natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
AMOUNT OF AID
ZNESEK POMOČI
Paragraph 96 of the opening decision raises doubts whether the aid can be quantified by using benchmarks like NR’s credit default swaps prices or interest rate on credit facilities offered to NR by private banks after 17 September 2007 since they already take into account the rescue of the bank by the State.
Odstavek 96 odločitve o sprožitvi postopka sproža dvome, ali je mogoče pomoč opredeliti z uporabo meril uspešnosti, kot so cene poslov kreditnih zamenjav banke NR ali obrestna mera za kredite iz zasebnih bank za banko NR po 17. septembru 2007, ker te že upoštevajo reševanje banke s strani države.
THE EXTENSION DECISION
ODLOČITEV O RAZŠIRITVI POSTOPKA
The Commission indicated in paragraphs 47 and 48 of the extension decision that the split-up could be compared to an asset relief measure within the scope of the Communication from the Commission on the treatment of impaired assets in the Community banking sector [30] (hereinafter ‘IAC’).
Komisija je v odstavkih 47 in 48 odločitve o razširitvi postopka navedla, da se lahko delitev primerja z ukrepom finančne pomoči v okviru področja uporabe Sporočila Komisije o obravnavanju oslabljenih sredstev v bančnem sektorju Skupnosti [30] (v nadaljnjem besedilu: IAC).
It therefore invited the UK authorities to provide information on this issue.
Zato je pozvala organe Združenega kraljestva, da predložijo informacije v zvezi s tem vprašanjem.
RESTORATION OF LONG-TERM VIABILITY
OBNOVITEV DOLGOROČNE SPOSOBNOSTI PREŽIVETJA
In paragraph 58 of the extension decision the Commission noted positively that BankCo seems to become a viable bank as a result of the measures proposed by the United Kingdom and does not risk encountering the same liquidity problems as NR. However, it also observed that no business plan demonstrating how BankCo will become a viable entity in the medium- to long-term had been submitted and that therefore the viability of BankCo could not be demonstrated.
V odstavku 58 odločitve o razširitvi postopka je Komisija pozitivno ugotovila, da družba BankCo postaja preživetja sposobna banka zaradi ukrepov, ki jih je predlagalo Združeno kraljestvo, pri čemer ne obstaja tveganje za podobne težave z likvidnostjo kot pri banki NR. Vendar je Komisija tudi ugotovila, da ni bil predložen noben poslovni načrt, ki bi prikazoval, kako bo družba BankCo srednje- in dolgoročno postala subjekt, sposoben preživetja, zaradi česar sposobnosti preživetja družbe BankCo ni mogoče dokazati.
AID LIMITED TO THE MINIMUM/OWN CONTRIBUTION
POMOČ, OMEJENA NA NAJMANJŠO POTREBNO/LASTNI PRISPEVEK
The Commission observed in paragraphs 59 and 58 of the extension decision that the aid to be granted to BankCo was of such a type and quantity that it would release BankCo from all the risky loans made by NR in the past and from the obligation to pay back the government loan, while it would receive good quality assets and a considerable amount of cash.
Komisija je v odstavkih 59 in 58 odločitve o razširitvi postopka ugotovila, da je pomoč za dodelitev družbi BankCo takšne vrste in obsega, da bi družbi BankCo omogočila odpravo vseh tveganih posojil banke NR v preteklosti in odpravo obveznosti za poplačilo državnega posojila, medtem ko bi prejela kakovostna sredstva in visok znesek denarnih sredstev.
Furthermore, the Commission noted that the UK authorities accept to fully finance the losses of AssetCo, whose mortgage book is valued at book value instead of the real economic value.
Poleg tega je Komisija ugotovila, da organi Združenega kraljestva soglašajo s polnim financiranjem izgub družbe AssetCo, katere hipoteke so ocenjene po knjigovodski vrednosti in ne po pravi tržni vrednosti.
The Commission therefore expressed strong doubts as to whether the aid was limited to the minimum.
Zato je Komisija močno dvomila, ali je bila pomoč omejena na najnižji znesek.
