natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In the light of the references made by the CTIP to a possible public service mission, the Commission notes that the conditions identified in the Altmark [40] case (to exclude the classification as aid in certain cases of services of general economic interest) are not fulfilled in the present case (see in particular paragraph 144, the third Altmark condition consisting in absence of overcompensation).
Ker se CTIP sklicuje na morebitno nalogo javne službe, Komisija navaja, da pogoji, opredeljeni v zadevi Altmark [40] (za izključitev opredelitve ukrepa kot pomoči v nekaterih primerih storitev splošnega gospodarskega pomena), v obravnavanem primeru niso izpolnjeni (glej zlasti odstavek 144, tretji pogoj iz sodbe Altmark, ki se dejansko nanaša na neobstoj čezmernega nadomestila).
One is therefore indeed in the presence of an economic advantage.
Gospodarska ugodnost torej dejansko obstaja.
These advantages are granted by the French State, which, in so doing, waives the collection of tax revenue.
Te ugodnosti dodeljuje država Francija, ki se s tem odreče davčnim prihodkom.
It therefore confers this advantage through state resources.
Ugodnost torej dodeljuje iz državnih sredstev.
The measure is also of a selective nature.
Ukrep je tudi selektiven.
The selectiveness results firstly from the restriction of the measure in question to a single economic sector, i.e. the insurance sector, and secondly from its restriction within this sector to a particular type of policy (sub-sector).
Selektivnost po eni strani izhaja iz omejitve zadevnega ukrepa na enega od gospodarskih sektorjev, in sicer zavarovalništvo, in po drugi strani iz dejstva, da je znotraj tega sektorja omejena na posebno vrsto zavarovanj (podsektor).
In this respect, it should first be noted that corporation tax is a tax whose scope covers all companies, whatever the sector in which they operate.
V zvezi s tem je treba najprej ugotoviti, da je davek od dobička pravnih oseb davek, ki ga plačujejo vse družbe, ne glede na to, v katerem sektorju delujejo.
An exemption from this tax benefiting the insurance sector exclusively therefore constitutes a derogation from the general corporation tax regime which thus specifically favours certain undertakings.
Oprostitev plačila tega davka, do katere je upravičen izključno sektor zavarovalništva, torej pomeni odstopanje od splošne ureditve davka od dobička pravnih oseb, ki tako na poseben način daje prednost nekaterim podjetjem.
The same applies to the exemption from local business tax.
Enako velja za oprostitev plačila lokalnega davka za podjetja.
Moreover, the exemption in question also favours the production within the insurance sector of certain sickness insurance policies, in this case contrats solidaires et responsables.
Poleg tega zadevna oprostitev znotraj sektorja zavarovalništva spodbuja sklepanje določenih polic za zdravstveno zavarovanje, v tem primeru polic za zdravstveno zavarovanje, ki temeljijo na solidarni odgovornosti.
The measure therefore favours operators entering into contrats solidaires, to the detriment of operators issuing ‘traditional’ policies.
Ukrep torej daje prednost izvajalcem, ki jih zavezujejo „solidarnostne“ pogodbe, v škodo izvajalcev, ki jih zavezujejo „klasične“ pogodbe.
Finally, apart from the fact that the insurance sector is the subject of trade within the European Union, it should be recalled that, where a Member State grants aid to an undertaking, domestic production may for that reason be maintained or increased with the result that undertakings established in other Member States have less chance of penetrating the market in that Member State [41].
Nazadnje, poleg dejstva, da je sektor zavarovalništva predmet trgovanja v Evropski uniji, je treba opozoriti, da kadar 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 [41].
The position of the undertakings concerned will consequently be strengthened in trade within the European Union.
Posledično se bo utrdil položaj zadevnih podjetij pri trgovanju v Evropski uniji.
This measure is therefore liable to create distortions of competition and to affect trade within the European Union.
Ukrep bi torej lahko povzročil izkrivljanje konkurence in vplival na trgovino v Evropski uniji.
It must therefore be concluded that the first measure does in fact constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU.
Treba je torej ugotoviti, da prvi ukrep dejansko pomeni državno pomoč v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU.
France does not challenge this classification.
Francija tej opredelitvi ne oporeka.
Analysis of the compatibility of the measure under Article 107(2)(a) TFEU
Analiza združljivosti ukrepa na podlagi člena 107(2)(a) PDEU
Since the measure notified constitutes State aid, an analysis must be carried out of its compatibility with the internal market.
