natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Because of the increase of the total infrastructure charge for road hauliers, the German authorities propose at the same time to introduce a reimbursement system as a partial compensation.
Nemški organi zaradi povečanja skupne pristojbine za uporabo infrastrukture za cestne prevoznike hkrati predlagajo uvedbo sistema vračila kot delnega nadomestila.
The 2,6 cents/km toll reimbursement is the result of the following calculation which is based on a decision of the German authorities to compensate EUR 600 million: Considering vehicle mileage totalling 22,7 billion km per year (vehicles of not less than 12 tonnes), a toll of 1 cent/km produces a toll revenue of EUR 227 million per year.
Vračilo cestnine v višini 2,6 centov/km je rezultat naslednjega izračuna, ki temelji na odločitvi nemških organov o nadomestitvi 600 milijonov evrov: če znaša letna kilometrina vozil 22,7 milijarde km (vozila, katerih masa ne presega 12 ton), cestnina v višini 1 centa/km letno ustvari 27 milijonov evrov prihodkov iz cestnin.
Assuming a consumption of 30 litres/100 km and EUR 0,01 excise duties per litre on fuel, 1 cent of excise duties produces excise duty revenue of approximately EUR 68 million per year [6].
Ob predpostavki, da poraba 30 litrov/100 km in 0,01 EUR trošarine na liter goriva ustvari 1 cent trošarin, je prihodek iz trošarin približno 68 milijonov EUR letno [6].
A 1 cent/km toll is therefore equivalent to about 3,3 cents of excise duties [7] per litre to produce the same revenue.
Za ustvarjanje enakega prihodka mora cestnina v višini 1 centa/km ustrezati približno 3,3 centom trošarine [7] na liter.
The decision to reimburse EUR 600 million therefore results in the reimbursement of about 2,6 cents of the toll charge per km [8].
Odločitev o nadomestitvi 600 milijonov EUR pomeni torej vračilo približno 2,6 centov cestnine na kilometer [8].
In order to be eligible for this reimbursement, proof of payment of excise duties amounting to 8,6 cents [9] per litre would have to be provided.
Da bi bili upravičeni do tega vračila, je treba predložiti dokazilo o plačilu trošarine v višini 8,6 centov [9] na liter.
Since the overall amount of reduction envisaged by the toll reimbursement system is considered to be EUR 600 million per year, this compensation corresponds to a reduction of approximately 17,6 % of the toll revenue of about EUR 3,4 billion per year.
Ker naj bi skupni znesek znižanja, ki ga predvideva sistem vračila cestnin, znašal 600 milijonov EUR letno, to nadomestilo pomeni približno 17,6 % znižanje prihodka iz cestnin v višini približno 3,4 milijard EUR letno.
The proposed TRS is not time-limited.
Predlagani SPC ni časovno omejen.
However, the German authorities have indicated that, if this would become a condition imposed by the Commission, they can modify the Statutory Order and introducing a system of time-limitation.
Nemški organi so navedli, da lahko spremenijo zakonsko odredbo in uvedejo sistem časovne omejitve, če bo to zahtevala Komisija.
The TRS is based on Article 1 of the Law on the imposition of mileage-based charges for the use of motorways by heavy goods vehicles adopted by the Government on 22 March 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the Law).
SPC temelji na 1. paragrafu Zakona o uvedbi pristojbin na avtocestah za težka tovorna vozila na podlagi kilometrine, ki ga je nemška vlada sprejela 22. marca 2002 (v nadaljnjem besedilu „zakon“).
The Law was signed on 5 April 2002, published in the Federal Law Gazette (Bundesgesetzblatt) on 11 April 2002 [10].
Zakon je bil podpisan 5. aprila 2002 in 11. aprila 2002 objavljen v Zveznem uradnem listu (Bundesgesetzblatt) [10].
