natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Thirdly, the Commission observes, however, that the selective nature of a measure may be justified by ‘the nature or general scheme of the system’, that is to say, whether the exceptions to the system or differentiations within that system derive directly from the basic or guiding principles of the tax system in the Member State concerned (third step of the selectivity analysis).
Tretjič, Komisija ugotavlja, da je selektivni značaj ukrepa mogoče upravičiti z „naravo ali splošno shemo sistema“, torej z obsegom, v katerem izjeme pri davčnem sistemu ali razlikovanja v sistemu izhajajo neposredno iz osnovnih ali vodilnih načel sistema v zadevni državi članici (to je tretji korak pri analizi selektivnosti).
If so, the Commission considers that, under the settled case-law of the Court [61] the measures introducing a differentiation between undertakings when that differentiation arises from the nature and overall structure of the system of charges of which they form part do not constitute State aid.
Komisija v skladu z uveljavljeno sodno prakso Sodišča meni, da ukrepi, ki uvajajo razlikovanje med podjetji, ne pomenijo državne pomoči, če to razlikovanje izhaja iz narave in splošne sheme davčnega sistema, katerega del so [61].
This justification based on the nature or overall structure of the tax system reflects the consistency of a specific tax measure with the internal logic of the tax system in general.
Ta utemeljitev na podlagi narave ali splošne strukture davčnega sistema odraža usklajenost določenega davčnega ukrepa z interno logiko davčnega sistema na splošno.
However, the Commission’s practice and the Court’s case-law have adopted a very restrictive approach for these justifications.
Vendar sta praksa Komisije in sodna praksa Sodišča zavzeli zelo restriktiven pristop k tovrstni utemeljitvi.
Only reasons inherent in the tax system can be invoked.
Razlogi morajo izhajati iz davčnega sistema.
The Greek authorities stated that the individual circumstances of each casino are different, and that the prices of admission tickets are set in function of those circumstances, taking account of the objective of setting such a price which is to discourage persons of low income from gambling.
Grški organi so navedli, da se okoliščine posameznih igralnic razlikujejo in da je višina vstopnine določena v skladu z okoliščinami ob upoštevanju cilja odvračanja oseb z nizkim dohodkom od igranja iger na srečo.
The Commission cannot accept these arguments.
Komisija ne more sprejeti teh argumentov.
The argument that the level of the price is set according to and justified by the circumstances of each individual casino, taking account of the objective of discouraging persons of low income from gambling, cannot be reconciled with the fact that the casinos of Mont Parnès and Thessaloniki, which apply the price of EUR 6, are both close to major centres of population in Greece.
Trditev, da je višina vstopnine določena in upravičena glede na okoliščine vsake posamezne igralnice ob upoštevanju cilja odvračanja oseb z nizkim dohodkom od igranja iger na srečo, ni skladna z dejstvom, da sta igralnica Mont Parnès in igralnica v Solunu, ki zaračunavata vstopnino v višini 6 EUR, blizu najgosteje naseljenih območij.
Nor can it be reconciled with the explicit possibility to admit customers without payment provided that 80 % of the price is nonetheless remitted to the State.
Prav tako ne more biti združljiva z izrecno določbo, ki igralnicam omogoča, da sprejmejo stranke brez plačila vstopnine, če 80 % cene kljub temu nakažejo državi.
Furthermore, the Commission also observes that it is not apparent why this lower price is necessary as concerns these casinos specifically and not in the case of other casinos, nor have the Greek authorities explained the economic calculation for setting the lower price of admission tickets at the specific level of EUR 6 and not another intermediary level, and if individual circumstances are concerned, which according to Greece mainly consist in the geographical situation of each casino, why all the beneficiary casinos are (in principle, see above) obliged to charge the same price of admission tickets and not a ‘personalised’ one, adapted to their individual situation.
Komisija tudi ugotavlja, da ni jasno, zakaj je ta nižja cena potrebna v primeru teh igralnic, ne pa tudi v primeru drugih igralnic. Grški organi niso pojasnili ekonomskega izračuna za določitev nižje vstopnine v višini 6 EUR namesto srednje visoke vstopnine oziroma, ob predpostavki, da dejansko obstajajo posebne okoliščine – ki po mnenju Grčije vključujejo predvsem geografski položaj posamezne igralnice – zakaj morajo vse upravičene igralnice zaračunavati enako vstopnino (kot splošno pravilo, glej zgoraj), namesto da bi bila cena prilagojena njihovemu individualnemu položaju.