Ker je priglašeni ukrep državna pomoč, je treba preučiti njegovo združljivost z notranjim trgom.
The French authorities consider that the measure in question constitutes compatible State aid under Article 107(2)(a) TFEU.
Francoski organi menijo, da je zadevni ukrep državna pomoč, ki je združljiva na podlagi člena 107(2)(a) PDEU.
Article 107(2)(a) TFEU reads: ‘The following shall be compatible with the internal market: (a) aid having a social character, granted to individual consumers, provided that such aid is granted without discrimination related to the origin of the products concerned’.
Člen 107(2)(a) PDEU določa: „Z notranjim trgom je združljivo naslednje: (a) pomoč socialnega značaja, dodeljena posameznim potrošnikom, pod pogojem, da je dodeljena brez diskriminacije glede na poreklo zadevnih izdelkov“.
A State aid measure is compatible on the basis of this provision where the following three conditions are met:
Ukrep državne pomoči je združljiv na podlagi te določbe, če so izpolnjeni trije pogoji:
the aid must have a social character;
pomoč mora biti socialnega značaja;
it must be granted to individual consumers;
dodeljena mora biti posameznim potrošnikom;
it must be granted without discrimination related to the origin of the product.
dodeljena mora biti brez diskriminacije glede na poreklo zadevnega izdelka.
It should be pointed out firstly that Article 107(2) TFEU derogates from the principle of the prohibition of State aid, as set out in Article 107(1) TFEU, and must therefore be interpreted restrictively [42].
Najprej je treba pojasniti, da člen 107(2) PDEU pomeni odstopanje od načela prepovedi državnih pomoči iz člena 107(1) PDEU in ga je zato treba razlagati ozko [42].
As regards more specifically the application of Article 107(2)(a) TFEU, it must be pointed out, however, that the Commission’s decision-making practice does not rule out the aid being granted to an intermediary which undertakes to pass it on to individual consumers [43], Nevertheless, in such a case, it is necessary for the mechanism put in place to guarantee that the aid is effectively passed on to the end consumer.
Zlasti kar zadeva uporabo člena 107(2)(a) PDEU, je treba kljub vsemu navesti, da v praksi odločanja Komisije ni izključeno, da se pomoč dodeli posredniku, ki se zaveže, da jo bo prenesel na posamezne potrošnike [43]. Vendar je v takem primeru nujno, da vzpostavljeni mehanizem zagotavlja dejanski prenos na končnega potrošnika.
The Commission considers that the social character (first condition) of the measure is well established in so far as the objective is to open up access to supplementary health insurance to people who have difficulties in accessing such insurance owing to their age, state of health or resources.
Komisija meni, da je socialna narava ukrepa (prvo merilo) na splošno dokazana, če je namenjen osebam, ki si zaradi svoje starosti, zdravstvenega stanja ali sredstev težko uredijo dopolnilno zdravstveno zavarovanje.
Article 207 of the CGI provides for criteria of a social nature to be respected by insurers to qualify for the measure [44], These criteria introduce minimum proportions of certain vulnerable populations, such as persons on low income or the elderly, in the insurance portfolio of the undertakings concerned.
V členu 207 splošnega zakonika o davkih so namreč določena socialna merila, ki jih morajo izpolnjevati zavarovalnice, da so upravičene do ukrepa [44]. Ta merila v zavarovalni portfelj zadevnih ustanov uvajajo minimalne deleže nekaterih ranljivih delov prebivalstva, kot so osebe z nizkimi dohodki ali starejše osebe.
The preliminary draft decree forwarded by the French authorities, which specifies certain terms and conditions for the gradation of rates according to the social situation of insured persons [45], confirms the social character of the measure in favour of vulnerable populations.
Predosnutek odloka, ki so ga poslali francoski organi in v katerem so pojasnjena nekatera pravila o prilagajanju premij glede na socialni status zavarovancev [45], potrjuje socialni značaj ukrepa v korist ranljivih skupin prebivalstva.
On the other hand, the Commission’s examination of the measure did not allow the conclusion to be drawn that the aid in fact benefits individual consumers (second condition).
Po drugi strani pa Komisija na podlagi preučitve ukrepa ni mogla ugotoviti, da bi bili pomoči dejansko deležni posamezni potrošniki (drugo merilo).
According to the French authorities, the aid granted to insurers will indirectly benefit individual consumers.