Section 3, paragraph 2 of Article 1 of the Law empowers the government to fix the toll rate per kilometre by Statutory Order with the consent of the Bundesrat taking into account the number of axles and the emission class of the vehicles.
odstavek 1. paragrafa 1. člena zakona vlado pooblašča, da z zakonsko odredbo in s soglasjem Bundesrata določi višino cestnine na kilometer, pri tem pa upošteva število osi in vrste emisij vozil.
Section 3, paragraph 3 empowers the German Government to fix the toll rate per kilometre by taking into account appropriately other traffic-specific payments made by parties liable for the toll within the territory of the Law by Statutory Order.
odstavek 3. paragrafa nemško vlado pooblašča, da določi višino cestnine na kilometer, pri tem pa ustrezno upošteva druga plačila, ki jih v zvezi s prometom izvršijo stranke, zavezane za plačilo cestnine na območju veljavnosti zakona.
The German government has confirmed that the Statutory Order shall only be modified if the Commission takes a positive decision on the TRS.
Nemška vlada je potrdila, da bo zakonsko odredbo spremenila samo, če bo Komisija sprejela pozitivno odločitev glede SPC.
Technical aspects of the proof of payment of excise duties
Tehnični vidiki dokazila o plačilu trošarine
The key element for the application of the TRS is the proof of payment of excise duties in Germany.
Ključni element za uporabo SPC je dokazilo o plačilu trošarine v Nemčiji.
The proof of payment will consist of presenting appropriate filling station receipts or fuel credit card company vouchers from Germany, in each case stating the registration number of the refuelled vehicle liable for the toll.
Dokazilo o plačilu bo vključevalo predložitev ustreznih računov bencinskih črpalk ali potrdil podjetij iz Nemčije o kreditnih karticah za gorivo, v obeh primerih z navedbo registrske številke z gorivom napolnjenega vozila, zavezanega za plačilo cestnine.
The proof of payment of excise duties on fuel within Germany shall also be in accordance with the current version of the Mineral Oil Tax Law of 21 December 1992 [12].
Dokazilo, da je bila trošarina za gorivo plačana v Nemčiji, je v skladu tudi s trenutnim besedilom Zakona o davku na mineralno olje z dne 21. decembra 1992 [12].
The toll shall be reduced only against the proof that toll payment and excise duties have been paid during the same calendar year.
Cestnina se zniža samo, če se dokaže, da je bilo plačilo cestnine in trošarine izvršeno v istem koledarskem letu.
The total toll reimbursement amount accumulated in any one calendar year (toll credit) is generally offset against the toll debt incurred for the vehicle liable for toll in the following year.
Skupni znesek povrnjene cestnine za eno koledarsko leto (cestninski kredit) se običajno pokrije iz cestnine, ki jih vozila, zavezana za plačilo, plačajo za naslednje leto.
The party liable for toll must present — by 31 March of the following year at the latest — the request for a toll reimbursement for a particular vehicle to the Federal Office for Goods Transport which is the body entrusted with the application of the Law and responsible for monitoring and dealing with infringements.
Stranka, zavezana za plačilo cestnine, mora najpozneje do 31. marca naslednjega leta Zveznemu uradu za prevoz blaga, ki je pooblaščen za izvajanje zakona ter odgovoren za nadzorovanje in obravnavanje kršitev, predložiti zahtevo za vračilo cestnine za določeno vozilo.
If, however, the toll credit cannot be offset against a toll debt in the following year, it will be paid out on request.
Če cestninskega kredita vseeno ni mogoče pokriti iz cestnine za naslednje leto, bo ta izplačan na zahtevo.
The request must be presented by 31 March of the following year at the latest to the Federal Office for Goods Transport.
Zahtevo je treba Zveznemu uradu za prevoz blaga predložiti najpozneje do 31. marca naslednjega leta.
Grounds for initiating the procedure
Vzroki za sprožitev postopka
On 23 July 2003 the Commission opened the formal investigation procedure on the following grounds:
Komisija je 23. julija sprožila formalni postopek preiskave zaradi naslednjih razlogov:
The Commission expressed its doubts as regards the necessity of the intended replacement of the initially fixed toll rate by a system of higher rates combined with reimbursement.
