natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
DKT refers to a study carried out in connection with its complaint which shows that DSB’s pre-tax operating margin (12,3 % for 1999-2004 and 12,77 % for 1999-2007) exceeds that of other rail transport companies in Europe (2,21 %-4,47 % in the United Kingdom; 3,35 % in Sweden; 0,49-4,65 % in Germany and 0,8-3,77 % for France’s SNCF) and exceeds the level cited by the Commission in another, similar procedure [29];DKT considers that DSB’s profits are also far in excess of those of its domestic competitors, as far as public transport service contracts are concerned (DSB (12,77 %); DSB S-tog (10,45 %); Arriva (4,39 %); Metro Service (6,18 %)),
Združenje DKT opozarja na analizo, opravljeno v okviru njegove pritožbe, ki kaže, da je bila profitna marža pred obdavčitvijo družbe DSB (12,3 % za obdobje 1999–2004 in 12,77 % za obdobje 1999–2007) višja od marž drugih železniških prevoznikov v Evropi (2,21–4,47 % v Združenem kraljestvu; 3,35 % na Švedskem; 0,49–4,65 % v Nemčiji ali celo 0,8–3,77 % za SNCF) in nad ravnjo, ki jo je Komisija navedla v drugem primerljivem postopku [29].DKT meni, da je poslovni izid družbe DSB tudi precej večji od izida njenih domačih konkurentov, kar zadeva pogodbe o izvajanju javne službe prevoza (DSB (12,77 %), DSB S-tog (10,45 %), Arriva (4,39 %), Metro Service (6,18 %)).
DKT emphasises that DSB’s profits are clearly in excess of the 6 % return on equity fixed by the Danish State as a target for DSB, and DKT assesses these profits at DKK 3,678 billion,
DKT poudarja, da poslovni izid DSB močno presega raven 6-odstotne donosnosti lastniškega kapitala, ki jo je država določila kot cilj za DSB, kar DKT ocenjuje kot presežek v višini 3,678 milijarde DKK.
Finally, DKT considers that the argument that the payment of dividends made it possible to avoid any overcompensation must be disputed for the following reasons:
Nazadnje, DKT meni, da je treba trditev, da je izplačilo dividend preprečilo vsakršno čezmerno nadomestilo, zavrniti iz naslednjih razlogov:
public transport service contracts do not contain any mechanism for refunding contractual payments in the event of their exceeding the level that is strictly necessary for offsetting the costs of fulfilling a public service obligation,
pogodbe o izvajanju javne službe prevoza ne vsebujejo mehanizma vračila pogodbenih plačil v primeru, ko bi ta presegla zahtevano raven za strogo nadomestilo za obveznost javne službe;
in this case the Danish State is confusing its role of investor and shareholder in a public undertaking with its role as a public authority, which allows it to provide compensation for public service obligations,
država Danska v tej zadevi zamenjuje svoji vlogi vlagatelja, ki je delničar javnega podjetja, in javnega organa, ki ji omogoča plačati nadomestilo za obveznosti javne službe;
the collection of dividends cannot in itself cancel out either the economic effects of overcompensation or the distortions of competition, the effects of which remain present on the market,
izplačilo dividend samo po sebi ne more izničiti niti gospodarskih učinkov čezmernega nadomestila niti izkrivljanja konkurence, katerega učinki ostajajo na trgu;
the argument relating to the payment of dividends leads to discrimination between public and private undertakings,
argument izplačila dividend bi povzročil diskriminacijo javnih in zasebnih podjetij;
the Commission’s framework for aid in the form of public service compensation provides only for the option of carrying forward up to 10 % of an overcompensation each year,
v Okviru Skupnosti za državne pomoči v obliki nadomestila za javne storitve je predvidena le možnost prenosa presežkov v višini 10 % vsako leto;
there is no direct link between overcompensation and the amount of dividends collected by the Danish State, the principle of which was stated, moreover, in the 10-year budgets before any overcompensation was established,
ni neposredne povezave med čezmernim nadomestilom in zneskom dividend, ki jih je prejela država, katere načelo je bilo potrjeno v desetletnih proračunih pred ugotovitvijo morebitnih čezmernih nadomestil.