As regards NR’s own contribution, the Commission expressed doubts in paragraph 60 of the extension decision whether it would be sufficient since some of the measures in the first restructuring plan that could be regarded as own contribution were abandoned in the amended restructuring plan, in particular the active redemption policy and the cap on new lending.
V zvezi z lastnim prispevkom banke NR je Komisija izrazila dvome v odstavku 60 odločitve o razširitvi postopka, ali bi bil prispevek zadosten, ker so bili nekateri ukrepi iz prvega načrta za prestrukturiranje, ki bi se lahko obravnavali kot lastni prispevek, v spremenjenem načrtu za prestrukturiranje izpuščeni, zlasti aktivna odkupna politika in omejevanje novih posojil.
LIMITING NEGATIVE SPILL-OVER EFFECTS/MEASURES LIMITING THE DISTORTION OF COMPETITION
OMEJEVANJE NEGATIVNIH UČINKOV PRELIVANJA/UKREPI ZA OMEJEVANJE IZKRIVLJANJA KONKURENCE
In paragraph 62 of the extension decision the Commission questioned whether the funding available to BankCo after the split-up of NR will allow it to crowd out competitors on the mortgage lending market, thus leading to negative spill-over effects.
V odstavku 62 odločitve o razširitvi postopka je Komisija dvomila, ali bo financiranje, ki je na voljo družbi BankCo po delitvi banke NR, omogočilo izločitev konkurence na trgu hipotekarnih posojil, kar bi povzročilo negativne učinke prelivanja.
Concerning measures limiting the distortion of competition, the Commission expressed strong doubts in paragraphs 63 to 66 of the extension decision on whether the measures proposed were sufficient.
V zvezi z ukrepi za omejevanje izkrivljanja konkurence je Komisija izrazila močne pomisleke v odstavkih 63 do 66 odločitve o razširitvi postopka, in sicer o tem, ali so bili predlagani ukrepi zadostni.
Firstly the Commission noted that after the split-up of NR, BankCo will emerge as a very strong and competitive bank unburdened by the risky loans made by NR in the past.
Najprej je Komisija ugotovila, da bo družba BankCo po delitvi banke NR postala zelo močna in konkurenčna banka, neobremenjena s tveganimi posojili, ki jih je odobrila banka NR v preteklosti.
The Commission therefore doubted whether the fact that BankCo will be a bank with a small balance sheet would offset the distortion of competition.
Zato je Komisija dvomila, ali bo dejstvo, da bo družba BankCo banka z majhno bilančno vsoto, izravnalo izkrivljanje konkurence.
Furthermore, the Commission noted that, taking into account the large amount of aid NR received, it was uncertain that sufficient measures could be implemented to avoid undue distortion of competition without endangering the viability of NR. It finally observed that some of the measures limiting distortion of competition had been amended or abandoned.
Poleg tega je Komisija ugotovila, da ob upoštevanju visokega zneska pomoči, ki ga je prejela banka NR, ni jasno, ali je mogoče izvajati zadostne ukrepe za preprečevanje neupravičenega izkrivljanja konkurence brez ogrožanja sposobnosti preživetja banke NR. Nazadnje je Komisija ugotovila, da so bili nekateri ukrepi za omejevanje izkrivljanja konkurence spremenjeni ali opuščeni.
The Commission received third party comments following publication of the opening decision and the extension decision.
Komisija je po objavi odločitve o sprožitvi postopka in odločitve o razširitvi postopka prejela pripombe tretjih oseb.
With regard to the opening decision, the Commission received comments from Unite the Union, the Building Societies Association (hereinafter ‘BSA’), SRM Global Master Fund LP, Alliance & Leicester Building Society, the British Banking Association, Jim Cousins (UK MP), Doug Henderson (UK MP) and the Newcastle authorities.
V zvezi z odločitvijo o sprožitvi postopka je Komisija prejela pripombe od sindikata Unite the Union, združenja Building Societies Association (v nadaljnjem besedilu: združenje BSA), sklada SRM Global Master Fund LP, družbe Alliance & Leicester Building Society, britanskega bančnega združenja, poslancev Jima Cousinsa in Douga Hendersona ter organov Newcastla.
Although those comments do not relate to the amended restructuring plan that was the subject of the extension decision, they may be relevant in the broader context of this case and will be shortly discussed in section 4.1 of this Decision insofar as they are of a general nature.
Čeprav navedene pripombe ne zadevajo spremenjenega načrta za prestrukturiranje, ki je bil predmet odločitve o razširitvi postopka, so lahko pomembne v širšem smislu te zadeve in bodo na kratko obravnavane v oddelku 4.1 te odločbe, če so splošne narave.
Third party comments concerning the extension decision were received from Leeds Building Society, the BSA and a British citizen.
Pripombe tretjih oseb, ki zadevajo odločitev o razširitvi postopka, so poslali družba Leeds Building Society, združenje BSA in britanski državljan.
OPENING DECISION
ODLOČITEV O SPROŽITVI POSTOPKA
The comments received by third parties regarding the opening decision focussed mainly on the distortions of competition caused by the guarantees on NR’s retail and wholesale deposits. The increase in NR’s retail deposit base in the first months of 2008 caused particular concern as third parties indicated that NR was offering high savings rates while backed by a government guarantee, thus leading to a competitive disadvantage for NR’s competitors.
Bistvo pripomb, ki so jih poslale tretje osebe v zvezi z odločitvijo o sprožitvi postopka, je bilo večinoma izkrivljanje konkurence, ki so ga povzročila jamstva za vloge na drobno in debelo banke NR. Povečanje osnove vlog na drobno banke NR v prvem mesecu leta 2008 je povzročilo zlasti skrbi tretjih oseb, ki so navedle, da je banka NR ponujala visoke varčevalne kvote, medtem ko je prejemala jamstvo države, s čimer je povzročala neugoden konkurenčni položaj konkurentov banke NR. Tretje osebe so ugotovile, da je konkurenčni okvir ublažil nekatere njihove skrbi.
The third parties noted that the Competitive Framework seemed to mitigate some of their concerns. Other comments concerned the importance of NR as a large employer in the North-East of England and the compensation shareholders of NR should receive due to the nationalisation undertaken by the United Kingdom.
Druge pripombe so zadevale pomen banke NR kot velikega delodajalca v severovzhodni Angliji in nadomestilo, ki bi ga morali delničarji banke NR prejeti zaradi nacionalizacije, ki jo je izvedlo Združeno kraljestvo.
EXTENSION DECISION
ODLOČITEV O RAZŠIRITVI POSTOPKA
Leeds Building Society in its submission expressed its concerns regarding the distortion of competition potentially caused by NR, stressing that the own contribution by NR in its view is insufficient and that the Competitive Framework in place only prevents distortion of competition by NR to a limited extent.
Družba Leeds Building Society je v svoji pripombi izrazila dvome glede izkrivljanja konkurence, ki bi ga lahko povzročila banka NR, ter poudarila, da lastni prispevek po njenem mnenju banke NR ni zadosten in da vzpostavljeni konkurenčni okvir izkrivljanje konkurence, ki ga povzroča banka NR, preprečuje le v omejenem obsegu.
It also is of the view that the small balance sheet of BankCo after the split will not offset distortions of competition, as BankCo does not have to absorb losses caused by NR’s risky lending of the past and will have access to the benefits of AssetCo’s balance sheet.
Prav tako meni, da majhna bilančna vsota družbe BankCo po delitvi ne bo izravnala izkrivljanja konkurence, ker družbi BankCo ni treba prevzeti izgub, ki so jih povzročila tvegana posojila banke NR v preteklosti, in bo imela dostop do ugodnosti bilančne vsote družbe AssetCo.
The BSA submitted detailed comments.
Združenje BSA je predložilo podrobne pripombe.
It considered that BankCo is extremely likely to be a viable bank in the medium- to long-term as it will have a strong position on the UK mortgage market after the split-up with limited non-performing loans and a lot of funding to write new loans.