Komisija je izrazila dvom glede potrebe po nameravanem nadomestilu prvotno določene višine cestnine s sistemom višjih zneskov in vračila.
Therefore, Germany was asked to provide all the arguments, counterbalancing the higher administrative burden compared to the initial system applied as of the date of its introduction.
Zato je od Nemčije zahtevala, da navede vse argumente, ki upravičujejo višjo upravno obremenitev v primerjavi s prvotnim sistemom, ki naj bi se uporabljal od datuma njegove uvedbe.
The Commission also expressed its doubts whether the measure would not lead to a de facto discrimination against foreign road hauliers.
Komisija je izrazila zaskrbljenost, da bi ukrep dejansko povzročil diskriminacijo tujih cestnih prevoznikov.
German authorities were therefore asked to provide all the necessary information why the measure should be considered non-discriminatory.
Zato je od nemških organov zahtevala, da predloži vse potrebne informacije o tem, zakaj naj bi bil ukrep nediskriminatoren.
In addition, the Commission expressed the need to clarify the environmental impact of the reimbursement system since a negative environmental effect could be against the common interest.
Komisija je poleg tega zahtevala pojasnitev okoljskega vpliva sistema vračil, saj bi bil negativni okoljski vpliv lahko v nasprotju s skupnim interesom.
The Commission therefore invited Germany to provide further information on this issue.
Komisija je zato Nemčijo pozvala, da zagotovi nadaljnje informacije o tem.
The Commission also could not yet conclude that the toll system as such fulfils all the conditions of Directive 1999/62/EC and that it complies with Article 28 of the EC Treaty.
Komisija prav tako še ne more sklepati, da sistem cestninjenja izpolnjuje vse pogoje iz Direktive 1999/62/ES in da je v skladu s členom 28 Pogodbe ES.
Furthermore, the Commission criticised at that time the lack of information as regards the relevant legal basis for the implementation of an eventual toll reimbursement system and therefore asked the German authorities to provide the Commission with e.g. a new draft Statutory Order on the basis of Article 1 section 3 paragraph 3 of the Law.
Poleg tega je Komisija ugotovila pomanjkanje informacij o ustrezni pravni podlagi za izvajanje morebitnega sistema vračila cestnine in je zato od nemških organov zahtevala, da Komisiji posredujejo npr. nov osnutek zakonske odredbe na podlagi 3. odstavka 3. paragrafa 1. člena zakona.
In the framework of the formal opening of the procedure, the Commission received 12 contributions from third parties, 10 of them from national or European associations [14] and 2 of them from Member States [15].
Komisija je v okviru uradne sprožitve postopka prejela 12 prispevkov tretjih strank, od tega 10 prispevkov nacionalnih ali evropskih združenj [14] in dva prispevka držav članic [15].
Ten contributions argue against the measure and two contributions develop arguments defending the aid scheme [16].
10 prispevkov nasprotuje ukrepu, dva prispevka pa vsebujeta argumente v prid shemi pomoči [16].
Arguments against the reimbursement measure
Argumenti proti ukrepu vračila
De facto discrimination of foreign road hauliers
Dejanska diskriminacija tujih cestnih prevoznikov
Discrimination of foreign road hauliers due to the differences in the level of excise duties in Member States [17]
Diskriminacija tujih cestnih prevoznikov zaradi različnih trošarin v državah članicah [17]
A large number of interested parties argue that the reimbursement system will in practice not be given on a fair basis independently of the nationality of road hauliers due to the differences in the level of excise duties in Member States.
Veliko število zainteresiranih strank trdi, da sistem vračila zaradi različnih trošarin v državah članicah v praksi ne bo temeljil na pravični podlagi in ne bo zagotovljen ne glede na državljanstvo cestnih prevoznikov.
In particular, the reimbursement system seems to be de facto discriminatory, as non-German road hauliers will not fill their tank in Germany due to the high excise duties on fuel in Germany and will therefore not benefit of the TRS.