On that basis, DKT considers that the tax exemption had a significant negative effect on competition amounting to approximately DKK 800 million over 10 years, a sum which was to be recovered by the Danish State.
DKT na tej podlagi meni, da je imela oprostitev davka velik negativen vpliv v višini skoraj 800 milijonov DKK v desetih letih, kar je znesek, ki bi ga država morala izterjati.
Moreover, DKT has drawn the Commission’s attention to the fact that the Danish State had allegedly decided to compensate DSB for no longer being exempt from that tax in the future by increasing the contractual payments.
Združenje DKT je poleg tega Komisijo opozorilo, da se je država odločila kompenzirati davčno obveznost družbe DSB v prihodnosti, in sicer s povečanjem pogodbenih plačil.
DKT would like the Commission to examine this issue as part of this procedure, because procedure CP78/06, to which the Commission referred in the decision initiating the procedure, has since been closed.
DKT želi, da Komisija to vprašanje obravnava v tem postopku, saj je postopek CP 78/06, na katerega se sklicuje v odločitvi o sprožitvi postopka, že končan.
On 10 January 2010, DKT sent the Commission its observations on the choice of Regulation (EEC) No 1191/69 or Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 as the appropriate legal basis.
Združenje DKT je 10. januarja 2010 Komisiji predložilo pripombe o izbiri ustrezne pravne podlage med uredbama (EGS) št. 1191/69 in (ES) št. 1370/2007.
DKT considers that, since Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 did not enter into force until 3 December 2009, the review of the compatibility of the aid measures in question on the basis of that Regulation was an error of law.
DKT meni, da ker je Uredba (ES) št. 1370/2007 začela veljati šele 3. decembra 2009, preučitev združljivosti zadevnih ukrepov pomoči na podlagi te uredbe pomeni napačno uporabo prava.
After recalling a number of principles related to the use of the EU rules on State aid ratione temporis, DKT stated that a distinction should be made according to whether or not the case concerns notified aid measures.
Potem ko je združenje DKT opozorilo na nekatera načela, povezana z uporabo pravil EU o državni pomoči ratione temporis, navaja, da je treba razlikovati glede na to, ali gre za priglašene ukrepe pomoči ali ne.
DKT referred to the judgment by the Court of First Instance in SIDE [30] as a basis for establishing that, in this case, the Commission should conduct the review of compatibility on the basis of Regulation (EEC) No 1191/69.
DKT se namreč sklicuje na sodbi Sodišča prve stopnje Evropskih skupnosti v zadevi SIDE [30], da bi v tej zadevi dokazalo, da bi Komisija morala preučiti združljivost na podlagi Uredbe (EGS) št. 1191/69.
DKT’s conclusion is based in particular on the fact that the public transport service contracts in question cover the periods 1999-2004 and 2005-14 and that the aid is granted at the time when the monthly contractual payments are made.
Sklep združenja DKT temelji predvsem na tem, da zadevni pogodbi o izvajanju javne službe prevoza pokrivata obdobji 1999–2004 in 2005–2014 in da je pomoč dodeljena z mesečnimi pogodbenimi plačili.
DKT also points out that Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 does not contain any provision concerning State aid that has already been granted or is the subject of an investigation procedure.
DKT poleg tega opozarja, da Uredba (ES) št. 1370/2007 ne vsebuje nobene določbe o državni pomoči, ki je že dodeljena ali predmet postopka preiskave.
In addition, the decision of 10 September 2008 initiating the procedure does not refer to the new Regulation, although that Regulation had already been adopted.
Sicer pa se Komisija v odločitvi o sprožitvi postopka z dne 10. septembra 2008 ne sklicuje na novo uredbo, čeprav je ta že bila sprejeta. Nazadnje, DKT opozarja tudi na protislovje z Obvestilom Komisije o določitvi pravil, ki se uporabljajo za oceno nezakonite državne pomoči.