Združenje je menilo, da je družba BankCo srednje- do dolgoročno zelo verjetno preživetja sposobna banka, ker bo imela po delitvi trden položaj na hipotekarnem trgu Združenega kraljestva z omejenimi slabimi posojili in veliko sredstvi za odobritev novih posojil.
BSA highlighted the difference between building societies and banks (constraints on funding and lending activities for building societies not present for banks).
Združenje BSA je poudarilo razliko med stanovanjskimi zadrugami in bankami (omejitve pri financiranju in posojanju za stanovanjske zadruge, ki jih banke nimajo).
BSA also indicated that the Competitive Framework is unlikely to be effective enough to prevent distortions of competition.
Združenje BSA je prav tako opozorilo, da konkurenčni okvir verjetno ne bo dovolj učinkovit, da bi preprečil izkrivljanje konkurence.
It furthermore made suggestions regarding possible measures limiting the distortion of competition:
Poleg tega je predstavilo predloge v zvezi z možnimi ukrepi za omejevanje izkrivljanja konkurence:
BankCo should pay remuneration for the protection it has gained from the establishment of AssetCo; alternatively, BankCo’s initial loan book should have characteristics close to those of an average competitor;
družba BankCo mora plačati nadomestilo za zaščito, ki jo je pridobila od ustanovitve družbe AssetCo; druga možnost je, da bi morala biti prvotna knjiga posojil družbe BankCo podobna knjigam povprečnega konkurenta;
the State guarantees on retail and wholesale deposits should be removed as soon as possible; alternatively, BankCo should pay a price commensurate to that other banks are paying when using the government’s credit guarantee scheme;
jamstva države za vloge na drobno in debelo je treba čim prej odpraviti; v nasprotnem primeru mora družba BankCo plačati enako ceno, kot jo plačajo druge banke pri uporabi državne sheme kreditnih jamstev;
if the measures suggested in points (i) and (ii) cannot be implemented, more direct controls on BankCo’s activities might be necessary;
če ukrepov iz točk (i) in (ii) ni mogoče izvesti, je morda potreben strožji nadzor nad dejavnostmi družbe BankCo;
BankCo should make a substantial proportion of its new lending in segments of the mortgage market where private sector lenders are not currently lending (for example, at high LTV ratios, or specifically to first-time buyers);
družba BankCo bi morala velik del svojih novih posojil odobriti v segmentih hipotekarnega trga, v katerih posojilodajalci iz zasebnega sektorja trenutno ne posojajo (na primer po visokih razmerjih LTV ali zlasti kupcem začetnikom);
in areas of the mortgage market where BankCo is competing with private sector lenders its price competitiveness should be limited, possibly by staying out of the Moneyfacts best buy tables for mortgage lending, that is to say, out of the top five lenders;
družba BankCo mora na področjih hipotekarnega trga, na katerih je konkurenca posojilodajalcem iz zasebnega sektorja, omejiti svojo cenovno konkurenčnost, če je mogoče tako, da se ne uvrsti na seznam najboljših nakupov Moneyfacts za hipotekarna posojila, kar pomeni, da ni med najboljšimi petimi posojilodajalci;
until the guarantee covering retail deposits is removed, BankCo should stay out of the top five savings accounts in Moneyfacts best buy tables.
družba BankCo se ne sme uvrstiti med najboljših pet na seznamu najboljših nakupov Moneyfacts za hranilne vloge, dokler se ne odpravi jamstvo za vloge na drobno.
Finally, the comments of the British citizen concerned the payment of coupons on subordinated debt instruments issued by NR and the effects a suspension of those payments would have upon individuals holding those instruments.
Nazadnje, britanski državljan je predložil pripombe v zvezi s plačilom kuponov za instrumente podrejenega dolga, ki jih je izdala banka NR, in učinki, ki bi jih povzročila odprava teh plačil posameznikom s temi instrumenti.
The third party comments concerning the opening decision that have been described in this Decision only relate to issues that may be relevant for the assessment of the amended restructuring plan.
