natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Acquiring and maintaining its own business premises and a proper business organisation shall not prevent a VCC from being considered to conduct asset management activities.
V skladu s tem sta pridobitev in ohranjanje svojih poslovnih prostorov in poslovne organizacije za opravljanje dejavnosti upravljanja premoženja neškodljiva.
The activities under recital 16 above may, however, be carried out by a subsidiary which is wholly owned by the VCC.
Dejavnosti iz uvodne izjave 16 pa lahko opravlja hčerinska družba, ki jo ima v popolni lasti družba tveganega kapitala.
Loss carry forward
Prenos izgube
Loss carry forward enables those losses to be taken into account over the life cycle of a company.
S prenosom izgube se lahko upoštevajo izgube v celotnem obstoju podjetja.
However, this can also lead to abuse in the form of ‘shell companies’ which are companies that have ceased their activities but are nevertheless sold since their loss carry forward represents a real value: purchasers of such shell companies benefit from an offsetting of future taxable profits and thus pay less tax depending on the applicable tax rate.
S tem lahko pride tudi do zlorab v obliki tako imenovanih navideznih podjetij, ki so kljub dejstvu, da ne poslujejo več, odsvojena, ker njihov prenos izgube pomeni dejansko vrednost: kupec takšnega navideznega podjetja pridobi s prenosom izgube tako, da svoje prihodnje obdavčljive dobičke pobota in zato v skladu z veljavno davčno stopnjo plača nižji davek.
Germany introduced anti-abuse measures regarding the trafficking of losses in the German Corporate Income Tax Act (hereinafter: CITA).
Nemčija je vključila v Zakon o davku na dohodek pravnih oseb ukrepe za preprečevanje zlorab pri trgovanju z izgubami.
The Company Tax Reform Continuation Law of 1997 stopped the trafficking of losses in the form of shell companies.
Z Zakonom o nadaljevanju reforme davka na ustvarjeni dohodek iz leta 1997 je bilo trgovanje z izgubami v obliki navideznih podjetij onemogočeno.
Germany tightened the anti-abuse measures by means of the 2008 Company Taxation Reform Act (Unternehmenssteuerreformgesetz 2008).
Z Zakonom o reformi davka na ustvarjeni dohodek iz leta 2008 je Nemčija poostrila ukrepe za preprečevanje zlorab.
This Act has an impact on all changes in direct and indirect shareholding of more than 25 % within five years.
Zakon vpliva na vse spremembe posrednega ali neposrednega lastniškega deleža, ki presega 25 %, v petletnem obdobju.
The CITA provides for a pro-rata deduction of losses if, within a period of five years, more than 25 % of the subscribed capital, membership rights, participation rights or the right to vote directly or indirectly is transferred to an acquirer.
Zakon o davku na dohodek pravnih oseb določa sorazmerni odbitek izgub, če je v petih letih več kot 25 % vpisanega kapitala, članskih pravic, pravic do udeležbe ali glasovalnih pravic posredno ali neposredno prenesenih na pridobitelja.
Unused losses are not deductible at all if within five years more than 50 % of the subscribed capital or of the above rights are transferred directly or indirectly to an acquirer.
Neizkoriščenih izgub ni več mogoče v celoti odbiti, če je v petih letih več kot 50 % vpisanega kapitala ali zgoraj navedenih pravic posredno ali neposredno prenesenih na pridobitelja.
The MoRaKG
Zakon o kapitalskih naložbah
The MoRaKG would relax the loss carry forward rules for TEs acquired by VCCs, as it would enable TEs with a significantly modified ownership structure to carry forward losses which would otherwise lapse under the basic rule.
Zakon o kapitalskih naložbah vključuje milejše določbe o prenosu izgube za ciljne družbe, ki jih pridobijo družbe tveganega kapitala, ker ciljnim družbam z bistveno drugačno lastniško strukturo omogoča davčni prenos izgub, ki bi v skladu z osnovnim pravilom propadle.