At the very least, DKT considers that Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 could constitute the appropriate legal basis for the review of compatibility only for the future effects of public transport service contracts, that is to say contractual payments made after 3 December 2009.
DKT meni, da je Uredba (ES) št. 1370/2007 lahko ustrezna pravna podlaga za preučitev združljivosti le za prihodnje učinke pogodb o izvajanju javne službe prevoza, in sicer za pogodbena plačila po 3. decembru 2009.
DENMARK’S COMMENTS ON THE OBSERVATIONS SUBMITTED BY INTERESTED PARTIES
KOMENTARJI DANSKE O PRIPOMBAH ZAINTERESIRANIH STRANI
According to Denmark, DKT’s observations do not result in a different assessment of the facts in question.
Po mnenju Danske pripombe združenja DKT ne vodijo k drugačni presoji zadevnih dejstev.
Denmark maintains that the four criteria in the judgment in Altmark are fulfilled in this case and that DSB did not receive any overcompensation.
Danska namreč meni, da so štiri merila iz sodbe Altmark v tej zadevi izpolnjena in da družba DSB ni prejela čezmernih nadomestil.
The extent of the Commission’s review
Obseg preiskave Komisije
Denmark takes the view that contracts related to urban and suburban transport are not covered by the formal review procedure and that there is therefore no need to comment on DKT’s views with regard to those contracts.
Danska meni, da pogodbi o prevozu na območju glavnega mesta nista predmet formalnega postopka preiskave in da torej ni treba komentirati stališč združenja DKT o teh pogodbah.
Denmark indicates nevertheless that DSB S-tog a/s is a wholly-owned subsidiary of DSB SV and that the data relating to DSB S-tog a/s are included in the consolidated accounts of the DSB group and the data submitted by the Danish authorities.
Danska vseeno trdi, da je DSB S-tog a/s hčerinska družba v 100-odstotni lasti DSB SV in da so podatki o DSB S-tog a/s vključeni v konsolidirane računovodske izkaze skupine DSB in podatke, ki so jih predložili danski organi.
The Danish authorities have specified that the projected and contractual payments relating to transport by S-tog were also determined on the basis of a 6 % return on equity after tax.
Danski organi pojasnjujejo, da so bila tudi predvidena plačila in pogodbena plačila za prevoz, ki ga opravlja S-tog, določena na podlagi 6-odstotne donosnosti lastniškega kapitala po obdavčitvi.
The results obtained by DSB S-tog a/s were included in the budget of DSB SV, and the contractual payments to be made to the company for long-distance and regional transport were calculated accordingly.
Poslovni izid družbe DSB S-tog a/s je bil vključen v proračun DSB SV, posledično pa so bila izračunana pogodbena plačila za družbo za prevoz na dolge razdalje in regionalni prevoz.
In addition, the operating profit generated by the subsidiary DSB S-tog a/s is included in the consolidated results of DSB SV.
Poleg tega je dobiček iz poslovanja, ki ga ustvari hčerinska družba DSB S-tog a/s, upoštevan v konsolidiranem poslovnem izidu DSB SV.
The profit from S-tog’s activities is therefore included in the overall financial results of DSB SV.
Dobiček iz prevoza, ki ga opravlja S-tog, je torej upoštevan v skupnem poslovnem izidu DSB SV.
The criteria in the judgment in Altmark
Merila iz sodbe Altmark
According to Denmark, the comments submitted by DKT do not challenge the fact that the four criteria in the judgment in Altmark are fulfilled in this case.
Po mnenju Danske komentarji združenja DKT ne postavljajo pod vprašaj dejstva, da so štiri merila iz sodbe Altmark v tej zadevi izpolnjena.
With regard to the first criterion, the Danish authorities argue that the Commission has not expressed any doubts in this respect.
Danski organi navajajo, da Komisija ni izrazila dvoma o prvem merilu.
