natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Regarding measure 2, the Commission had doubts about how the measure complied with all the conditions of the Community block exemption Regulation for regional aid [12].
kar zadeva ukrep 2, je Komisija dvomila, ali je ukrep izpolnjeval vse pogoje iz uredbe Skupnosti o skupinskih izjemah za regionalno pomoč [12];
Concerning measure 3, it was unclear to the Commission how the Spanish authorities would comply with the de minimis Regulation.
kar zadeva ukrep 3, Komisija ni razumela, kako bodo španski organi ravnali v skladu z Uredbo de minimis;
The Commission was concerned that the de minimis measure 4 could be unduly combined with other types of aid for the same eligible costs.
Komisija je bila zaskrbljena, da bi lahko bil ukrep 4 de minimis neupravičeno združen z drugimi vrstami pomoči za iste upravičene stroške;
As for measure 5, the information provided by the Spanish authorities was insufficient to assess whether it was compatible with the Commission block exemption Regulation for small and medium-sized enterprises [13].
kar zadeva ukrep 5, informacije, ki so jih predložili španski organi, niso bile dovolj za oceno združljivosti z Uredbo Komisije o skupinskih izjemah za majhna in srednje velika podjetja [13];
The legal basis for measures 6 and 7 had not been given.
pravna podlaga za ukrepa 6 in 7 ni bila navedena;
As for measure 8, the Commission was unsure whether the measure was discriminatory and required prior notification to the Commission.
kar zadeva ukrep 8, Komisija ni bila prepričana, ali je bil ukrep diskriminatoren in je bila zanj potrebna predhodna priglasitev Komisiji.
The Spanish authorities maintained that the decision to initiate the procedure was at variance with the Italgrani II case-law [14].
Španski organi so trdili, da odločitev o sprožitvi postopka odstopa od sodne prakse v zadevi Italgrani II [14].
The Spanish authorities explained that besides the legal basis of N 415/2004, a scheme for large undertakings, which expired on 31 December 2007 and had been mentioned in earlier correspondence, also applied, as did scheme XS 50/2005 [15] for SMEs, already approved, and which expired on 30 June 2007.
Španski organi so pojasnili, da sta se poleg pravne podlage N 415/2004 uporabljali tudi shema za velika podjetja, ki je prenehala veljati 31. decembra 2007 in je bila navedena v prejšnjih dopisih, ter shema XS 50/2005 [15] za MSP, ki je že bila odobrena in je prenehala veljati 30. junija 2007.
The budget actually disbursed was EUR 14,24 million in grants and EUR 36,72 million in interest-free loans with a 12-year term.
Iz proračuna se je dejansko izplačalo 14,24 milijona EUR v donacijah in 36,72 milijona EUR v brezobrestnih posojilih z 12-letnim rokom odplačila.
On 21 October 2008, the Spanish authorities reiterated their compliance with the conditions laid down in the scheme and confirmed that scheme N 415/2004 had not been and would not be applied after 31 December 2007 and that scheme XS 50/2005 had not been and would not be applied after 30 June 2008.
Španski organi so 21. oktobra 2008 ponovno poudarili, da bo bili pogoji iz sheme izpolnjeni, ter potrdili, da se shema N 415/2004 ni in se ne bo uporabljala po 31. decembru 2007, shema XS 50/2005 pa se ni se ne bo uporabljala po 30. juniju 2008.
The Spanish authorities explained that scheme N 101/2005 expired once Regulation 1628/2006 came into force [16].
Španski organi so pojasnili, da je shema N 101/2005 prenehala veljati, ko je začela veljati Uredba 1628/2006 [16].
The synthetic fibres industry was not eligible for schemes N 101/2005 and XR/70/2007, according to paragraph 4 of Order ITC/1014/2005 and paragraph 4 of Order ITC/3098/2006, as amended by paragraph 3 of Order ITC/643/2007.
Industrija sintetičnih vlaken na podlagi odstavka 4 Odredbe ITC/1014/2005 in odstavka 4 Odredbe ITC/3098/2006, kakor je bila spremenjena z odstavkom 3 Odredbe ITC/643/2007, ni bila upravičena do shem N 101/2005 in XR/70/2007.