According to Article 4 of the MoRaKG, in the event of a direct acquisition by a VCC of a participation in a TE, the losses of the TE continue to be deductible to the extent of the hidden reserves of the TE taxable domestic assets.
V skladu s členom 4 Zakona o kapitalskih naložbah je mogoče, kadar družba tveganega kapitala neposredno pridobi delež v ciljni družbi, v prihodnje odbiti izgube ciljne družbe, če gre za skrite rezerve obdavčljivih notranjih obratnih sredstev ciljne družbe.
The same applies in the event of a direct acquisition from a non-VCC of a participation in a TE from a VCC, if:
Enako velja, če pridobitelj, ki ni družba tveganega kapitala, neposredno pridobi delež v ciljni družbi družbe tveganega kapitala, če
when the participation is acquired, the TE has equity of no more than EUR 20 million, or
ima ciljna družba ob pridobitvi deleža največ 20 milijonov EUR lastniškega kapitala,
when the participation is acquired, the TE has equity of no more than EUR 100 million and the increase in equity in excess of EUR 20 million derives from annual profits in the four financial years preceding the sale,
ima ciljna družba ob pridobitvi deleža največ 100 milijonov EUR lastniškega kapitala in povečanje lastniškega kapitala, ki presega znesek 20 milijonov EUR, temelji na letnih presežkih štirih poslovnih let pred odsvojitvijo,
the period between the purchase and sale of the participation in the TE by the VCC is at least four years.
je obdobje med nakupom in odsvojitvijo deleža v ciljni družbi s strani družbe tveganega kapitala najmanj štiri leta.
Up to one fifth of the loss deductible may be deducted under the arrangements for the deduction of losses of the Income Tax Act in the year of acquisition; in each of the following four years this figure shall increase by a further fifth of the deductible loss.
V skladu z določbami Zakona o davku od dohodka se lahko pri odbitku izgube v letu pridobitve deleža odbije petina odbitne izgube; ta znesek se v naslednjih štirih letih poveča za petino odbitne izgube.
Tax benefits for private investors
Davčne olajšave za zasebne vlagatelje
The MoRaKG aims to encourage private investors such as business angels to invest in TEs by offering tax advantages for the profits derived from their investment.
Zakon o kapitalskih naložbah, ki določa davčne ugodnosti za dobiček iz naložb, naj bi spodbudil naložbe zasebnih vlagateljev, kot so poslovni angeli, v ciljne družbe.
According to Article 1 Section 20 of the MoRaKG, the capital gains on the sale of shares in a TE shall be divided proportionally among the investors according to their participation.
V skladu s členom 1(20) Zakona o kapitalskih naložbah se kapitalski dobiček od odsvojitve deležev v ciljni družbi razdeli med vlagatelje sorazmerno glede na njihovo udeležbo.
The resulting amount is taken into account for the income taxation of the private investors/business angels.
Na dobljenem znesku temelji obdavčitev dohodka zasebnih vlagateljev/poslovnih angelov.
The tax advantage would only take effect in the event of a realised capital gain.
Davčna ugodnost velja le v primeru realiziranih kapitalskih dobičkov.
The participation of private investors/business angels in TEs must be between 3 % and 25 % at any moment within the preceding five years with a maximum holding time of ten years.
Udeležba zasebnega vlagatelja/poslovnega angela v ciljni družbi mora znašati v zadnjih petih letih od 3 % do 25 % in lahko traja največ 10 let.
Each private investor/business angel is entitled to tax-free profits of up to EUR 50000 (EUR 200000 times 0,25) per investment, which corresponds to the maximum participation of 25 %.
Vsak zasebni vlagatelj/poslovni angel je na naložbo ob največji možni 25-odstotni udeležbi upravičen do neobdavčenega dobička v višini do 50000 EUR (200000 EUR krat 0,25).
DOUBTS EXPRESSED IN THE OPENING DECISION
POMISLEKI IZ ODLOČITVE O SPROŽITVI POSTOPKA
As set out in recital 3, the Commission decided on 28 January 2009 to initiate the formal investigation procedure (hereinafter opening decision).
Kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 3, je Komisija 28. januarja 2009 sprejela odločitev o sprožitvi formalnega postopka preiskave (v nadaljnjem besedilu: odločitev o sprožitvi postopka).
In the opening decision the Commission expressed its preliminary view that all three measures constitute State aid.
V njej je izrazila predhodno mnenje, da vsi trije ukrepi pomenijo državno pomoč.
Existence of State aid in the trade tax measure
Državna pomoč v zvezi z ukrepom glede davka na dohodek iz poslovne dejavnosti
On the basis of its comparison of the letter of 2003 with the ‘clarification’ in the MoRaKG, the Commission expressed doubts as to whether the German claim that the MoRaKG only creates a statutory ‘clarification’ of the letter of 2003 is correct as it seems that the law would provide certain tax advantages for the newly-created specific category of venture capital companies defined by the MoRaKG.
Na podlagi primerjave dopisa iz leta 2003 s „pojasnilom“ iz Zakona o kapitalskih naložbah ima Komisija pomisleke glede razlage Nemčije, da je dopis iz leta 2003 z Zakonom o kapitalskih naložbah le zakonsko natančneje opredeljen, saj se zdi, da daje zadevni zakon davčno prednost novi posebni kategoriji družb tveganega kapitala, ki so v njem opredeljene.
Indeed, it seemed that the ‘clarification’ deviates from the letter of 2003, and may provide for less stringent criteria for certain VCCs to benefit from the trade tax exemption.
Komisija meni, da „pojasnilo“ odstopa od dopisa iz leta 2003 in za nekatere družbe tveganega kapitala določa milejša merila za oprostitev davka na dohodek iz poslovne dejavnosti.
On the basis of these doubts the Commission noted that the trade tax measure would favour certain VCCs over other investment companies which may pursue exactly the same or similar activities.
Ob upoštevanju teh pomislekov Komisija meni, da ukrep glede davka na dohodek iz poslovne dejavnosti daje prednost nekaterim družbam tveganega kapitala v primerjavi z drugimi investicijskimi družbami, ki morda opravljajo enake ali podobne dejavnosti.
Moreover, the exemption from trade tax would involve an annual tax loss estimated at around EUR 90 million, which may indicate that the MoRaKG does not merely ‘clarify’ the letter of 2003.
Poleg tega se zaradi navedenega izpada davka na dohodek iz poslovne dejavnosti letni davčni prihodki zmanjšajo za približno 90 milijonov EUR, kar lahko pomeni, da Zakon o kapitalskih naložbah ni le „pojasnilo“ dopisa iz leta 2003.
Existence of State aid in the loss carry forward measure
Državna pomoč v zvezi z ukrepom prenosa izgube
In principle Germany has not excluded that the measure on loss carry forward is selective and hence favours TEs and VCCs.
Nemčija načeloma ni izključila možnosti, da je ukrep prenosa izgube selektiven ter tako daje prednost ciljnim družbam in družbam tveganega kapitala.
Germany claimed, however, that this is justified by the nature and logic of the German tax system.
Vendar je Nemčija navedla, da to utemeljujejo značilnosti in logika nemškega davčnega sistema.
Since, according to Germany, the introduction of the general restriction on the exploitation of tax losses in 2008 hit the venture capital market particularly hard, the possibility of exploiting tax losses should continue to exist for this market, and thus the measure meets the criteria set out in the Commission Notice on the application of the State aid rules to measures relating to direct business taxation [12] (hereinafter Notice on Business Taxation).
Ker Nemčija meni, da je uvedba splošne omejitve glede uporabe izgube iz leta 2008 za trg tveganega kapitala zelo obremenjujoča, mora biti uporaba izgube za ta trg še vedno na voljo. Ob upoštevanju tega ukrep izpolnjuje merila iz Obvestila Komisije o uporabi pravil o državni pomoči za ukrepe, ki zadevajo neposredno obdavčitev ustvarjenega dohodka [12] (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Obvestilo Komisije o obdavčitvi ustvarjenega dohodka).