As an example, should the lower price of admission tickets be justified by the specificities of the individual geographical situation of each of the casinos, than such reasoning in any case would not apply to the casino of Thessaloniki who seems to enjoy this treatment not in consideration of its geographical situation, but in consideration of a national provision granting to undertakings established with foreign capital the most advantageous treatment applicable to national undertakings.
Na primer, če se dokaže, da nižjo vstopnino upravičujejo dejavniki, povezani z geografskim položajem vsake od igralnic, pa te utemeljitve nikakor ni mogoče uporabiti v primeru igralnice v Solunu, za katero se zdi, da je deležna take obravnave brez upoštevanja njenega geografskega položaja, vendar z upoštevanjem nacionalne določbe, ki dovoljuje podjetjem, ustanovljenim s tujim kapitalom, najugodnejšo obravnavo, ki velja za domača podjetja.
Thus, the geographical situation of the casino of Thessaloniki does not appear to have been taken into consideration at any time in setting the price of its admission tickets.
Tako se zdi, da se pri določanju višine vstopnine za igralnico v Solunu nikoli ni upošteval njen geografski položaj.
In light of all the above, the Commission concludes that the selective character of the measure in review is not justified by the nature of the general system.
Komisija je sklenila, da selektivni značaj zadevnega ukrepa ni upravičen z naravo ali splošno shemo sistema.
Therefore, the contested measure is considered to include a discriminating element, in the form of a reduction in the tax base resulting in a fiscal advantage benefiting to individually determined casinos, discrimination which is not justified by the logic of the Greek general relevant tax system.
Komisija meni, da sporni ukrep vključuje element diskriminacije v obliki znižanja davčne osnove, kar je individualno določenim igralnicam zagotovilo davčno korist, in da ta diskriminacija ni upravičena z logiko zadevnega splošnega davčnega sistema v Grčiji.
Accordingly, the Commission therefore concludes that the criterion of selectivity in the sense of Article 107(1) of the TFEU is met in the present case.
Komisija je sklenila, da je merilo selektivnosti za namene člena 107(1) PDEU izpolnjeno.
Distortion of competition and effect on trade
Izkrivljanje konkurence in vpliv na trgovino
In order to constitute State aid the measure must affect competition and trade between Member States.
Da bi ukrep pomenil državno pomoč, mora vplivati na konkurenco in trgovino med državami članicami.
This criterion supposes that the beneficiary of the measure exercises an economic activity, regardless of the beneficiary’s legal status or means of financing.
Ne glede na pravni status upravičenca ali vire financiranja to merilo predpostavlja, da upravičenec ukrepa opravlja gospodarsko dejavnost.
According to the Court’s case-law [62], ‘for the purpose of categorising a national measure as prohibited State aid, it is necessary, not to establish that the aid has a real effect on trade between Member States and that competition is actually being distorted, but only to examine whether that aid is liable to affect such trade and distort competition. In particular, when aid granted by a Member State strengthens the position of an undertaking compared with other undertakings competing in intra-Community trade, the latter must be regarded as affected by that aid. […] In addition, it not necessary that the beneficiary undertaking itself be involved in intra-Community trade. Aid granted by a Member State to an undertaking may help to maintain or increase domestic activity, with the result that undertakings established in other Member States have less chance of penetrating the market of the Member State concerned.’ Moreover, under settled case-law of the Court [63], for a measure to distort competition and affect trade between Member States it is sufficient that the recipient of the aid competes with other undertakings on markets open to competition in the internal market [64].
V skladu s sodno prakso Sodišča „pri opredelitvi nacionalnega ukrepa za državno pomoč ni treba ugotavljati stvarnega vpliva pomoči na trgovino med državami članicami niti dejanskega izkrivljanja konkurence, ampak je treba le preučiti, ali te pomoči lahko vplivajo na to trgovino in izkrivljanje konkurence. Zlasti kadar pomoč države članice okrepi položaj enega podjetja v razmerju do drugih konkurenčnih podjetij v trgovini znotraj Skupnosti, se šteje, da pomoč na ta podjetja vpliva. Poleg tega ni potrebno, da upravičeno podjetje sodeluje v trgovini znotraj Skupnosti. Kadar namreč država članica odobri pomoč podjetju, lahko s tem ohrani ali poveča njegovo notranjo dejavnost, tako da zmanjša možnosti podjetij s sedežem v drugih državah članicah, da vstopijo na trg te države članice“ [62]. Poleg tega v skladu z ustaljeno sodno prakso [63] za to, da ukrep izkrivlja konkurenco, zadostuje, da prejemnik pomoči tekmuje z drugimi podjetji na trgih, ki so odprti za konkurenco na domačem trgu [64].
