnih sodiščih z namenom presoje vzrokov za zavrnitev odobritve, je treba opozoriti, da za ugotovitev obstoja splošnega ukrepa ni potrebno preveriti, ali je vedenje davčne uprave samovoljno.
It need only be established that the administration has a discretionary power enabling it to vary the conditions for granting the tax concession in question according to the characteristics of the investment project submitted for its assessment.
Dejansko zadostuje ugotovitev, da ima omenjena uprava diskrecijsko pravico, ki ji omogoča, da prilagodi pogoje dodelitve zadevne davčne ugodnosti glede na značilnosti načrtov vlaganj, predloženih v njeno presojo.
It has been ruled, moreover, that debt remissions granted in the course of judicial proceedings and in accordance with the applicable national law were selective in character as they did not flow automatically from the application of the law, but from the discretionary decisions made by the public bodies in question.
Razen tega je bilo ocenjeno, da je oprostitev dolga, ki je odobrena na podlagi sodnega postopka in v skladu z veljavno nacionalno zakonodajo, selektivna, ker ne izhaja samodejno iz uporabe zakonodaje, ampak iz diskrecijske izbire zadevnih javnih organov.
In making this ruling, the Court again made it clear that Article 87(1) of the Treaty does not distinguish between measures of state intervention by reference to their causes or aims but defines them in relation to their effects.
Sodnik Skupnosti je poudaril, da se v členu 87(1) Pogodbe ukrepi državnega posredovanja ne razlikujejo glede na svoje vzroke in cilje, ampak so opredeljeni glede na svoj učinek.
In the present case, a fortiori, the fact that decisions withholding approval may be appealed against before a national court cannot call into question the existence of a margin of discretion on the part of the national authorities in applying the ministerial approval grant criteria.
Tako v tem primeru zlasti dejstvo, da se lahko na sklepe o zavrnitvi soglasja pritoži pred nacionalnim sodiščem, ne sme zbujati dvomov v obstoj diskrecijske pravice nacionalnih organov pri uporabi pogojev za podelitev soglasja ministra.
Lastly, the Commission considers that the French authorities’ argument centred on the absence of a distinction based on the nationality of the members of an EIG and of users likewise does not call into question the selective character of the scheme provided for in Article 39 CA of the General Tax Code, especially since Senate Report No 413 states that the condition as to the existence of a significant economic and social interest of the investment is ‘a means to promote goods manufactured in France or financing operations for the benefit of a French user’.
Komisija nazadnje ocenjuje, da trditev francoskih organov, ki temelji na nezadostnem razlikovanju na podlagi državljanstva članov gospodarskega interesnega združenja in uporabnikov, ne sme zbujati dvomov o selektivnosti sheme po členu 39 CA Splošnega zakonika o davkih, poleg tega je v poročilu Senata št. 413 navedeno, da je pogoj, ki se nanaša na obstoj znatnih gospodarskih in socialnih koristi naložb „način, na katerega se zagotovi prednost za blago, proizvedeno na nacionalnem ozemlju, ali za financiranje, izvršeno v korist francoskega uporabnika“.
In the light of the above, the Commission considers that the scheme provided for in Article 39 CA of the General Tax Code is selective in character.
V skladu z zgoraj navedenim Komisija meni, da je shema iz člena 39 CA Splošnega zakonika o davkih selektivna.
The relevance of the exception based on the nature and overall structure of the tax system
Primernost izjeme na podlagi narave in gospodarnosti davčnega sistema
The French authorities claim that the combined provisions of the second paragraph of Article 39 C and Article 39 CA of the General Tax Code are a means of ex ante control by the tax authorities aimed at combating tax avoidance through the abuse of movable asset financing operations by tax-transparent structures such as EIGs.
Francoski organi trdijo, da povezane določbe iz drugega pododstavka člena 39 C in člena 39 CA Splošnega zakonika o davkih omogočajo predhodni nadzor, ki je na voljo davčni upravi za preprečevanje davčne utaje zaradi zlorabe postopkov financiranja premičnin z davčno preglednimi strukturami, kot so gospodarska interesna združenja.
They consider that the scheme provided for in Article 39 CA of the General Tax Code is thus justified by the nature and overall structure of the tax system.
Menijo, da je shema iz člena 39 CA Splošnega zakonika o davkih utemeljena z naravo in gospodarnostjo davčnega sistema.
They state in this connection that the scheme provided for in Article 39 CA of the General Tax Code is ‘based on objective, horizontal tax avoidance combating criteria’.
V zvezi s tem natančneje navajajo, da shema iz člena 39 CA Splošnega zakonika o davkih „temelji na objektivnih in horizontalnih merilih za preprečevanje davčnih utaj“.