The Spanish authorities also confirmed that the measure could qualify as initial investment, as in Ministerial Order ITC/643/2007 of 2 October 2007 amending Order ITC/3098/2006 [18].
Poleg tega so španski organi potrdili, da bi se lahko ukrep obravnaval kot začetna naložba, kot je navedeno v Ministrski odredbi ITC/643/2007 z dne 2. oktobra 2007 o spremembi Odredbe ITC/3098/2006 [18].
The description of the recipients in paragraph 4 of Ministerial Order ITC/643/2007 corresponded to the definition of initial investment as provided for by the Regional Aid Guidelines [19] and Regulation No 1628/2006.
Opis prejemnikov iz odstavka 4 Ministrske odredbe ITC/643/2007 je ustrezal opredelitvi začetne naložbe iz smernic o regionalni pomoči [19] in Uredbe št. 1628/2006.
The budget disbursed was EUR 10,97 million in grants and EUR 150,8 million in repayable loans.
Iz proračuna se je izplačalo 10,97 milijona EUR v donacijah in 150,8 milijona EUR v vračljivih posojilih.
The Spanish authorities confirmed that the recipients were exclusively SMEs.
Španski organi so potrdili, da so bili prejemniki izključno MSP.
The estimated maximum amount of aid of EUR 30000 per company had been calculated on the basis of a maximum loan of EUR 1000000. From 1 January 2006 until 13 January 2008, ten companies benefited from the measure, whilst 23 companies were refused.
Ocenjeni najvišji znesek pomoči v višini 30000 EUR na podjetje je bil izračunan na podlagi najvišjega posojila v višini 1000000 EUR. Koristi od ukrepa je od 1. januarja 2006 do 13. januarja 2008 imelo deset podjetij, medtem ko je bilo 23 podjetij zavrnjenih.
The interest rate subsidy of 0,5 percentage points had not been granted.
Subvencionirana obrestna mera v višini 0,5 odstotne točke ni bila dodeljena.
On 30 May 2008 and at the meeting on 11 September 2008, the Spanish authorities underlined that financing had been granted on normal market terms but that large undertakings and firms in difficulty were excluded.
Španski organi so 30. maja 2008 in na sestanku dne 11. septembra 2008 poudarili, da je bilo financiranje odobreno na podlagi normalnih tržnih pogojev, vendar so bila velika podjetja in podjetja v težavah izključena.
The Spanish authorities confirmed this in writing by letter of 21 October 2008 and undertook not to apply this measure until the expiry of the Textile Plan.
Španski organi so to pisno potrdili v dopisu z dne 21. oktobra 2008 in se zavezali, da tega ukrepa ne bodo uporabljali do prenehanja veljavnosti načrta za tekstilno industrijo.
Measure 4
Ukrep 4
The legal basis for this measure was the de minimis Regulation.
Pravna podlaga za ta ukrep je bila Uredba de minimis.
These amounts could not be combined with other aid if it meant that the permitted de minimis threshold was exceeded.
Teh zneskov ni bilo mogoče združevati z drugo pomočjo, če je to pomenilo prekoračitev dovoljenega praga de minimis.
Accordingly, every recipient had to fill in an annual declaration form.
V skladu s tem je moral vsak prejemnik izpolniti letni prijavni obrazec.
The ICO drew up annual records of the measure, which were sent to the credit institutions that collaborated with the ICO.
ICO je pripravil letno evidenco v zvezi z ukrepom in jo poslal kreditnim institucijam, ki so sodelovale z ICO.
The ICO also provided them with information about the average margins applied in Spain on the basis of data provided by the Bank of Spain.
ICO jih je obvestil tudi o povprečnih maržah v Španiji na podlagi podatkov Banke Španije.
On 21 October 2008, the Spanish authorities presented an overview of the de minimis aid granted in 2006, 2007 and 2008, together with the corresponding declarations.
Španski organi so 21. oktobra 2008 predložili pregled pomoči de minimis, dodeljene v letih 2006, 2007 in 2008, skupaj z ustreznimi izjavami.