The Commission considers that the conditions set out in the case-law are fulfilled for the following reasons.
Komisija meni, da so v tem primeru pogoji, določeni v sodni praksi, izpolnjeni iz naslednjih razlogov.
The contested measure alleviates the taxes that the beneficiaries have to pay with respect to the rest of casinos in Greece, thereby strengthening their comparative financial position and increasing the profitability of their investments as opposed to a situation where their profitability would be exclusively based on their own merits.
Zadevni ukrep znižuje davke, ki jih morajo plačevati upravičenci, v primerjavi z drugimi igralnicami v Grčiji, s čimer krepi njihov konkurenčni finančni položaj in dobičkonosnost njihovih naložb je večja, kot bi bila, če bi temeljila samo na njihovih lastnih prednostih.
As above mentioned, under settled case-law, the criterion of trade being affected is met if the recipient firm carries on an economic activity involving trade between Member States.
Kot je bilo navedeno, je po ustaljeni sodni praksi merilo, da mora biti pomoč sposobna vplivati na trgovino, izpolnjeno, če podjetje, ki je prejemnik pomoči, opravlja gospodarsko dejavnost, ki vključuje trgovino med državami članicami.
The mere fact that the aid strengthens the firm’s position compared with that of other firms which are competitors in intra-European trade is enough to allow the conclusion to be drawn that intra-European trade is affected.
Za oblikovanje sklepa, da ukrep vpliva na trgovino v Evropi, zadostuje, da pomoč krepi položaj podjetja v primerjavi s položajem drugih podjetij, ki z njim konkurirajo v trgovini znotraj Evrope.
Neither the fact that aid is relatively small in amount, nor the fact that the recipient is moderate in size or its share of the European market very small, nor indeed the fact that the recipient does not carry out exports or exports virtually all its production outside the European market do anything to alter this conclusion [65].
Tudi če je znesek pomoči razmeroma majhen, če prejemnik ni velik ali je njegov delež evropskega trga zelo majhen ali če prejemnik ne opravlja izvoza ali dejansko izvaža vse svoje proizvode na neevropske trge, to ne spremeni tega sklepa [65].
Greece argued that the situation of the casinos and the distances between them mean that each serves a local market and therefore that the measure cannot distort competition or affect trade between Member States.
Grčija je trdila, da lokacija igralnic in oddaljenost med njimi pomeni, da vsaka oskrbuje lokalni trg in da zato ukrep ne more izkrivljati konkurence ali vplivati na trgovino med državami članicami.
However, pursuant to case-law [66], there is no threshold in order to determine the actual or potential effect on competition and on trade between Member States, and therefore, this condition for applying Article 107(1) of the TFEU may be completed independently of the local or regional provision of the services concerned or the importance of the field of activity concerned.
Vendar pa v skladu s sodno prakso ni nobenega praga, ki bi določal dejanski ali potencialni vpliv na konkurenco in na trgovino med državami članicami, zato to merilo za uporabo člena 107(1) ni odvisno od lokalne ali regionalne narave storitev, ki se opravljajo, ali od velikosti zadevnega področja dejavnosti [66].
Greece also argued that the gambling market is not harmonised between Member States, who are therefore free to regulate it at national level.
Grčija je tudi trdila, da trg iger na srečo ni usklajen med državami članicami, ki ga lahko zato prosto regulirajo na nacionalni ravni.
Greece invoked the jurisprudence of the Court which allows restrictions to the single market for gambling services in the name of protection of consumers from fraud and criminality [67].
Grčija navaja sodno prakso Sodišča, ki dovoljuje omejitev enotnega trga za storitve na področju igralništva za zaščito potrošnikov pred goljufijami in kriminalom [67].
The Commission fully respects the right of Member States to set the objectives of their policy in the area of gambling provided that any restrictions on the freedom to provide services are suitable for achieving the objectives pursued, do not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives and are applied in a non-discriminatory manner.
Komisija v celoti upošteva pravico držav članic, da določijo cilje svoje politike na področju igralništva pod pogojem, da so kakršne koli omejitve svobode pri zagotavljanju storitev primerne za doseganje ciljev, ne presegajo okvirov, ki so potrebni za doseganje teh ciljev, in se uporabljajo nediskriminacijsko.
However the Commission cannot accept that these arguments deprive the measure at issue of any effect of distortion of competition or on trade between Member States.
Vendar pa se Komisija ne strinja, da iz tega sledi, da zadevni ukrep ne more izkrivljati konkurence in ne vpliva na trgovino med državami članicami.