Pripombe tretjih oseb o odločitvi o sprožitvi postopka, ki so bile opisane v tej odločbi, zadevajo le vprašanja, ki so lahko pomembna za oceno spremenjenega načrta za prestrukturiranje.
The comments from the United Kingdom set out in section 5.1 regarding the opening decision will therefore also be limited to those issues.
Zato bodo pripombe Združenega kraljestva iz oddelka 5.1 o odločitvi o sprožitvi postopka prav tako omejena na ta vprašanja.
UNITED KINGDOM’S COMMENTS ON THE DOUBTS RAISED IN THE OPENING DECISION
PRIPOMBE ZDRUŽENEGA KRALJESTVA GLEDE DVOMOV IZ ODLOČITVE O SPROŽITVI POSTOPKA
As regards the doubts expressed in paragraph 91 of the opening decision, the UK authorities claim that […].
V zvezi z dvomi iz odstavka 91 odločitve o sprožitvi postopka organi Združenega kraljestva trdijo, da […].
It can therefore not be characterised as aid.
Zato tega ni mogoče opredeliti kot pomoč.
Even if it were the case, it could not be described as unlimited.
Tudi če bi bilo tako, pomoči ni mogoče opredeliti kot neomejeno.
As regards paragraph 94 of the opening decision, the UK authorities do not contest that the backdating to 1 April 2008 — following State aid approval — of the new loan interest and fee arrangements will constitute additional restructuring aid.
V zvezi z odstavkom 94 odločitve o sprožitvi postopka organi Združenega kraljestva ne zanikajo, da bo antedatiranje nove ureditve obresti in provizij za posojila na 1. april 2008 po odobritvi državne pomoči, pomenilo dodatno pomoč za prestrukturiranje.
They submit, however, that they are the minimum necessary to ensure that NR continues to fulfil its regulatory capital requirements.
Vendar organi navajajo, da je to najnujnejše za zagotovitev, da banka NR še naprej izpolnjuje svoje predpisane kapitalske zahteve.
As regards the doubts expressed in paragraph 96 of the opening decision, the United Kingdom first claims that it would be artificial to consider the aid amount as the full value of the State facilities and of the amounts covered by the State guarantees.
V zvezi z dvomi iz odstavka 96 odločitve o sprožitvi postopka Združeno kraljestvo najprej trdi, da bi bilo napačno obravnavati znesek pomoči kot polno vrednost državne pomoči in zneskov, ki jih obsegajo jamstva države.
Indeed, NR continues to own high quality assets and the good quality collateral charged in favour of the State at the time the facility and guarantee arrangements were provided should be taken into account.
Banka NR ima dejansko še vedno visokokakovostna sredstva, pri čemer je treba upoštevati tudi kakovostno zavarovanje v korist državi med izvajanjem pomoči in ureditev jamstev.
The United Kingdom believes that the least artificial methodology is to quantify the measures using benchmarks such as financing proposals made, Credit Default Swap rates and spreads for subordinated debt.
Združeno kraljestvo meni, da je najbolj odkrita metodologija meritev ukrepov s pomočjo meril uspešnosti, kot so finančni predlogi, stopnje poslov kreditnih zamenjav in razmiki za podrejeni dolg.
At the very most, the quantum of aid could be calculated using the Commission’s official reference rate which entered into force on 1 July 2008.
V najboljšem primeru je mogoče količino pomoči izračunati z uradno referenčno mero Komisije, ki je začela veljati 1. julija 2008.
UNITED KINGDOM’S COMMENTS ON THE DOUBTS RAISED IN THE EXTENSION DECISION
PRIPOMBE ZDRUŽENEGA KRALJESTVA GLEDE DVOMOV IZ ODLOČITVE O RAZŠIRITVI POSTOPKA
As regards the applicability of the IAC to the split-up, the UK authorities have indicated that they do not accept the Commission’s analysis for the following reasons.
V zvezi z uporabnostjo IAC za delitev so organi Združenega kraljestva navedli, da ne soglašajo z analizo Komisije zaradi naslednjih razlogov.