The Spanish authorities undertook to comply with the de minimis Regulation in future.
Španski organi so se zavezali, da bodo v prihodnosti upoštevali Uredbo de minimis.
The measures in question were general measures open to all sectors.
Zadevni ukrepi so bili splošni ukrepi, ki so bili na voljo za vse sektorje.
The subsidised activities were similar to those mentioned in Article 5 of the SME Regulation.
Subvencionirane dejavnosti so bile podobne dejavnostim iz člena 5 Uredbe o MSP.
It was very difficult to estimate the amount of aid as the scheme was applied intermittently, indirectly and unclearly.
Znesek pomoči je bilo zelo zapleteno oceniti, ker se je shema uporabljala s prekinitvami, posredno in nejasno.
In line with Article 17(3)(m), ICEX had to check compatibility with other aid received on the basis of the same eligible costs.
ICEX je moral v skladu s členom 17(3)(m) preveriti združljivost z drugo pomočjo, prejeto na podlagi istih upravičenih stroškov.
The Spanish authorities provided a table showing that the de minimis aid granted by the ICO and the ICEX from 2006 to 2008 in the textile and clothing sector did not exceed the threshold of EUR 200000 per company over three tax years.
Španski organi so predložili tabelo, v kateri je prikazano, da višina pomoči de minimis, ki sta jo ICO in ICEX dodelila v tekstilnem in oblačilnem sektorju med letoma 2006 in 2008, ni presegla praga v višini 200000 EUR na podjetje v treh davčnih letih.
Measure 6
Ukrep 6
The measure was of a general nature, although it was primarily targeted at SMEs.
Ukrep je bil splošen, čeprav je namenjen zlasti MSP.
Therefore only firms with fewer than 5 employees could receive higher amounts than those paid in the previous year to the Social Security General Fund.
Zato so lahko le podjetja z manj kot pet zaposlenimi prejela višje zneske od zneskov, ki so bili prejšnje leto plačani v Splošni sklad za socialno varnost.
Other recipients could only recover a percentage of the contribution paid for special training purposes in the current financial year.
Drugi prejemniki so lahko izterjali le delež prispevka, ki je bil v tekočem poslovnem letu plačan za posebno usposabljanje.
According to the Spanish authorities, the aid intensity for SMEs was about 11,3 % and 20 % for large enterprises.
Glede na navedbe španskih organov je bila intenzivnost pomoči za MSP približno 11,3 %, za velika podjetja pa 20 %.
The planned budget was EUR 50000 per year.
Načrtovani proračun je bil 50000 EUR na leto.
By 13 January 2008, only one company had been selected for the measure.
Do 13. januarja 2008 je bilo za ukrep izbrano le eno podjetje.
The Spanish authorities confirmed that in accordance with the rescue and restructuring Guidelines [21], firms in difficulty were excluded from the scheme.
Španski organi so potrdili, da so bila v skladu s Smernicami za reševanje in prestrukturiranje [21] podjetja v težavah izključena iz sheme.
The Spanish authorities stressed that firms were only eligible if their employees over the age of 55 had been employed by the company for at least 5 years, which reduced eligibility to approximately 50 %.
Španski organi so poudarili, da so bila podjetja upravičena le, če so bili njihovi delavci, starejši od 55 let, zaposleni v podjetju najmanj 5 let, zato se je stopnja upravičenosti zmanjšala na približno 50 %.
Most of the recipients (53 %) were women, while 76 % had very low skills and training, which made it difficult for them to find another job.
Večina prejemnikov (53 %) je bila žensk, pri čemer jih je bilo 76 % zelo nizko kvalificiranih in usposobljenih, zato so le težko našle drugo zaposlitev.
The Spanish authorities stressed that Article 137(1) and Article 4 of the EC Treaty gave Member States autonomy in social security matters.
Španski organi so poudarili, da so države članice na podlagi člena 137(1) in člena 4 Pogodbe ES v zadevah socialne varnosti samostojne.