The operators in the sector are often international hotel groups [68] that compete which each other, whose decision whether to invest or divest in casinos or other hotel facilities are affected by the measure, since it impacts the comparative profitability of these groups and their investments.
Ponudniki storitev v tej panogi so pogosto mednarodne hotelske skupine [68], ki si medsebojno konkurirajo in na katerih odločitve za naložbe v igralnice ali druge hotelske storitve lahko ukrep vpliva, saj vpliva na primerjalno dobičkonosnost skupin in njihove naložbe.
Casinos are often sited in tourist destinations, which would indicate that the presence of a casino may act as an attraction to tourists to visit Greece.
Igralnice se pogosto nahajajo na turističnih destinacijah, kar kaže, da lahko prisotnost igralnice privablja turiste, da obiščejo Grčijo.
Indeed casinos fell under the responsibility of the Ministry of Tourism in Greece.
Ministrstvo, pristojno za igralnice v Grčiji, je Ministrstvo za turizem.
In addition, the Commission notes that there is a certain cross-border mobility of customers; moreover, casino services are themselves operated in a cross-border environment – for instance, casinos operate such services on cruise ships linking Greece to Italy and other destinations.
Komisija tudi ugotavlja, da obstaja določena stopnja čezmejne mobilnosti strank. Storitve igralnic se izvajajo tudi v čezmejnem okolju – na primer, igralnice izvajajo take storitve na ladjah za križarjenje, ki povezujejo Grčijo z Italijo in drugimi destinacijami.
More widely, some persons wishing to gamble may be able to choose between gambling in a casino and doing so on line.
Bolj splošno, osebe, ki želijo igrati igre na srečo, imajo možnost izbire med igranjem iger na srečo v igralnici in na spletu.
On line gambling is an international business and gamblers in Greece may be able to access such services provided by operators in other Member States.
Spletno igralništvo je mednarodni posel in igralci v Grčiji lahko dostopajo do tovrstnih storitev, ki jih zagotavljajo ponudniki storitev v drugih državah članicah.
The case referred to by Greece (see paragraph 108) in fact concerned Internet gambling.
Spletno igralništvo je bilo predmet sodbe, ki jo je navedla Grčija (glej odstavek 108).
The Greek authorities disputed the possibility of competition with other forms of gambling cited in the Opening Decision, noting that Internet gambling is currently illegal in Greece.
Grški organi so oporekali možnosti konkurence z drugimi oblikami igralništva, navedenimi v odločitvi o začetku postopka, pri čemer so poudarili, da je internetno igralništvo v Grčiji nezakonito.
However, and despite the current legal situation in Greece, the Greek authorities have recognised themselves that Internet gambling has in fact grown ‘to uncontrollable proportions’ [69].
Vendar so grški organi ugotovili, da je internetno igralništvo kljub trenutnemu pravnemu položaju v Grčiji naraslo „do neobvladljivih razsežnosti“ [69].
In this context reference should also be made to the judgement of the Court of Justice in Case C-65/05 Commission v Greece [70] in which the Court held that Law 3037/2002 which aimed at banning Internet gambling in Greece amounted to an unjustified barrier to the freedom of establishment and the freedom to provide services.
Omeniti je treba tudi sodbo Sodišča v zadevi C-65/05 Komisija proti Grčiji [70], v kateri je Sodišče odločilo, da zakon 3037/2002, namenjen prepovedi internetnega igralništva v Grčiji, pomeni neupravičeno oviranje svobode ustanavljanja in svobode opravljanja storitev.
Furthermore, the overall economic crisis affects consumer habits and disposable income for entertainment purposes such as using casino services.
Nadalje, vsesplošna gospodarska kriza vpliva na navade potrošnikov in razpoložljiv dohodek za prostočasne dejavnosti, kot je uporaba storitev igralnic.
In this particular context a differentiation in prices of admission tickets has an even more significant distortive impact on the choices made by consumers and thus is liable even more so to distort competition on the casino market.
V teh posebnih razmerah imajo razlike v višini vstopnine še bolj izkrivljajoč učinek na izbiro potrošnikov in tako obstaja še večja verjetnost izkrivljanja konkurence na trgu igralnic.
Furthermore, the Commission notes that although the Law 2687/1953 could have been invoked by other casinos, if they had brought in capital from abroad and had submitted the application in good time, its application is subject to certain specific arbitrary rules that make it a selective measure.