Firstly, NR is entirely government-owned, consequently, unlike other cases where the State takes over the losses on impaired assets from a privately-owned bank either by buying them or guaranteeing them, the United Kingdom cannot buy the impaired assets as it already owns them.
Prvič, banka NR je v celoti v državni lasti, zato v nasprotju z drugimi primeri, v katerih država prevzame izgube za oslabljena sredstva od zasebnih bank tako, da jih kupi ali jim zagotavlja jamstva, Združeno kraljestvo ne more kupiti oslabljenih sredstev, ker je že njihov lastnik.
Secondly, the UK authorities are of the view that the IAC is designed primarily to deal with situations where considerable uncertainty exists as to banks’ exposures to complex and opaque impaired assets.
Drugič, organi Združenega kraljestva menijo, da je IAC namenjen predvsem obravnavi razmer, v katerih je veliko negotovosti glede izpostavljenosti bank kompleksnim in nepreglednim oslabljenim sredstvom.
NR’s mortgage products, mortgage-backed securities and Treasury assets do not, according to the United Kingdom, fall into this category.
Združeno kraljestvo meni, da hipotekarni produkti in hipotekarno zavarovani vrednostni papirji banke NR ter državna sredstva v banki NR ne spadajo v to kategorijo.
Finally, the UK authorities argue that the IAC focuses on the principle of burden-sharing, primarily with the bank taking some element of first loss.
Nazadnje, organi Združenega kraljestva trdijo, da se IAC osredotoča na načelo porazdelitve bremena, predvsem v bankah z elementom prve izgube.
In the case of NR this is not possible as the State already owns all the assets before the split-up.
V primeru banke NR to ni mogoče, ker ima država v lasti vsa sredstva že pred delitvijo.
The UK authorities indicate in their comments that they have provided the Commission with information that demonstrates BankCo’s viability in the business plan submitted to the Commission on 10 June 2009 [31].
Organi Združenega kraljestva v svojih pripombah navajajo, da so v poslovnem načrtu, predloženem 10. junija 2009, Komisiji zagotovili informacije, ki dokazujejo sposobnost preživetja družbe BankCo [31].
In the business plan, BankCo’s viability has been stress-tested against a serious recession scenario (unemployment rising to 3,6 million in 2011 and house prices falling to 50 % of their peak).
V poslovnem načrtu je bil v zvezi s sposobnostjo preživetja družbe BankCo opravljen test izjemnih situacij za primer hude recesije (dvig brezposelnosti na 3,6 milijona v letu 2011 in padec cen nepremičnin za 50 % njihove najvišje vrednosti).
The stress test demonstrates BankCo’s viability even in a serious recession scenario.
Test izjemnih situacij je pokazal sposobnost preživetja družbe BankCo tudi v primeru hude recesije.
With regard to the Commission’s doubts whether the aid granted to NR is limited to the minimum necessary, the United Kingdom disputes that the amended restructuring plan creates a super-competitive new bank.
V zvezi z dvomi Komisije, ali je pomoč banki NR omejena na najmanjšo potrebno, Združeno kraljestvo oporeka, da spremenjeni načrt za prestrukturiranje ustvarja superkonkurenčno novo banko.
The United Kindgom points out that the capital structure and funding of BankCo has been carefully designed in order for it to be viable even in a stress case.
Združeno kraljestvo opozarja, da sta bila struktura kapitala in financiranje družbe BankCo previdno načrtovana, da bi bila družba sposobna preživetja tudi v izjemnih situacijah.
According to the United Kingdom, it is not the case that the State will accept to fully finance and support the losses of AssetCo.
Po navedbah Združenega kraljestva država ne bo soglašala s polnim financiranjem in podporo izgub družbe AssetCo.
The United Kingdom points out that no guarantee has been given by the State for the assets of AssetCo.
Združeno kraljestvo poudarja, da država ni izdala nobenih jamstev za sredstva družbe AssetCo.
The UK authorities however have indicated that, […], further support may be required […].
Vendar so organi Združenega kraljestva navedli, da […] je morda potrebna nadaljnja podpora […].