By 1 January 2008, 6313 employees in 2015 firms had benefited from the scheme, corresponding to 16,6 % of firms and 4,5 % of employees in the sector.
Do 1. januarja 2008 je bilo v shemo vključenih 6313 delavcev v 2015 podjetjih, kar pomeni 16,6 % podjetij in 4,5 % delavcev v sektorju.
56 % of the recipient companies benefited from the measure for only one worker, 30 % for 2, 3 or 4 workers and 13 % for between 5 and 30 workers; only 1 % benefited from the measure for more than 30 workers.
Koristi od ukrepa za le enega delavca je imelo 56 % podjetij, ki so prejela pomoč, za 2, 3 ali 4 delavce je imelo koristi 30 % podjetij, ki so prejela pomoč, za 5 do 30 delavcev pa je imelo koristi 13 % podjetij, ki so prejela pomoč; koristi od ukrepa za več kot 30 delavcev je imel le 1 % podjetij, ki so prejela pomoč.
The average aid per worker aged 55-58 was EUR 151/month, which corresponds to an intensity of 8,3 % of labour costs.
Povprečna pomoč na delavca, starega 55 do 58 let, je bila 151 EUR/mesec, kar pomeni intenzivnost 8,3 % stroškov dela.
Aid to workers aged 59 years amounted to EUR 44/month, i.e. 2,6 % of labour costs.
Pomoč za delavce, stare 59 let, je znašala 44 EUR/mesec, tj. 2,6 % stroškov dela.
Only 5,2 % of workers in the sector were eligible for this measure.
Do tega ukrepa je bilo upravičenih le 5,2 % delavcev v sektorju.
The average impact for a company was 0,3 % of its labour costs.
Povprečen učinek za podjetje je bil 0,3 % stroškov dela.
Despite its name, this was not a measure aimed at maintaining employment but an alternative to early retirement.
Ta ukrep kljub svojemu imenu ni bil namenjen ohranjanju delovnih mest, ampak je bil nadomestna možnost za predčasno upokojitev.
The Spanish authorities also claimed that the amount of EUR 151/month was a sufficient incentive for keeping the person employed rather than hiring the same person and not declaring him.
Poleg tega so španski organi navedli, da je bil znesek v višini 151 EUR/mesec dovolj velika spodbuda, da je oseba ostala zaposlena, namesto da bi jo najeli in je ne bi prijavili.
The measure could be applied to the synthetic fibres industry if the company had its main activity in the textile sector and if it was included in the collective bargaining for the textile and clothing sector rather than the chemical industry.
Ta ukrep se je lahko uporabljal za industrijo sintetičnih vlaken, če je podjetje glavno dejavnost izvajalo v tekstilnem sektorju in je bilo vključeno v pogajanja za sklenitev kolektivne pogodbe za tekstilni in oblačilni sektor in ne za kemično industrijo.
Consequently there was only a slight possibility that these synthetic fibre producers would benefit from the measure.
Zato je bila možnost, da bi koristi od ukrepa imeli ti proizvajalci sintetičnih vlaken, zelo majhna.
By letter of 17 September 2008 the Spanish authorities confirmed that this was a general measure and that no tax deferrals had been granted to companies in the textile sector under the Textile Plan.
Španski organi so z dopisom z dne 17. septembra 2008 potrdili, da je bil to splošen ukrep in da podjetjem v tekstilnem sektorju ni bil odobren odlog plačila davkov v skladu z načrtom za tekstilno industrijo.
On 21 October 2008, the Spanish authorities agreed that in the unlikely event of a textile or clothing company requesting a guarantee exemption for tax deferrals, the request would be dealt with on the basis of the general legislation and not the Textile Plan.
Španski organi so se 21. oktobra 2008 strinjali, da bi se zahteva tekstilnega ali oblačilnega podjetja glede oprostitve plačila zavarovanja za odlog plačila davkov obravnavala na podlagi splošne zakonodaje in ne na podlagi načrta za tekstilno industrijo, pri čemer takšna zahteva ni verjetna.
Lastly, the Spanish authorities undertook to comply with the Community legislation on the combination of de minimis measures.