The question of whether the Copenhagen-Århus line constitutes a public service obligation is, moreover, dealt with below.
Vprašanje, ali je opravljanje prevoza na progi Köbenhavn–Aarhus obveznost javne službe, pa se obravnava v nadaljevanju.
With regard to the second criterion, the Danish authorities argue that the Commission has not expressed any doubts regarding the period up to 2008 and specify that, for the period between 2009 and 2014, the compensation paid to DSB was also calculated on the basis of a 10-year budget submitted to the Commission.
Danski organi glede drugega merila navajajo, da Komisija ni izrazila dvoma o obdobju do leta 2008, in pojasnjujejo, da je bilo za obdobje 2009–2014 nadomestilo za DSB prav tako izračunano na podlagi desetletnega proračuna, predloženega Komisiji.
With regard to the third criterion, DKT has stated that it is only necessary to examine this criterion if the fourth criterion has been fulfilled. The Danish authorities do not share that opinion and consider that it is perfectly possible to examine the criteria independently of each other and in the order followed by the Court in the judgment in Altmark.
Kar zadeva pripombe DKT o tretjem merilu in dejstvu, da ga je treba preučiti le, če je predhodno izpolnjeno četrto merilo, se danski organi ne strinjajo s tem mnenjem in menijo, da se merila seveda lahko preučijo neodvisno drugo od drugega in v vrstnem redu, ki mu je Sodišče sledilo v sodbi Altmark.
Concerning the fourth criterion, the Danish authorities dispute DKT’s arguments tending to the conclusion that this criterion is not fulfilled.
Glede četrtega merila pa danski organi nazadnje zavračajo trditve DKT, iz katerih bi se lahko sklepalo, da se to merilo ni upoštevalo.
They specify that the 10-year budgets were prepared on the basis of all the available data and a satisfactory cost analysis including long-term prospects for improvement.
Pojasnjujejo namreč, da sta bila desetletna proračuna pripravljena na podlagi vseh razpoložljivih podatkov in zadostne analize stroškov, v katero so bile vključene možnosti dolgoročnega izboljšanja.
In addition, the budget was revised during the negotiation of the second contract, and the contractual payments were reduced to take account of efficiency gains.
Poleg tega je bil proračun popravljen med pogajanji o drugi pogodbi, pogodbena plačila pa so se zmanjšala zaradi upoštevanja večje učinkovitosti.
The Danish authorities have also pointed out that the fact that, for historical reasons, the company bears extraordinary costs as regards employees taken on as public servants has no bearing on whether or not the company is well managed.
Danski organi poleg tega poudarjajo, da dejstvo, da ima podjetje iz zgodovinskih razlogov izredne stroške v zvezi z delavci, zaposlenimi s statusom javnega uslužbenca, ni povezano z dobrim ali slabim vodenjem podjetja.
They also state that there are substantial differences in terms of capital structure, risk profile, etc., between the various rail companies, which makes comparisons with other companies impossible.
Opozarjajo še, da obstajajo zelo velike razlike v strukturi kapitala, profilu tveganja itd. med različnimi železniškimi podjetji, zaradi česar so primerjave z drugimi podjetji nemogoče.
Similarly, the fact that DSB First was able to tender more cheaply – at first sight – for the Kystbanen line is not a reflection, or indeed an indication, of the fact that the payments hitherto made to DSB were excessive, because that tender was submitted by a separate company and was based on different parameters (contract staff only, newer equipment, fewer staff on board).
Tudi okoliščina, da je lahko družba DSB First oddala ponudbo po – na prvi pogled – nižji ceni za progo Kystbanen, ni niti odsev niti dokaz tega, da so bila plačila, nakazana družbi DSB, prevelika, saj je to ponudbo oddalo ločeno podjetje in ponudba tudi temelji na drugačnih parametrih (le pogodbeni delavci, novejši vozni park, manj vlakovnega osebja).
Denmark has pointed out its doubts as to the argument set out by the Commission concerning the implementation of Regulation (EEC) No 1191/69, which it regards as fraught with considerable legal uncertainty, particularly with regard to the notification requirement for public transport service contracts.