It is true that the definition of state aid does not include national measures introducing a differentiation between undertakings when that differentiation arises from the nature and overall structure of the system of charges of which they form part.
Res je, da pojem državne pomoči ne vključuje državnih ukrepov, ki uvajajo razlikovanje med podjetji, kadar to razlikovanje izhaja iz narave in gospodarnosti sistema stroškov, katerega del so.
This justification based on the nature or overall structure of the tax system reflects the consistency of a specific tax measure with the internal logic of the tax system in general.
Ta utemeljitev na podlagi značilnosti ali gospodarnosti davčnega sistema, kaže na skladnost posebnega davčnega ukrepa z notranjimi načeli davčnega sistema na splošno.
However, tax differentiations cannot be simply dictated by the general aims and objectives pursued by the State in adopting the measures in question.
Tako davčno razlikovanje ne more izhajati preprosto iz splošnih namenov in ciljev, ki jih država spoštuje pri sprejemanju zadevnih ukrepov.
In the present case, the Commission considers that, by limiting the amount of deductible depreciation, the second paragraph of Article 39 C of the General Tax Code does in fact seek to combat abusive recourse to tax-transparent structures with a view to achieving a tax saving as part of operations to finance assets leased out or otherwise made available.
V tem primeru Komisija ocenjuje, da je drugi pododstavek člena 39 C Splošnega zakonika o davkih z omejitvijo zneska amortizacije, ki se lahko odšteje, učinkovito usmerjen k preprečevanju zlorabe davčno preglednih struktur zaradi pridobivanja davčnega dobička iz postopkov financiranja najetih ali drugače zagotovljenih sredstev.
That objective is clearly necessary and rational for purposes of ensuring the effectiveness of the scheme of tax-deductible depreciation of assets leased out or otherwise made available and must therefore be considered to form an inherent part of the said scheme.
Zdi se, da je ta cilj potreben in praktičen, da se zagotovi učinkovit davčni sistem amortizacij najetih ali razpoložljivih sredstev ter ga je zato treba obravnavati kot sestavni del navedenega sistema.
On the other hand, the scheme provided for in Article 39 CA of the General Tax Code cannot be justified by the nature and overall structure of the French system of depreciation of assets leased out or otherwise made available.
Nasprotno pa sheme iz člena 39 CA Splošnega zakonika o davkih ni mogoče utemeljiti z značilnostmi in gospodarnostjo francoskega sistema amortizacij najetih ali drugače zagotovljenih sredstev.
Although derogations from the ceiling in principle on depreciation provided for in the second paragraph of Article 39 C of the General Tax Code are admissible, they should be based only on criteria the fulfilment of which would be capable of preventing recourse, for tax optimisation purposes, to the financing of the said assets by means of tax-transparent structures such as EIGs.
Tudi če bi bilo odstopanje od zgornje meje načela amortizacije iz drugega pododstavka člena 39 C Splošnega zakonika o davkih sprejemljivo, bi moralo to odstopanje temeljiti izključno na pogojih, katerih izpolnjevanje bi preprečevalo zlorabo navedenih sredstev za namene davčne optimizacije z davčno preglednimi strukturami, kot so gospodarska interesna združenja.
Firstly, the limitation of the scope of the derogation in question to the financing of assets depreciable over a period of at least eight years cannot be justified, either in itself or in combination with the other approval grant criteria, in the light of the objective pursued by the French authorities.
Tako, po eni strani, glede na zastavljen cilj francoskih organov ni mogoče utemeljiti, da se področje uporabe zadevnega odstopanja od financiranja blaga, ki je predmet amortizacije v obdobju vsaj osmih let, omeji samo po sebi ali skupaj z drugimi pogoji za dodelitev soglasja.
During the course of the present administrative procedure, those authorities have provided no explanation as to why, in the light of the objective of combating tax avoidance, the derogation was limited to assets having such a depreciation period.
Sicer pa francoski organi v okviru sedanjega upravnega postopka niso zagotovili nobene razlage o izbiri, z ozirom na zastavljeni cilj preprečevanja davčnih utaj, da bi se to odstopanje omejilo na blago s takšnim trajanjem amortizacije.
Secondly, as indicated above, of the ministerial approval grant criteria, that which relates to the existence on the part of the financing operation of an economic and social interest, particularly in relation to employment, leaves the national authorities a margin of discretion.
Po drugi strani, kot je bilo že prej navedeno, se nacionalnim organom zagotovi diskrecijska pravica s enim izmed pogojev za dodelitev soglasja ministra, ki je povezan z obstojem gospodarskih in socialnih koristi v postopku financiranja, zlasti na področju zaposlovanja.