Sistem vračila je dejansko diskriminatoren, ker nenemški cestni prevozniki zaradi visokih trošarin za gorivo v Nemčiji svojih rezervoarjev za gorivo ne bodo polnili v Nemčiji in zato ne bodo upravičeni do SPC.
Discrimination of foreign road hauliers since the measure, seen as a reduction of the tax for the use of infrastructure (toll), favours German companies [18]
Diskriminacija tujih cestnih prevoznikov z ukrepom, ki se šteje za znižanje obdavčitve za uporabo infrastrukture (cestnine) in zato daje prednost nemškim podjetjem [18]
It was also argued that the measure, seen as a reduction of the tax for the use of infrastructure, favours German road hauliers since, again, road hauliers from abroad will not fill their tank in Germany due to the high excise duties on fuel.
Poudarjeno je bilo tudi, da ukrep, ki se šteje za znižanje obdavčitve za uporabo infrastrukture, daje prednost nemškim cestnim prevoznikom, saj cestni prevozniki iz tujine zaradi visokih trošarin za gorivo svojih rezervoarjev za gorivo ne bodo polnili v Nemčiji.
As a consequence, foreign road hauliers will pay a higher infrastructure charge (i.e. the full amount) than German road hauliers benefiting from such a reimbursement system and paying de facto a ‘reduced’ infrastructure charge.
Zato bodo tuji cestni prevozniki plačali višjo pristojbino za uporabo infrastrukture (tj. celoten znesek) kot nemški cestni prevozniki, ki bodo koristili takšen sistem vračila in bodo dejansko plačevali „znižane“ pristojbine za uporabo infrastrukture.
Discrimination of foreign road hauliers due to the fact that the measure leads to a partial compensation of the price difference of fuel between Germany and other countries [19]
Diskriminacija tujih cestnih prevoznikov, ker ukrep vodi do delnega vračila razlike v ceni goriva med Nemčijo in drugimi državami [19]
Some interested parties specify that, as a consequence of the aid measure, German road hauliers will be able to reduce the price level for the transport of goods.
Nekatere zainteresirane stranke navajajo, da bodo nemški cestni prevozniki zaradi ukrepa pomoči lahko znižali cene za prevoz blaga.
This will create a disadvantage to companies transporting goods on long distance.
To bo povzročilo škodo podjetjem za prevoz blaga na dolgih razdaljah.
Hence, the aid measure will indirectly discriminate against non-German road hauliers.
Zato bo ukrep pomoči neposredno diskriminiral nenemške cestne prevoznike.
Discrimination of foreign road hauliers due to the fact that they have to contribute excessively to the harmonisation of mineral oil tax [20]
Diskriminacija tujih cestnih prevoznikov, ker morajo prekomerno prispevati k uskladitvi davčne stopnje za mineralno olje [20]
In addition, third parties argue that the increase of the toll from 12,4 cents/km up to 15 cents/km which becomes necessary to finance the compensation measure will be financed by all road hauliers, including by those who will not benefit from the toll reimbursement.
Poleg tega tretje stranke trdijo, da bodo povišanje cestnine z 12,4 centov/km na 15 centov/km, ki bo nujno za financiranje kompenzacijskega ukrepa, financirali vsi cestni prevozniki, vključno s prevozniki, ki ne bodo upravičeni do vračila cestnine.
Hence, non-German road hauliers will have to accept higher toll rates in order to finance the harmonisation of mineral oil tax intended by German authorities.
Zato bodo nenemški cestni prevozniki morali sprejeti višje cestnine, s čimer bodo financirali uskladitev davčne stopnje za mineralno olje, ki jo predvidevajo nemški organi.
Since interested parties consider that this is not justified, they conclude that the measure is discriminatory.
Ker zainteresirane stranke menijo, da to ni utemeljeno, štejejo ukrep za diskriminatoren.