Komisija tudi ugotavlja, da čeprav bi zakonodajni odlok 2687/1953 lahko uporabljale tudi druge igralnice, če bi vložile tuji kapital in pravočasno vložile zahtevek, je njegova uporaba odvisna od posebnih samovoljnih pravil, zaradi kateri je ukrep selektiven.
In fact, the only one other example of potential application of this Law that has been brought to the attention of the Commission – namely concerning the casino on Syros, who submitted an application under this law – was refused because the application was submitted after the importing of the foreign capital (and not ahead of this).
Edini drug primer morebitne uporabe zakona, ki je pritegnil pozornost Komisije, je povezan z igralnico na otoku Syros, ki je vložila zahtevek, ki pa je bil zavrnjen, ker je bil vložen po uvozu tujega kapitala in ne pred tem.
The Commission notes, further, that when the casino of Mont Parnès was privatised, the possibility of a licence for a second casino with the same region was specifically provided for in the sale.
Nadalje, ko je bila igralnica Mont Parnès privatizirana, je bila v prodajni pogodbi izrecno navedena možnost pridobitve dovoljenja za še eno igralnico na istem območju.
Clearly the likelihood of investment in such an operation would depend on the conditions of competition with the existing operator.
Jasno je, da bi bila verjetnost naložbe v tako dejavnost odvisna od konkurenčnih pogojev obstoječega ponudnika storitev.
Since it can not be ruled out that casinos are competing with similar companies in another Member State, this requirement pursuant to Article 107(1) of the TFEU must be regarded as fulfilled.
Ker ni mogoče izključiti, da bi igralnice lahko konkurirale podobnim podjetjem v drugih državah članicah, je treba ta pogoj iz člena 107(1) PDEU šteti za izpolnjenega.
Therefore the Commission concludes that the contested measure is liable to distort competition and affect trade between Member States by potentially improving the operating conditions of the beneficiaries being directly engaged in economic activities, which are liable to pay this tax on admissions in casinos in Greece.
Komisija je sklenila, da sporni ukrep lahko izkrivlja konkurenco in vpliva na trgovino med državami članicami z morebitnim izboljšanjem pogojev poslovanja upravičencev, ki so neposredno vključeni v gospodarske dejavnosti in so dolžni plačati davek na vstopnino v igralnice v Grčiji.
Given all the above considerations, the Commission concludes that the criteria for the existence of aid within the meaning of Article 107 of the TFEU are met and that the measure constitutes State aid in favour of the casinos with a lower price of admission tickets.
Komisija je sklenila, da so merila za obstoj pomoči v smislu člena 107 PDEU izpolnjena in da ukrep pomeni državno pomoč v korist igralnic z nižjimi vstopninami.
These casinos are Mont Parnès, Corfu, Thessaloniki and Rhodes.
To so igralnica Mont Parnès ter igralnice na Krfu, v Solunu in na Rodosu.
As stated in the Opening Decision, the Commission considers that the measure in question does not qualify for any of the derogations laid down in Article 106 or 107 of the TFEU.
Kot je navedeno v odločitvi o začetku postopka, Komisija meni, da ukrep ne izpolnjuje pogojev za katero koli izjemo iz členov 106 ali 107 PDEU.
Greece has so far argued that there is no State aid involved and has not offered any arguments as to why any aid would be compatible.
Grčija je doslej trdila, da ukrep ne vključuje nobene pomoči in ni predložila nobenega argumenta, s katerim bi dokazala, zakaj je katera koli pomoč združljiva.
In any event, as noted above, the argument that the measure has the objective of discouraging gambling cannot be reconciled with the fact that the casinos which apply the price of EUR 6 include those closest to the major centres of population in Greece.
Vendar v vsakem primeru, kot je poudarjeno zgoraj, trditev, da je cilj ukrepa odvračati ljudi od igranja iger na srečo, ne more biti združljiva z dejstvom, da igralnice, ki zaračunavajo vstopnino v višini 6 EUR, vključujejo igralnice, ki so najbližje najgosteje naseljenim območjem v Grčiji.
The derogations in Article 107(2) of the TFEU, concerning aid of a social character granted to individual consumers, aid to make good the damage caused by natural disasters or exceptional occurrences and aid granted to certain areas of the Federal Republic of Germany, do not apply in this case.
Izjeme iz člena 107(2) PDEU za pomoč socialne narave, dodeljeno posameznim potrošnikom, pomoč za povrnitev škode, ki so jo povzročile naravne nesreče ali izredni dogodki, in pomoč, dodeljeno nekaterim območjem Zvezne republike Nemčije, se v tem primeru ne uporabljajo.