This criterion bears no relationship, moreover, to France’s objective of combating tax avoidance.
Razen tega ta pogoj ni povezan s ciljem Francije, da bi se borila proti davčnim utajam.
At all events, such a social objective is not capable in itself of excluding the scheme at issue from classification as aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty inasmuch as that article does not distinguish between measures of state intervention by reference to their causes or their aims but defines them in relation to their effects.
Tak socialni cilj sam po sebi ne more preprečiti, da zadevna shema ne bi pomenila pomoči v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe, ker se v tem členu ukrepi državnega posredovanja ne razlikujejo glede na vzroke ali cilje državnih pomoči, ampak so opredeljeni glede na svoje učinke.
It has been ruled, furthermore, that Article 87(1) of the Treaty would be deprived of effectiveness if specific measures were to be excluded from classification as state aid for reasons to do with the creation or maintenance of employment, since it is with a view to creating or safeguarding jobs that most aid measures are granted.
Poleg tega je bilo že odločeno, da člen 87(1) Pogodbe ne bo učinkovit, če se iz opredelitve državne pomoči izključijo posebni ukrepi, ki se nanašajo na razloge za odpiranje ali ohranjanje delovnih mest, saj je večina pomoči dodeljene za odpiranje ali ohranjanje delovnih mest.
The French authorities also claim that the tax scheme provided for in Article 39 CA of the General Tax Code has made possible a rejuvenation and consolidation of the commercial sea fleet.
V tem smislu francoski organi poudarjajo tudi, da je davčna shema iz člena 39 CA Splošnega zakonika o davkih omogočila obnovo in okrepitev pomorske flote.
Similarly, Air France states that the scheme promotes the renewal of its fleet, which has been made necessary by changes in environmental standards.
Air France prav tako navaja, da ta shema spodbuja obnovo njihove flote, ki je potrebna zaradi spremenjenih okoljskih standardov.
However, apart from the fact that such claims confirm the Commission’s assessment as to the selective character of the scheme at issue, the pursuit of economic or industrial policy objectives cannot be considered to exclude a selective measure from the application of Article 87(1) of the Treaty.
Razen dejstva, da so take navedbe potrjujejo oceno Komisije glede selektivnosti omenjene sheme, izpolnjevanja ciljev gospodarske ali industrijske politike ni mogoče obravnavati kot načina, ki ne dopušča, da se za selektivni ukrep uporabi člen 87(1) Pogodbe.
It has been ruled, moreover, in a similar context that a scheme providing for an interest rate subsidy on loans granted to natural persons, SMEs, local and regional public bodies and bodies providing local public services for purchasing vehicles or for leasing them with intention to purchase was an aid measure and could not be justified by the fact that it was aimed at modernising the commercial vehicles on the road in Spain in the interest of environmental protection and improving road safety.
V podobnem smislu je bilo odločeno, da je shema, ki določa subvencioniranje obrestne mere pri kreditu za nakup ali najem z možnostjo odkupa vozil pravnim osebam, malim in srednje velikim podjetjem, lokalnim javnim organom in podjetjem, ki zagotavljajo javne storitve, pomoč in je ni mogoče upravičiti z dejstvom, da je cilj tega ukrepa zagotoviti obnovo industrijskega voznega parka v Španiji zaradi skrbi za varstvo okolja in prometne varnosti.
All of the general interest grounds to which the scheme at issue is claimed to have the object or effect of contributing — namely employment and the renewal or consolidation of the ships or aircraft concerned — however legitimate they may be, are not justified by the nature and overall structure of the tax scheme at issue and are even irrelevant when it comes to classifying a measure as state aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty.
Čeprav so zakoniti vsi razlogi v splošnem interesu, pri katerih je bil cilj ali učinek zadevne sheme prispevek k zaposlovanju, obnovi ali okrepitvi zadevnih pomorskih ali letalskih flot, niso upravičeni z naravo ali gospodarnostjo zadevnega davčnega sistema in so neučinkoviti, če je treba opredeliti, ali je ukrep državna pomoč v skladu s členom 87(1) Pogodbe.
The Commission also considers that it is irrelevant, for the purposes of applying Article 87(1) of the Treaty, that the scheme provided for in Article 39 CA of the General Tax Code is less favourable to beneficiaries than was the co-ownership shares scheme, the scheme at issue in the case falling to be assessed by the Commission at the time of its implementation.
Komisija meni tudi, da za namene člena 87(1) Pogodbe ni pomembno, ali je shema iz člena 39 CA Splošnega zakonika o davkih manj ugodna za te upravičence kot ureditev skupnega vlaganja v pomorstvu, zadevno shemo pa mora v tem primeru Komisija oceniti ob začetku izvajanja.