Discrimination of foreign filling stations, in particular in neighbouring regions of the German territory [21]
Diskriminacija tujih bencinskih črpalk, zlasti v sosednjih regijah nemškega ozemlja [21]
Interested parties argue that the TRS does not give an incentive to improve the transport infrastructure, but gives an incentive to fill the tank in Germany.
Zainteresirane stranke trdijo, da SPC ne spodbuja izboljšanja prometne infrastrukture, temveč daje pobudo za polnjenje rezervoarjev za gorivo v Nemčiji.
As a consequence, the reimbursement system will favour German filling stations to the detriment of non-German filling stations.
Zato bo sistem vračila dajal prednost nemškim bencinskim črpalkam na škodo nenemških bencinskih črpalk.
Hence, the reimbursement measure has also a discriminatory effect as regards foreign filling stations.
Ukrep vračila ima zato tudi diskriminatoren učinek na tuje bencinske črpalke.
Discrimination of other Member States, due the fact that they will loose tax income [22]
Diskriminacija drugih držav članic zaradi izgub prihodkov od davka [22]
As a consequence, another argument presented by interested parties is that other Member States, e.g. in neighbouring regions, will loose tax income due to a reduced purchase of fuel on their territories.
Zainteresirane stranke so tudi navedle, da bodo druge države članice, zlasti v sosednjih regijah, zaradi manjšega nakupa goriva na njihovih ozemljih izgubile prihodke od davka.
Discrimination of vehicles of less than 12 tonnes since the reimbursement has de facto the effect of a mineral oil tax reduction [23]
Diskriminacija vozil, katerih masa ne presega 12 ton, ker vračilo dejansko učinkuje kot znižanje davčne stopnje za mineralno olje [23]
Seen as an indirect reduction of excise duties, some interested parties argue that the measure is considered to be discriminatory against those consumers of fuel using German motorways with vehicles of less than 12 tonnes.
Ker se ukrep šteje za neposredno znižanje trošarin, nekatere zainteresirane stranke trdijo, da je diskriminatoren do tistih potrošnikov goriva, ki uporabljajo nemške avtoceste z vozili, katerih masa ne presega 12 ton.
A difference in the tax burden cannot, by itself, justify the granting of State aid [24]
Razlika v davčni obremenitvi sama po sebi ne more upravičiti dodelitve državne pomoči [24]
An additional argument presented by third parties is linked to a Court decision on an Italian aid scheme which consisted in a tax credit scheme for Italian road hauliers and provided for compensatory payments to be made to transport undertakings established in other Member States, on the basis of the estimated consumption of diesel required for the distance covered on Italian territory.
Dodaten argument, ki so ga navedle tretje stranke, se navezuje na odločbo sodišča o italijanski shemi pomoči, ki je predstavljala shemo za obračunavanje davkov za italijanske cestne prevoznike, v skladu s katero so se kompenzacijska plačila izvrševala za prevozna podjetja iz drugih državah članicah glede na ocenjene porabe dizelskega goriva, ki je potreben za prevoz razdalje na italijanskem ozemlju.
The Court confirmed the Commission’s decision by which the Italian Republic was obliged to recover the granted aid.
Sodišče je potrdilo odločitev Komisije, na podlagi katere je Italijanska republika morala dodeljeno pomoč vrniti.
Therefore, interested parties argue, in analogy to the Italian case, that a difference in the tax burden for mineral oil cannot by itself justify the granting of State aid [25].
Zato zainteresirane stranke po analogiji z italijanskim primerom trdijo, da različna davčna obremenitev za mineralna olja sama po sebi ne upravičuje dodelitve državne pomoči [25].
Discrimination of foreign road hauliers due to specific reimbursement mechanisms or administrative burden [26]
Diskriminacija tujih cestnih prevoznikov zaradi posebnih mehanizmov vračila ali upravne obremenitve [26]
First, the reimbursement, as it seems, is not linked to the real use of motorways in Germany.
Prvič, vračilo ni povezano z dejansko uporabo avtocest v Nemčiji.
As the reimbursement mechanisms will, according to third parties, accept all filling station receipts regardless of the fact whether the vehicle used German motorways or other roads.