Španski organi so se zavezali, da bodo upoštevali zakonodajo Skupnosti o združevanju ukrepov de minimis.
The Commission received comments from two parties, who wished to remain anonymous.
Komisija je prejela pripombe dveh strank, ki sta želeli ostati anonimni.
The first set of comments rejected sectoral State aid to the textile industry because it distorted competition.
V prvem sklopu pripomb je bila sektorska državna pomoč za tekstilno industrijo zavrnjena, ker je izkrivljala konkurenco.
The authors favoured the line taken by the Commission in the decision to initiate the procedure and underlined that the Textile Plan set no limits on the subsidies that each company could receive.
Avtorji so podprli pristop Komisije iz odločitve o sprožitvi postopka in poudarili, da načrt za tekstilno industrijo ne določa omejitev za subvencije, ki jih je lahko prejelo posamezno podjetje.
The justifications put forward by the Spanish authorities were insufficient.
Utemeljitve španskih organov so bile nezadostne.
Aid for R & D was useful, but should be limited to SMEs.
Pomoč za raziskave in razvoj je bila koristna, vendar bi morala biti omejena na MSP.
They considered that State aid for intangible assets should be rejected because it was too easily misused.
Avtorji so menili, da je treba državno pomoč za neopredmetena sredstva zavrniti, ker jo je mogoče preveč preprosto zlorabiti.
Furthermore, although training measures for employees laid off from the textile industry were beneficial, giving an 80 % discount on social security contributions would only benefit employees indirectly and was not acceptable.
Čeprav so bili ukrepi usposabljanja za odpuščene delavce koristni, bi 80-odstotno znižanje prispevkov za socialno varnost imelo za delavce le posredno korist in ni bilo sprejemljivo.
If textile companies had more advantages than other sectors as regards paying social security debts by instalments, this would constitute unlawful State aid.
Če bi tekstilna podjetja imela več prednosti glede obročnega plačevanja dolgovanih prispevkov za socialno varnost kot drugi sektorji, bi to bila nezakonita državna pomoč.
The other comments referred to Geotexan’s extremely low prices on the Spanish market, which could be due to implementation of the Spanish Textile Plan.
Druge pripombe so bile povezane z zelo nizkimi cenami podjetja Geotexan na španskem trgu, kar bi lahko bila posledica izvajanja španskega načrta za tekstilno industrijo.
SPAIN’S RESPONSE TO THE INTERESTED PARTIES’ COMMENTS
ODGOVOR ŠPANIJE NA PRIPOMBE ZAINTERESIRANIH STRANK
The Spanish authorities argued that the Commission did not classify the measures as State aid in the decision to initiate the procedure but simply referred to that possibility.
Španski organi so navedli, da Komisija v odločitvi o sprožitvi postopka ukrepov ni opredelila kot državno pomoč, ampak je to možnost le omenila.
Spain also replied that the training subsidy for companies with 50-249 employees amounted to a 20 % rather than an 80 % increase.
Poleg tega je Španija odgovorila, da se je subvencija za usposabljanje za podjetja s 50–249 delavci povečala za 20 % in ne za 80 %.
The intensity complied with the limits given in Article 4 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 68/2001 of 12 January 2001 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to training aid [22].
Intenzivnost je bila v skladu z omejitvami iz člena 4 Uredbe Komisije (ES) št. 68/2001 z dne 12. januarja 2001 o uporabi členov 87 in 88 Pogodbe ES pri pomoči za usposabljanje [22].
Moreover, the recipient of the training measure was the worker, who could either stay in the company or upgrade his training in order to seek a new job.
Poleg tega je bil prejemnik ukrepa usposabljanja delavec, ki je lahko ostal v podjetju ali nadgradil usposabljanje, da bi lahko poiskal novo zaposlitev.
As regards the second comment, the Spanish authorities argued that the allegations were submitted late and no proof was provided.
V zvezi z drugo pripombo so španski organi navedli, da so bile trditve predložene pozno in da niso bili zagotovljeni dokazi.
The aim of the Textile Plan was to adapt companies in the sector to market liberalisation and not to favour the position of any specific company.
Namen načrta za tekstilno industrijo ni bil prednostno obravnavati položaj posameznega podjetja, ampak prilagoditi podjetja v tem sektorju liberalizaciji trga.
There is no record of Geotexan having benefited from the training aid measures.
O tem, da je Geotexan imel koristi od ukrepov pomoči za usposabljanje, ni podatkov.
In any event, it would have received a subsidy of EUR 970 per year, which would not be a decisive factor in developing an aggressive pricing policy.
V vsakem primeru bi podjetje prejelo subvencijo v višini 970 EUR na leto, kar ne bi odločilno vplivalo na razvoj agresivne cenovne politike.
In short, the comments did not contain any new legal facts or grounds and they were presented in general terms without providing any proof.
Pripombe niso vsebovale novih pravnih dejstev ali podlage, pri čemer so bile splošne in niso bile utemeljene z dokazi.
Hence they should not be taken into account.
Zato se jih ne sme upoštevati.
State aid nature of the measures
Značaj državne pomoči, ki ga imajo ukrepi
As stated in Article 87(1) of the Treaty, any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, in so far as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the common market.
V skladu s členom 87(1) Pogodbe je vsaka pomoč, ki jo dodeli država članica, ali kakršna koli vrsta pomoči iz državnih sredstev, ki izkrivlja ali bi lahko izkrivljala konkurenco z dajanjem prednosti posameznim podjetjem ali proizvodnji posameznega blaga, nezdružljiva s skupnim trgom, kolikor prizadene trgovino med državami članicami.
According to the Spanish authorities, measure 3 had not been applied: the 0,5 % interest rate subsidy had not been granted and funding was based on normal market conditions.
Po navedbah španskih organov se ukrep 3 ni uporabljal: subvencionirana obrestna mera v višini 0,5 % ni bila dodeljena in financiranje je temeljilo na normalnih tržnih pogojih.
The Commission asked the Spanish authorities for information about the interest rates actually granted to the ten recipients.
Komisija je španske organe zaprosila za informacije o obrestnih merah, ki so bile desetim prejemnikom dejansko dodeljene.
Given the tiny difference between the two rates, the Commission must conclude that the State aid would have been so small that it would fall below the de minimis threshold.
Glede na neznatno razliko med obrestnima merama Komisija ugotavlja, da bi bila državna pomoč tako nizka, da bi bila pod pragom de minimis.
The Spanish authorities undertook not to apply this measure until the Plan expired.
Španski organi so se zavezali, da tega ukrepa do izteka načrta ne bodo uporabljali.
In these circumstances, the Commission must conclude that the amount of aid was less than the de minimis threshold and that it was not a question of State aid.
Glede na to Komisija ugotavlja, da je bil znesek pomoči pod pragom de minimis in da ni šlo za vprašanje državne pomoči.
On measures 4 and 5 the Spanish authorities said that they were covered by the Commission Regulation on de minimis aid and therefore did not constitute State aid.
V zvezi z ukrepoma 4 in 5 so španski organi navedli, da ju zajema Uredba Komisije o pomoči de minimis, zato nista pomenila državne pomoči.
The Commission must accordingly examine whether the conditions of the de minimis Regulation were fulfilled.
Glede na to mora Komisija preučiti, ali so bili izpolnjeni pogoji iz Uredbe de minimis.
As regards measure 4 the Spanish authorities provided evidence of having complied with the de minimis Regulation in the past and undertook to do so in future.
V zvezi z ukrepom 4 so španski organi predložili dokaze, da so v preteklosti upoštevali Uredbo de minimis, in so se zavezali, da bodo tako ravnali tudi v prihodnosti.
They also gave assurances that they had complied with the new Communication on Reference Rates since 1 July 2008.
Poleg tega so zagotovili, da od 1. julija 2008 upoštevajo novo sporočilo o referenčnih obrestnih merah.
Regarding measure 5, the de minimis Regulation excludes aid for export promotion.
V zvezi z ukrepom 5 Uredba de minimis izključuje pomoč za spodbujanje izvoza.