The Commission noted, however, that other investment companies (falling outside the scope of the VCC definition) should not be excluded, if the measure is justified by the nature and logic of the German tax system, since non-VCCs may also invest in TEs and should also benefit from the same right to exploit the losses.
Vendar Komisija opozarja, da druge investicijske družbe (tj. družbe, ki niso zajete z opredelitvijo družbe tveganega kapitala) ne smejo biti izključene, če ukrep utemeljujejo značilnosti in logika nemškega davčnega sistema, ker lahko tudi druge investicijske družbe vlagajo v ciljne družbe in jim je treba omogočiti uporabo pravice do uporabe izgube.
But this is not the case, as TEs co-owned by non-VCCs can only carry over their losses if the non-VCC has bought its participation from a VCC under the conditions described in recital 21.
Vendar to v zadevnem primeru ne velja, ker lahko ciljne družbe, v katerih so udeležene druge investicijske družbe, prenesejo izgubo le, če so te družbe pridobile delež od družbe tveganega kapitala v skladu s pogoji iz uvodne izjave 21.
Germany also claimed that the measure does not affect trade between the Member States within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty, since it has an ‘internal objective’ which is compatible with the Notice on Business Taxation.
Poleg tega je Nemčija navedla, da ukrep ne prizadeva trgovine med državami članicami v skladu s členom 87(1) Pogodbe ES, ker naj bi z njim dosegli „notranji cilj“, ki je združljiv z Obvestilom Komisije o obdavčitvi ustvarjenega dohodka.
The measure only represents an exception to a strict rule, of which there is no equivalent in other Member States; therefore the measure cannot have a cross-border effect on competition or trade.
Ukrep je le izjema od strogega pravila, ki nima enakovredne ustreznice v drugih državah članicah. Zato ne more čezmejno vplivati na konkurenco ali trgovino.
However, the Commission stressed that the beneficiaries of this measure could be involved in trading with other Member States and that therefore the measure could have an effect on trade.
Vendar Komisija meni, da so lahko upravičenci do tega ukrepa vključeni v trgovino z drugimi državami članicami, kar pomeni, da ukrep lahko vpliva na trgovino.
Moreover, in determining whether a tax measure grants a selective advantage to certain undertakings, one must look at the generally applicable system in the Member State concerned; the question of which rules should apply in other Member States is, in principle, irrelevant.
Zato je treba pri obravnavi vprašanja, ali davčni ukrep daje selektivno prednost nekaterim podjetjem, izhajati iz splošno veljavnega sistema v zadevni državi članici. Vprašanje, kateri predpisi se uporabljajo v drugih državah članicah, je načeloma nepomembno.
Existence of State aid in the tax benefits to private investors
Državna pomoč v zvezi z davčnimi olajšavami za zasebne vlagatelje
Germany claimed that the beneficiaries of this measure are natural persons and that therefore it does not constitute State aid.
Nemčija je pojasnila, da ta ukrep ne pomeni državne pomoči, ker so upravičenci fizične osebe.
However, since the measure makes investments in certain companies (TEs) more appealing for investors, it may indirectly favour certain undertakings, namely TEs [13].
Ker pa lahko zaradi ukrepa postanejo naložbe v nekatera podjetja, tj. ciljne družbe, za vlagatelje bolj zanimive, lahko to za nekatera podjetja (ciljne družbe) [13] pomeni posredno prednost.
The Commission therefore considered that the criteria of ‘advantage’ and ‘selectivity’ are met.
Zato Komisija meni, da sta izpolnjeni merili „prednosti“ in „selektivnosti“.
Moreover, the implementation of the measure would involve an annual tax loss estimated at around EUR 30 million.
Poleg tega se letni davčni prihodki zaradi izvajanja ukrepa zmanjšajo za približno 30 milijonov EUR.
Compatibility with the Community guidelines on State aid to promote risk capital investments in small and medium-sized enterprises
Združljivost s Smernicami Skupnosti o državnih pomočeh za spodbujanje naložb rizičnega kapitala v mala in srednje velika podjetja
The Commission questioned the compatibility of the measures with the Community guidelines on State aid to promote risk capital investments in small and medium-sized enterprises [14] (hereinafter RC Guidelines), since the RC Guidelines provide that State aid in the form of risk capital cannot be granted to large enterprises [15], firms in difficulty and firms in the shipbuilding, coal and steel industry.
Komisija je izrazila pomislek o združljivosti ukrepov s Smernicami Skupnosti o državnih pomočeh za spodbujanje naložb rizičnega kapitala v mala in srednje velika podjetja (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Smernice o rizičnem kapitalu) [14], ker se v skladu s temi smernicami državna pomoč v obliki rizičnega kapitala ne sme dodeliti velikim podjetjem [15], podjetjem v težavah ter podjetjem v ladjedelništvu, premogovništvu in jeklarstvu.
In the case at hand, however, the above undertakings may benefit from the measures; therefore the scope of the measures (with regards to the beneficiaries) is not defined in compliance with the RC Guidelines.
Vendar lahko v tem primeru ukrepi veljajo tudi za podjetja iz zgoraj navedenih skupin. Zato opredelitev področja uporabe ukrepov (glede upravičencev) ni v skladu s Smernicami o rizičnem kapitalu.
In addition, according to point 4.3 of the RC Guidelines, State aid must target a specific market failure for the existence of which there is sufficient evidence.
Poleg tega mora biti državna pomoč v skladu z oddelkom 4.3 Smernic o rizičnem kapitalu usmerjena na določeno tržno nepopolnost, za katero mora biti dovolj dokazov o obstoju.
Such evidence has not been submitted by Germany.
Tega Nemčija ni dokazala.
Finally, the Commission also questioned whether the other requirements set out in Chapter 4 of the RC Guidelines were met.
Komisija je prav tako izrazila pomisleke, ali so izpolnjeni drugi pogoji iz oddelka 4 Smernic o rizičnem kapitalu.
Furthermore, the Commission noted that restricting the tax advantage to VCCs investing in incorporated enterprises appeared to contradict the alleged objective of the measure, namely to promote the provision of risk capital to all companies that need it.
Poleg tega Komisija meni, da je omejitev davčne ugodnosti na družbe tveganega kapitala, ki vlagajo v kapitalske družbe, v nasprotju z opredeljenim ciljem ukrepa, tj. omogočiti lažje zagotavljanje rizičnega kapitala za vsa podjetja, ki ga potrebujejo.
Indeed, young innovative companies in need of risk capital might take legal forms other than that of incorporated companies.
Ugotovljeno je namreč, da mlada, inovativna podjetja, ki potrebujejo rizični kapital, morda niso kapitalske družbe, ampak se odločijo za druge pravne oblike.
Hence, young innovative companies in the form of a partnership would not benefit from the measure.
Vendar ukrep ne zagotavlja ugodnosti mladim, inovativnim podjetjem v obliki osebne družbe.
The Commission questioned the compatibility of the measures with the rules of the common market.
Komisija je izrazila pomisleke o združljivosti ukrepov s predpisi o skupnem trgu.
In order to qualify as a VCC, an undertaking must have its legal domicile (Sitz) and its corporate management in Germany.
Med družbe tveganega kapitala so lahko uvrščena le podjetja s sedežem in upravo v Nemčiji.
It appears that certain undertakings, in particular permanent business establishments/branches and subsidiaries of EU and EEA companies with a legal domicile (Sitz) outside Germany, would not be eligible.
Zato se zdi, da nekatera podjetja, zlasti poslovne enote/podružnice in hčerinske družbe podjetij iz Skupnosti in EGP s sedežem zunaj Nemčije, niso upravičena do pomoči.
This condition could hinder freedom of establishment within the meaning of Article 43 of the EC Treaty.
Ta pogoj lahko pomeni omejitev pravice do ustanavljanja v skladu s členom 43 Pogodbe ES.
Germany claims that companies with a legal domicile outside Germany cannot be supervised by BaFin and would enjoy an unjustified competitive advantage over German VCCs.
Nemčija je navedla, da podjetij s sedežem zunaj Nemčije ne more nadzorovati zvezni organ za finančni nadzor in da imajo taka podjetja neupravičeno konkurenčno prednost glede na nemške družbe tveganega kapitala.
But the Commission queried the idea that permanent business establishments of foreign companies registered in Germany, which are de facto in competition with VCCs, could not be supervised by other means.
Vendar je Komisija izrazila pomisleke o tem, da niso na voljo druge možnosti za nadzor poslovnih enot tujih podjetij, ki so registrirana v Nemčiji in dejansko konkurirajo družbam tveganega kapitala.
At that time, the Commission therefore came to the conclusion that there was no justification for excluding such undertakings from the scheme.
Na podlagi tega je Komisija ugotovila, da izključitev teh podjetij iz ureditve ni utemeljena.
This is why the Commission also doubted whether the measures at issue could be declared compatible with the common market.
Zato Komisija ni bila prepričana, ali lahko zadevne ukrepe razglasi za združljive s skupnim trgom.
GERMANY’S COMMENTS ON THE OPENING DECISION
PRIPOMBE NEMČIJE V ZVEZI Z ODLOČITVIJO O SPROŽITVI POSTOPKA
By letter dated 3 March 2009, Germany submitted its comments on the decision to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty.
Nemčija je z dopisom z dne 3. marca 2009 predložila pripombe v zvezi z odločitvijo Komisije o sprožitvi postopka v skladu s členom 88(2) Pogodbe ES.
The comments concerned all three measures.
Pripombe so povezane z vsemi tremi ukrepi.
In summary, Germany reiterated its view that those measures did not constitute State aid.
Nemčija tudi v tem primeru meni, da ukrepi ne pomenijo državne pomoči.
The final assessment of whether a venture capital company is engaged in trading or asset managing activities is to be made in line with German supreme court precedents, which are summarised in the letter of 2003.
O tem, ali družba tveganega kapitala opravlja gospodarsko dejavnost ali dejavnost upravljanja premoženja, na koncu presoja nemško zvezno sodišče v sodni praksi, ki je povzeta v dopisu iz leta 2003.
As regards the estimated losses of EUR 90 million in tax revenue, Germany explained that it expects that the clarification of the MoRaKG will lead to fewer ‘faulty’ contractual arrangements (verunglückte Vertragsgestaltungen), in which the taxes are only due because of the contract’s faulty arrangements.
V zvezi s pričakovanimi davčnimi izgubami v višini 90 milijonov EUR je Nemčija razložila, da bi pojasnila Zakona o kapitalskih naložbah prispevala k zmanjšanju primerov „ponesrečene“ priprave pogodb, pri katerih davki zapadejo le zaradi „ponesrečene“ priprave.
Loss carry forward measure
Ukrep prenosa izgube
Germany reiterated its view that the rules on loss deduction at TE level are justified due to the nature and logic of the tax system, even if investment companies which fall outside the scope of the MoRaKG definition also invest in TEs.
Nemčija je ponovno poudarila, da so predpisi o prenosu izgube na ravni ciljnih družb utemeljeni glede na značilnosti in logiko davčnega sistema, čeprav v ciljne družbe vlagajo tudi investicijske družbe, ki niso zajete v opredelitvi iz Zakona o kapitalskih naložbah.
Germany argued that making a distinction between VCCs and other investment companies lies within the legislator’s room for manoeuvre (Gestaltungsspielraum) as there are objective differences between VCCs and other investment companies.
Po mnenju Nemčije se lahko zakonodajalec prosto odloči, da bo razmejil družbe tveganega kapitala in druge investicijske družbe, ker obstajajo med družbami tveganega kapitala in drugimi investicijskimi družbami objektivne razlike.
Accordingly, pursuant to paragraph 24 of the Notice on Business Taxation, a different treatment is justified.
Zato je v skladu s točko 24 Obvestila Komisije o obdavčitvi ustvarjenega dohodka različno obravnavanje utemeljeno.
Furthermore, VCCs are in a special situation.
Poleg tega so družbe tveganega kapitala v posebnem položaju.