Ker bodo mehanizmi vračila po mnenju tretjih strank dopuščali vsa potrdila bencinskih črpalk ne glede na to, ali je vozilo uporabljalo nemške avtoceste ali druge ceste.
This will favour mainly German road hauliers with a mixed fleet of vehicles below and above 12 tonnes.
To bo dajalo prednost predvsem nemškim cestnim prevoznikom z raznolikim voznim parkom vozil, katerih masa ne presega ali presega 12 ton.
Secondly, third parties argue that the measure creates a discriminatory effect because the total toll reimbursement accumulated in one calendar year can be offset against the toll debt incurred in the following year.
Drugič, tretje stranke trdijo, da ima ukrep diskriminatoren učinek, ker se skupni znesek za vračilo cestnine v enem koledarskem letu pokrije iz cestnine za naslednje leto.
This payment mechanism advantages German road hauliers compared to non-German road hauliers which might use German motorways only occasionally.
Ta plačilni mehanizem daje prednost nemškim cestnim prevoznikom v primerjavi z nenemškimi cestnimi prevozniki, ki bi lahko nemške avtoceste uporabljali samo občasno.
Thirdly, interested parties argue that the measure is not compatible with Directive 1999/62/EC since the reimbursement system creates linguistic and administrative obstacles and will lead to the fact that many foreign users, in particular occasional users, will not claim a reimbursement.
Tretjič, zainteresirane stranke trdijo, da ukrep ni združljiv z Direktivo 1999/62/ES, ker sistem vračila ustvarja jezikovne in upravne ovire, zaradi česar mnogi tuji uporabniki, zlasti občasni uporabniki, vračila ne bodo zahtevali.
Finally, interested parties refer to some practical aspects of the toll system (such as the lack of On-Board Units (OBUs), etc.) which in their view also has an indirect impact on the aid measure itself.
Zainteresirane stranke se sklicujejo tudi na nekatere praktične vidike sistema cestninjenja (kot je pomanjkanje enot na vozilu (OBU) itd.), ki imajo po njihovem mnenju prav tako neposreden vpliv na sam ukrep pomoči.
Violation of Directive 92/81/EEC on the harmonisation of the structures of excise duties on mineral oils [27]
Kršitev Direktive 92/81/EGS o uskladitvi trošarinskih struktur za mineralna olja [27]
Several third parties argue that since the reimbursement system leads to an indirect reduction of excise duties, Directive 92/81/EEC is violated if specific procedural rules, such as Article 8(4) on notification procedure, is not respected [28].
Več tretjih strank je trdilo, da se zato, ker sistem vračila povzroča neposredno znižanje trošarin, krši Direktiva 92/81/EGS, če se ne upoštevajo posebna postopkovna pravila, kot je npr. člen 8(4) o postopku priglasitve [28].
Negative effects on the environment [29]
Negativni vplivi na okolje [29]
It should also be mentioned that one interested party argues that the measure favours the consumption of fuel in view of the fact that the amount of reimbursement depends directly on the amount of fuel consumption.
Prav tako je treba omeniti, da je ena zainteresirana stranka trdila, da ukrep spodbuja porabo goriva, ker je znesek vračila neposredno odvisen od količine porabljenega goriva.
As a consequence, the measure would be against the Community interest.
Zato je ukrep v nasprotju z interesom Skupnosti.
Additional arguments related to the toll system
Dodatni argumenti v zvezi s sistemom za cestninjenje
In addition, all interested parties arguing against the aid measure criticise the toll system as such, without sometimes clearly distinguishing the toll from the TRS.
Poleg tega vse zainteresirane stranke, ki nasprotujejo ukrepu pomoči, kritizirajo sistem cestninjenja kot takšen, pri tem pa ne razlikujejo jasno med cestnino in SPC.
With regard to the toll, the following main arguments were raised by interested parties:
Zainteresirane stranke so glede cestnine navedle naslednje glavne argumente: