natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
It follows that even measures which are open to all sectors can be considered selective on the grounds that de facto they are not open to all undertakings in the territory concerned.
Iz tega izhaja, da je tudi ukrepe, ki so dostopni vsem sektorjem, mogoče obravnavati kot selektivne, če dejansko niso dostopni vsem podjetjem na zadevnem ozemlju.
This view is also reflected in a Commission decision on the Austrian energy tax rebate [45].
Ta vidik je izražen tudi v odločbi Komisije o povrnitvi energetskih dajatev v Avstriji [45].
Following the judgment of the Court of Justice that has just been discussed, Austria broadened the measure to include undertakings from all sectors.
Po pravkar obravnavani sodbi Sodišča je Avstrija razširila ukrep, tako da vključuje podjetja iz vseh sektorjev.
In its assessment of the amended scheme, however, the Commission found that the measure was still selective, because even if formally speaking the rebate was open to all undertakings, in practice the only undertakings that would benefit would be those with a high energy consumption in relation to their net production value [46].
Vendar je Komisija pri svoji oceni spremenjene sheme ugotovila, da je ukrep še vedno selektiven, ker so ugodnosti kljub temu, da je vračilo uradno dostopno vsem podjetjem, v praksi na voljo le podjetjem z visoko porabo energije glede na njihovo neto vrednost proizvodnje [46].
The Commission concluded that the tax rebate constituted unlawful (i.e. not notified) State aid, and was incompatible with the internal market [47].
Komisija je ugotovila, da vračilo davka pomeni nezakonito (tj. nepriglašeno) državno pomoč in je nezdružljivo z notranjim trgom [47].
The effects of the Commission decision subsequently led an Austrian administrative court to request a preliminary ruling from the Court of Justice [48].
Zaradi navedene odločbe Komisije je avstrijsko upravno sodišče na Sodišče vložilo predlog za sprejetje predhodne odločbe [48].
The questions submitted by the Austrian court related to the scope of the effects of the illegality of the tax rebate, and the Court of Justice did not reopen the issue of selectivity.
Vprašanja, ki jih je predložilo avstrijsko sodišče, so zadevala obseg učinkov nezakonitosti vračila davka, zato Sodišče ni ponovno obravnavalo vprašanja selektivnosti.
The question was however discussed by the Advocate-General.
Vendar pa je vprašanje obravnaval generalni pravobranilec.
In his opinion the Advocate-General said that ‘as the Commission points out, to grant rebates only to service undertakings (in addition to production undertakings) not excluded by the 0,35 % threshold would be simply to enlarge the circle of beneficiaries of the aid. It would not however deprive the aid of its effects as such, since a criterion of selectivity would remain’ [49].. He also took the view that ‘The Commission’s reasoning in its 2004 decision is convincing as regards the selective nature of the 0,35 % threshold in the amended scheme’ [50].
V svojih sklepnih predlogih je navedel, da bi, „[k]ot poudarja Komisija, […] omejitev povračila na storitvena podjetja (poleg proizvodnih podjetij), ki niso izvzeta iz praga 0,35 %, dejansko razširila krog upravičencev do pomoči. Ne bi pa odpravila učinkov pomoči kot takih, ker bi se ohranilo selektivno merilo“ [49]. Prav tako je bil mnenja, da je „[o]brazložitev Komisije v odločbi iz leta 2004 […] glede selektivnosti praga 0,35 % spremenjene sheme prepričljiva“ [50].
The Commission concludes that the 0,5 % threshold at issue in the present case is a selection criterion which limits the benefit of the notified measure to energy-intensive undertakings and excludes undertakings which are not energy-intensive.
Komisija ugotavlja, da je obravnavani prag 0,5 % v tem primeru merilo za izbor, ki omejuje ugodnosti priglašenega ukrepa za energetsko intenzivna podjetja in izvzema podjetja, ki niso energetsko intenzivna.
Irrespective of the number of sectors that qualify, the threshold means that not all undertakings in the national territory can benefit under the notified measure.
Ne glede na število sektorjev, ki izpolnjujejo pogoje, prag onemogoča, da bi vsa podjetja na nacionalnem ozemlju koristila ugodnosti priglašenega ukrepa.
Consequently, the threshold renders the notified measure selective.
Zaradi praga je priglašeni ukrep torej selektiven.
The Commission also observes that to qualify for the exemption mechanism under assessment here, undertakings must be eligible for an energy tax rebate under the Austrian Energy Tax Rebate Act, which was the subject of the Commission decision on the Austrian energy tax rebate.
Komisija prav tako ugotavlja, da morajo biti podjetja za vključitev v mehanizem oprostitve, ki se v tem primeru ocenjuje, upravičena do vračila davka na energijo v skladu z avstrijskim zakonom o vračilu davka na energijo, ki je bil obravnavan v odločbi Komisije o povrnitvi energetskih dajatev v Avstriji.
The Commission’s reasoning in that decision consequently applies mutatis mutandis to the present case.
Obrazložitev Komisije iz navedene odločbe se torej smiselno uporablja v tem primeru.
Focus on the production of goods
Osredotočenost na proizvodnjo blaga
As regards Austria’s second line of argument, the Commission finds that the notified measure is selective also because in practice it focuses primarily on a limited number of undertakings active in the production of certain energy-intensive goods.
V zvezi z drugim sklopom utemeljitev Avstrije Komisija ugotavlja, da je priglašeni ukrep selektiven tudi zato, ker se v praksi osredotoča zlasti na omejeno število podjetij, ki se ukvarjajo s proizvodnjo določenega energetsko intenzivnega blaga.
According to the case-law of the Court of Justice, a measure must be analysed not by reference to its causes or aims but in relation to its effects [51].
V skladu s sodno prakso Sodišča se ukrep ne sme analizirati glede na njegove vzroke ali cilje, ampak glede na njegove učinke [51].
This means that even though in formal terms a measure is open to all sectors and all undertakings, it may still be considered selective if it is not open to all undertakings in national territory in practice.
To pomeni, da se ukrep lahko obravnava kot selektiven, če v praksi ni dostopen vsem podjetjem na nacionalnem ozemlju, čeprav je uradno dostopen vsem sektorjem in podjetjem.
The Court of Justice has held that ‘Neither the high number of benefiting undertakings nor the diversity and importance of the industrial sectors to which those undertakings belong warrant the conclusion that [a] scheme constitutes a general measure of economic policy’ [52].
Sodišče je razsodilo, da „niti veliko število podjetij, ki koristijo ugodnosti, niti raznolikost in pomembnost industrijskih sektorjev, katerim ta podjetja pripadajo, ne utemeljujejo ugotovitve, da shema pomeni splošen ukrep gospodarske politike“ [52].
In its investigation the Commission found that the notified scheme focused primarily on a very few undertakings, most of which were engaged in the production of goods.
Komisija je pri svoji preiskavi ugotovila, da se je priglašena shema osredotočala predvsem na zelo majhno število podjetij, pri čemer se je večina teh podjetij ukvarjala s proizvodnjo blaga.
On 9 September 2010 Austria submitted data gathered on the basis of the scheme as it currently applied, that is to say with aid intensities below the notification thresholds.
Avstrija je 9. septembra 2010 predložila podatke, zbrane na podlagi sheme, kot se je trenutno uporabljala, tj. z intenzivnostmi pomoči pod pragi priglasitve.
Of the approximately 300000 undertakings in Austria, according to this information, the number that applied for benefits under the scheme was only about 2000, or less than 1 % of all Austrian undertakings.
Glede na te podatke je od približno 300000 podjetij v Avstriji za ugodnosti iz sheme zaprosilo le okrog 2000 podjetij, kar je manj kot 1 % vseh avstrijskih podjetij.
As the scheme was applied, approximately 66 % of the benefits went to undertakings in the‘production of goods’ [53].
V okviru uporabe sheme je bilo približno 66 % ugodnosti namenjenih podjetjem, ki so se ukvarjala s „proizvodnjo blaga“ [53].
The Commission observes that if Austria were to increase the aid intensities above the de minimis thresholds under which the scheme is provisionally operating, the measure would most probably focus even more on undertakings active in the production of goods.
Če bi Avstrija povečala intenzivnosti pomoči nad prage de minimis, v skladu s katerimi začasno deluje shema, bi bil ukrep po mnenju Komisije najverjetneje še bolj osredotočen na podjetja, ki se ukvarjajo s proizvodnjo blaga.
This is demonstrated by the fact that, on the basis of the information provided by Austria, only 12 undertakings would benefit from aid intensities higher than under the version of the scheme currently applying, and that of these only two operate in the transport sector, while 10 are engaged in the production of goods [54].
To dokazuje dejstvo, da bi glede na podatke, ki jih je predložila Avstrija, intenzivnosti pomoči, večje od tistih iz različice sheme, ki se trenutno uporablja, veljale le za dvanajst podjetij in da le dve od teh podjetij delujeta v prometnem sektorju, medtem ko se jih deset ukvarja s proizvodnjo blaga [54].
The Commission concludes that the notified scheme will provide little or no benefit to the majority of the sectors of the Austrian economy, and will benefit mainly undertakings active in one of the branches of the production of goods.
Komisija ugotavlja, da priglašena shema večini sektorjev avstrijskega gospodarstva ne bo koristila ali pa bodo te koristi majhne, medtem ko bo koristila zlasti podjetjem, ki so dejavna v eni od panog proizvodnje blaga.
Irrespective of the number of sectors in which undertakings might benefit as a result of the measure, the measure focuses mainly on undertakings active in the production of goods, and is therefore to be considered selective de facto.
Ne glede na število sektorjev, v katerih bodo podjetja morda koristila ugodnosti ukrepa, se ukrep osredotoča zlasti na podjetja, ki se ukvarjajo s proizvodnjo blaga, in ga je zato treba obravnavati kot dejansko selektivnega.
The Commission concludes that the notified exemption mechanism is selective, both because it provides for a 0,5 % threshold, which confines the measure to energy-intensive undertakings, and because those undertakings are active primarily in the production of goods.
Komisija je sklenila, da je priglašeni mehanizem oprostitve selektiven, ker določa prag 0,5 %, ki omejuje ukrep na energetsko intenzivna podjetja, in ker se ta podjetja ukvarjajo zlasti s proizvodnjo blaga.
Measures justified by the nature and general scheme of the system
Ukrepi, upravičeni z naravo in splošno shemo sistema
The Commission notes that even where a measure has a selective character it does not fulfil the condition of selectivity if it is justified by the nature or the general scheme of the system of which it is part [55].
Komisija ugotavlja, da tudi ukrep selektivnega značaja ne izpolnjuje pogoja selektivnosti, če je upravičen z naravo ali splošno shemo sistema, kateremu pripada [55].
The Court of Justice has consistently held that it is for the Member State to demonstrate that this is so [56].
Sodišče je vedno razsodilo, da mora to dokazati država članica [56].
According to the Court, ‘a distinction must be made between, on the one hand, the objectives attributed to a particular tax scheme which are extrinsic to it and, on the other, the mechanisms inherent in the tax system itself which are necessary for the achievement of such objectives’.
Po mnenju Sodišča „je treba razlikovati med cilji, določenimi posebnemu davčnemu sistemu, ki so zunaj njega, in mehanizmi, ki so lastni samemu davčnemu sistemu in so potrebni za uresničitev teh ciljev“.
It is only the latter mechanisms that can be justified by the nature or the general scheme of the tax system of which the measure is part [57].
Le zadnje je mogoče upravičiti z naravo ali splošno shemo davčnega sistema, ki mu ukrep pripada [57].
Any extrinsic objectives have to be considered at the stage when the aid is being assessed for compatibility [58].
Vse zunanje cilje je treba obravnavati na stopnji, ko se ocenjuje združljivost pomoči [58].
Austria considers that the differentiation of charges introduced by Section 22c of the Act is intended to allow for the varying capacity of undertakings to bear additional charges.
Avstrija meni, da je namen diferenciacije dajatev, ki jo uvaja oddelek 22c zakona, omogočiti plačevanje dodatnih dajatev glede na različne zmožnosti podjetij.
Austria also takes the view that the exemption mechanism does not impair the environmental benefits provided for by the Act, since the amount of aid available to support the production of green electricity is not reduced.
Avstrija tudi meni, da mehanizem oprostitve ne zmanjšuje okoljskih koristi, ki jih zagotavlja zakon, ker obseg pomoči, ki je na voljo za podporo proizvodnji električne energije iz obnovljivih virov, ni zmanjšan.
Austria contends that only by reducing environmental charges for certain businesses is it possible to establish a sustainable financing mechanism for green electricity, which is necessary in order to ensure support for renewable energy sources.
Avstrija trdi, da je zmanjšanje okoljskih dajatev za nekatere dejavnosti edini način za vzpostavitev trajnostnega mehanizma financiranja za električno energijo iz obnovljivih virov, ki je potreben za zagotovitev podpore za obnovljive vire energije.
The Commission notes in this regard that the intrinsic objective of the system established by the clearing price is to raise revenues for the specific purpose of promoting renewable energy.
Komisija v zvezi s tem ugotavlja, da je bistveni cilj sistema, ki temelji na transferni ceni, povečati prihodke za poseben namen spodbujanja obnovljivih virov energije.
The exemption mechanism, however, pursues the objective of improving the competitiveness of energy-intensive businesses by reducing their electricity price, and thereby improving the acceptability of the system based on the clearing price.
Vendar je cilj mehanizma oprostitve izboljšati konkurenčnost energetsko intenzivnih dejavnosti z zmanjšanjem njihove cene električne energije, s čimer bi se povečala sprejemljivost sistema, ki temelji na transferni ceni.
This objective is extrinsic to the rationale and general scheme of the system.
Ta cilj ne izhaja iz utemeljitve in splošne sheme sistema.
The Court of Justice has held that the pursuit of such an extrinsic objective cannot be relied upon to justify a measure by reference to the nature or general scheme of the tax system [59].
Sodišče je razsodilo, da doseganje takega zunanjega cilja ne more upravičevati ukrepa s sklicevanjem na naravo ali splošno shemo davčnega sistema [59].
It can be analysed only when the aid has to be assessed for compatibility [60].
Analizira se lahko le, ko se ocenjuje združljivost pomoči [60].
In support of its view that the exemption mechanism is justified by the rationale and general scheme of the system, Austria cites two State aid decisions; but there the situation was different.
V podporo svojemu stališču, da je mehanizem oprostitve upravičen z utemeljitvijo in splošno shemo sistema, navaja Avstrija dva sklepa o državni pomoči, vendar so bile razmere v te primerih drugačne.
State aid measure No N 271/06, the Danish tax on surplus heat, sought not to improve competitiveness but to place the tax treatment of all energy products on an equal footing.
Cilj ukrepa državne pomoči št. N 271/06 o danskem davku na presežno toploto ni bil izboljšati konkurenčnost, ampak uvesti enakopravno davčno obravnavo vseh energentov.
State aid measure No N 860/06, the German energy tax exemption for dual-use processes, was based on the principle that energy products should be taxed only when they were used for heating or fuel purposes.
Ukrep državne pomoči št. N 860/06 o oprostitvi davka na energijo za postopke z dvojno uporabo v Nemčiji je temeljil na načelu, da je treba energente obdavčiti samo takrat, kadar se uporabljajo za ogrevanje ali kot gorivo.
It follows that the notified exemption for energy-intensive industries is not justified by the nature or general scheme of the system of which it is part.
Iz tega izhaja, da priglašena oprostitev za energetsko intenzivne industrije ni upravičena z naravo ali splošno shemo sistema, kateremu pripada.
The Commission concludes that the notified measure fulfils the condition of selectivity because it is selective de facto and is not justified by the nature and general scheme of the system.
Komisija ugotavlja, da priglašeni ukrep izpolnjuje pogoj selektivnosti, ker je dejansko selektiven ter ni upravičen z naravo in splošno shemo sistema.
The beneficiaries of the measure, which in the Commission’s view constitutes operating aid, are for the most part engaged in the production of energy-intensive goods such as metal or paper products [61].
Upravičenci ukrepa, ki po mnenju Komisije pomeni pomoč za tekoče poslovanje, se večinoma ukvarjajo s proizvodnjo energetsko intenzivnega blaga, kot so izdelki iz kovine ali papirja [61].
These are industries where there is trade between Member States, and undertakings in one Member State are subject to competition from undertakings in others.
To so industrije, na področju katerih poteka trgovina med državami članicami, podjetjem v eni državi članici pa konkurirajo podjetja iz drugih držav članic.
The measure in question is therefore liable to distort competition and to affect trade in the internal market.
Zato lahko zadevni ukrep izkrivlja konkurenco in vpliva na trgovino na notranjem trgu.
The Commission concludes that the exemption mechanism constitutes State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU, because it has the effect of reducing State resources and thereby conferring a selective advantage on energy-intensive businesses.
Komisija ugotavlja, da pomeni mehanizem oprostitve državno pomoč v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU, ker zmanjšuje državna sredstva in tako zagotavlja selektivno prednost energetsko intenzivnim dejavnostim.
Consequently, the measure has the potential to affect trade between Member States and to distort competition in the internal market.
Zato lahko ukrep vpliva na trgovino med državami članicami in izkrivlja konkurenco na notranjem trgu.
Austria has undertaken not to put the aid into effect until the European Commission has approved it.
Avstrija se je zavezala, da pomoči ne bo začela izvajati, dokler je ne odobri Evropska komisija.
Austria notified the measure before putting it into effect, and has thus complied with its obligation under Article 108(3) TFEU [62].
Avstrija je ukrep priglasila, preden ga je začela izvajati, s čimer je izpolnila svojo obveznost iz člena 108(3) PDEU [62].
Under Article 107(3) TFEU the Commission may declare State aid compatible with the internal market.
V skladu s členom 107(3) PDEU lahko Komisija državno pomoč razglasi za združljivo z notranjim trgom.
It is settled case-law that the burden of proof for demonstrating that a measure is compatible lies on the Member State [63].
Na podlagi ustaljene sodne prakse mora združljivost ukrepa dokazati država članica [63].
In aid cases falling under Article 107(3) TFEU the Commission has wide discretion [64].
V primerih pomoči iz člena 107(3) PDEU ima Komisija široko diskrecijsko pravico [64].
In the exercise of its discretion it has issued guidelines and notices setting forth criteria for declaring certain types of aid compatible with the internal market under Article 107(3) TFEU.
V okviru izvajanja svoje diskrecijske pravice je izdala smernice in obvestila o določitvi meril za razglasitev nekaterih vrst pomoči za združljive z notranjim trgom v skladu s členom 107(3) PDEU.
The Court of Justice has consistently held that the Commission is bound by the guidelines and notices that it issues in the area of supervision of State aid where they do not depart from the rules in the Treaty and are accepted by the Member States [65].
Sodišče je vedno razsodilo, da mora Komisija upoštevati smernice in obvestila, ki jih izda na področju nadzora državne pomoči, kadar ti ne odstopajo od pravil iz Pogodbe in jih države članice sprejemajo [65].
In the first place, therefore, it must be considered whether the notified aid falls within the scope of one or more sets of guidelines or notices, and can be declared compatible with the internal market because it satisfies the tests of compatibility set out therein.
Zato je treba najprej preučiti, ali priglašena pomoč spada na področje uporabe enega ali več sklopov smernic ali obvestil in ali jo je mogoče razglasiti za združljivo z notranjim trgom, ker izpolnjuje zahteve glede združljivosti, ki so v njih določene.
Austria claims that the notified measure falls within the scope of the Environmental Aid Guidelines [66], or that the Environmental Aid Guidelines are applicable by analogy.
Avstrija trdi, da priglašeni ukrep spada na področje uporabe smernic o pomoči za varstvo okolja [66] ali pa se smernice o pomoči za varstvo okolja smiselno uporabljajo.
In addition, it also claims that the aid falls within the scope of the General Block Exemption Regulation [67].
Poleg tega trdi tudi, da pomoč spada na področje uporabe Uredbe o splošnih skupinskih izjemah [67].
However, there are clearly defined situations in which operating aid may be granted.
Vendar obstajajo jasno opredeljene okoliščine, v katerih se lahko dodeli pomoč za tekoče poslovanje.
In particular, operating aid in the form of reductions of taxes may be granted, on specific conditions, under Chapter 4 of the Environmental Aid Guidelines [68] or under Article 25 of the General Block Exemption Regulation [69].
Pod posebnimi pogoji se lahko v skladu s poglavjem 4 smernic o pomoči za varstvo okolja [68] ali členom 25 Uredbe o splošnih skupinskih izjemah [69] dodeli zlasti pomoč za tekoče poslovanje v obliki znižanja davkov.
Under certain conditions aid may also be assessed directly under Article 107(3)(c) TFEU.
Pod nekaterimi pogoji se lahko pomoč oceni tudi neposredno na podlagi člena 107(3)(c) PDEU.
The Environmental Aid Guidelines
Smernice o pomoči za varstvo okolja
The Environmental Aid Guidelines define their scope of application as follows [70]:
Področje uporabe smernic o pomoči za varstvo okolja je opredeljeno na naslednji način [70]:
These Guidelines apply to State aid for environmental protection.
Te smernice se uporabljajo za državno pomoč za varstvo okolja.
They will be applied in accordance with other Community policies on State aid, other provisions of the Treaty establishing the European Community and the Treaty on European Union and legislation adopted pursuant to those Treaties.
Uporabljale se bodo v skladu z drugimi politikami Skupnosti o državni pomoči, drugimi določbami Pogodbe o ustanovitvi Evropske skupnosti in Pogodbe o Evropski uniji ter zakonodajo, sprejeto v skladu s temi pogodbami.
These Guidelines apply to aid to support environmental protection in all sectors governed by the EC Treaty.
Te smernice se uporabljajo za pomoč […], namenjeno podpori varstva okolja v vseh sektorjih, ki jih ureja Pogodba ES.
They also apply to those sectors which are subject to specific Community rules on State aid (steel processing, shipbuilding, motor vehicles, synthetic fibres, transport, coal agriculture and fisheries) unless such specific rules provide otherwise.’
Prav tako se uporabljajo za tiste sektorje, za katere veljajo posebna pravila Skupnosti o državni pomoči (predelava jekla, ladjedelstvo, motorna vozila, sintetična vlakna, promet, premogovništvo, kmetijstvo in ribištvo), razen če tovrstna posebna pravila določajo drugače.“