Danska opozarja na svoj dvom o sklepanju Komisije glede izvajanja Uredbe (EGS) št. 1191/69, ki jo po njenem mnenju bremeni velika pravna negotovost, zlasti glede obveznosti priglasitve pogodb o izvajanju javne službe prevoza.
Denmark does not share DKT’s interpretation, in particular as to the use of the word ‘price’ in Article 14(2)(b) and the non-applicability of the rules on State aid in cases where Regulation (EEC) No 1191/69 applies.
Danska se vseeno ne strinja z razlago DKT, zlasti glede uporabe izraza „cena“ v členu 14(2)(b) in neuporabe pravil o državni pomoči, če bi se uporabljala Uredba (EGS) št. 1191/69.
i. General remarks concerning the analysis
i. Splošno o analizi
Denmark strongly disagrees with DKT’s argument that the compensation was to be determined on the basis of analyses of the costs for each individual line.
Danska se absolutno ne strinja s trditvijo DKT, da bi bilo treba nadomestilo določiti na podlagi stroškov za vsako zadevno progo.
There is no legal basis which makes it possible to require that the compensation paid under a global contract for the discharging of a public service obligation should be calculated on the basis of analyses, at a ‘microlevel’, of each of the obligations accepted by the service provider.
Na podlagi nobene pravne podlage ni mogoče zahtevati, da se nadomestilo, nakazano na podlagi skupne pogodbe o izpolnjevanju obveznosti javne službe, izračuna na podlagi analiz, opravljenih na „mikroravni“ vsake od obveznosti, ki jih je izvajalec storitev sprejel.
The Danish authorities also dispute DKT’s interpretation of the judgment in Case T-17/02 Fred Olsen S.A. v Commission and emphasise that this case concerns a coherent, integrated network operated under a global negotiated contract.
Danski organi izpodbijajo razlago DKT o sodbi Fred Olsen (zadeva T-17/02) in poudarjajo, da gre v tej zadevi za usklajeno, integrirano omrežje, na katerem se storitve opravljajo na podlagi skupne pogodbe, sklenjene po postopku s pogajanji.
The fixing of the level of compensation on the basis of a line-by-line analysis is superfluous and could lead to misleading results.
Določitev zneska nadomestila na podlagi analize za vsako progo posebej je torej odveč in bi lahko privedla do zavajajočih rezultatov.
It would cause greater uncertainty regarding the distribution of common charges than a summary statement of all receipts and costs connected with the discharging of the public service obligations imposed by the contract.
Povzročila bi večjo negotovost glede razdelitve skupnih stroškov, kot jo povzroči zbirno poročilo o vseh prihodkih in izdatkih, povezanih z izpolnjevanjem obveznosti javne službe, naloženih s pogodbo.
They point out, on the other hand, that DSB’s accounting data relating to the services provided under the contract may be examined independently because they are based on separate accounts.
Nasprotno pa opozarjajo, da je računovodske podatke družbe DSB o storitvah, opravljenih na podlagi pogodbe, mogoče preučiti ločeno, ker temeljijo na ločenih računovodstvih.
Copenhagen-Århus link
Povezava Köbenhavn–Aarhus
The Danish authorities do not share the view that services which can be provided without financial assistance cannot constitute a public service obligation.
Danski organi se ne strinjajo z mnenjem, da storitev, ki se lahko opravlja brez finančne pomoči, ne more biti obveznost javne službe.
The State is quite entitled to decide to include the provision of such services in a service obligation that is fairly wide in scope (requirements in terms of departure times, capacity, fares, etc.), which is the case here because this line is closely integrated with the rest of DSB’s services due to the connecting services to the north of Århus, the connection with other lines and the splitting and combining of trains from other sections of line.
Država se namreč lahko odloči, da jo vključi v obsežno usklajeno javno storitev (zahteve glede voznega reda, zmogljivosti, tarif itd.), kar je storila v tem primeru, saj je ta proga tesno povezana z drugimi storitvami družbe DSB zaradi zvez s kraji severno od Aarhusa, povezave z drugimi programi in tudi zaradi ločevanja ali združevanja vlakov, ki vozijo na tej progi.
In addition, the Danish authorities have stated that the compensation paid to DSB is calculated on the basis of the revenues and costs connected with all of its public service obligations.
Danski organi poleg tega navajajo, da so nadomestila, nakazana družbi DSB, izračunana na podlagi prihodkov in stroškov, povezanih z vsemi obveznostmi javne službe.
If lines or certain services likely to make a profit are included, the related receipts are therefore integrated into the accounts as a whole.
Če so vanje vključene proge ali nekatere storitve, ki lahko ustvarjajo presežek, so z njimi povezani prihodki tako vključeni v skupne računovodske izkaze.
Consequently, the exclusion of certain lines capable of making a profit in themselves would only result in an increase in the total aid paid to DSB, and the inclusion of a non-loss-making line does not necessarily lead to overcompensation.
Zato izključitev nekaterih prog, ki so same po sebi lahko donosne, lahko povzroči le povečanje skupne pomoči, nakazane DSB, vključitev proge, ki ne ustvarja izgube, pa ne vodi nujno do čezmernih nadomestil.
Moreover, the Danish authorities have pointed out that DKT’s calculations concerning the Copenhagen-Århus line are inaccurate, and put forward evidence confirming that claim.
Danski organi opozarjajo, da izračuni združenja DKT za progo Köbenhavn–Aarhus niso točni, in navajajo elemente, s katerimi je to mogoče potrditi.
They stress that DKT does not make it sufficiently clear how the calculations were done, and they say they are not familiar with the figures submitted.
Poudarjajo, da DKT ne pojasnjuje dovolj, kako je opravilo te izračune, in trdijo, da ne poznajo navedenih številk.
According to Denmark, an optimistic assessment leads to revenues on this line over DKK […] million lower than those cited by DKT, […].
Po mnenju Danske optimistična ocena kaže za več kot […] milijonov DKK manjše prihodke za to progo od prihodkov, ki jih je navedlo DKT, in sicer […].
DSB’s turnover is influenced, however, by a number of micro- and macroeconomic factors, which means that there is no constant proportional correlation between DSB’s production and turnover (factors: local competition, changes in the economic situation, political priorities, inflation, changes in the social composition of passengers, etc.).
Vendar na promet družbe DSB vplivajo določeni mikro- in makroekonomski dejavniki, ki povzročijo, da med proizvodnjo in prometom ni stalne sorazmerne korelacije (dejavniki: krajevna konkurenca, razvoj gospodarskih razmer, politične prednostne naloge, inflacija, gibanje socialne sestave potnikov itd.).
The Danish authorities propose two methods for assessing the productivity of DSB’s activities:
Danski organi predlagajo dve metodi ocenjevanja produktivnosti dejavnosti družbe DSB:
DSB’s production, measured in terms of the number of passenger-kilometres (increase of 1,8 % a year between 1999-2007) related to the number of employees (full time equivalents),
obseg prevozov družbe DSB, in sicer število potniških kilometrov (povečanje za 1,8 % letno med letoma 1999 in 2007), povezan s številom zaposlenih (ekvivalenti polne zaposlitve);
DSB’s production related to staffing costs in real terms (that is to say, corrected for wage inflation),
obseg prevozov družbe DSB, povezan z realnimi stroški dela (to je popravljenimi v skladu z inflacijo plač).
These two methods show an increase in productivity of, respectively, 1,9 % and 2 % per year.
Ti metodi kažeta povečanje produktivnosti za 1,9 % oziroma 2 % na leto.
Reduction in the contractual payments
Zmanjšanje pogodbenih plačil
The Danish authorities assert that the figures put forward by DKT in that regard are incorrect.
Danski organi trdijo, da številke, ki jih je v zvezi s tem navedlo združenje DKT, niso točne.