Kot navajajo francoski organi, bodo pomoči, dodeljenih podjetjem, posredno deležni posamezni potrošniki.
The strong competition in the supplementary health insurance market ensures that the aid received is passed on by insurers to consumers in the amount of premiums set.
Močna konkurenca na trgu dopolnilnega zdravstvenega zavarovanja naj bi zagotavljala, da bodo pomoči, dodeljene podjetjem, prenesene na potrošnika prek določitve zneska premij, ki jih bo moral plačati potrošnik.
In this respect, it should be noted that the tax exemption of sickness insurance policies (contrats solidaires) applied by France has been considered by the Commission to be aid compatible under Article 107(2)(a) TFEU [46].
V zvezi s tem je treba navesti, da je Komisija menila, da je oprostitev, ki jo je Francija uporabljala za davek na police za zdravstveno zavarovanje, temelječe na solidarnosti, pomoč, ki je združljiva na podlagi člena 107(2)(a) PDEU [46].
There was in fact no doubt in this case that the tax exemption first and foremost benefited individual consumers who in fact had to pay the tax.
V tem primeru namreč ni bilo nikakršnega dvoma, da so imeli korist od oprostitve plačila davka predvsem posamezni potrošniki, ki so bili dejansko zavezanci za plačilo davka.
The amount of the tax constituted a component of the premium and the tax exemption in favour of contrats solidaires reduced the amount of the premium accordingly.
Znesek davka je bil sestavni del zneska premij, ki se je z oprostitvijo plačila davka v korist solidarnih zavarovanj ustrezno zmanjšal.
In the present case, the aid is granted, not through an indirect tax exemption proportional to the amount of the premium payable by insured persons, but through an exemption from corporation tax which is calculated on the basis of the profits made by the insurer from all insured persons who have taken out contrats solidaires et responsables.
V obravnavanem primeru pomoč ni dodeljena v obliki posredne oprostitve plačila davka glede na znesek premij, ki ga morajo plačati zavarovanci, temveč v obliki oprostitve plačila davka od dobička pravnih oseb, ki se izračuna glede na dobičke, ki jih je zavarovalnica ustvarila z vsemi zavarovanci, ki so sklenili zavarovanje na podlagi solidarne odgovornosti.
The actual passing on of the exemption from corporation tax to the end consumer is uncertain to say the least.
Najmanj, kar lahko rečemo, je, da je dejanski prenos oprostitve plačila davka od dobička pravnih oseb na končnega potrošnika negotov.
Firstly, the Commission is not in possession of any information enabling it to establish that the corporation tax (and the exemption from such tax) is in fact passed on to individual consumers in the market concerned.
Po eni strani Komisija nima dokazov, da se davek od dobička pravnih oseb (in oprostitev plačila tega davka) dejansko prenese na posamezne potrošnike na zadevnem trgu.
Moreover, a recent report by the French Court of Auditors showed the existence of very significant increases in profit margins in the health insurance sector in recent years (from 12 % in 2003 to 23 % in 2007) [47].
Poleg tega je nedavno poročilo francoskega računskega sodišča pokazalo, da so se stopnje dobička v sektorju zdravstvenega zavarovanja v zadnjih letih znatno zvišale (z 12 % v letu 2003 na 23 % v letu 2007) [47].
In this context of a significant increase in profit margins, it can hardly be concluded that a market mechanism exists guaranteeing that the exemption from corporation tax is in fact passed on to end consumers.
Glede na tako znatno zvišanje stopenj dobička je težko sklepati o obstoju tržnega mehanizma, ki naj bi zagotavljal dejanski prenos oprostitve plačila davka od dobička pravnih oseb na končne potrošnike.
The CTIP points out that part of profits must be allocated to the constitution of reserves in order to comply with solvency requirements and that it is therefore perfectly natural for at least part of the advantage to serve to cover, in whole or in part, the increase each year in the solvency requirement.
CTIP sicer navaja, da se del dobička nameni oblikovanju rezerv, da se upoštevajo zahteve po kapitalski ustreznosti, in da torej ni nič nenavadnega, da se vsaj del ugodnosti nameni za delno ali celotno kritje vsakoletnega zvišanja zahteve po kapitalski ustreznosti.
This argument tends to show that the measure will give rise to an increase in profits for insurers rather than a reduction in the price of covering the risks concerned for consumers.
Ta trditev naj bi dokazovala, da se bodo z ukrepom povečali dobički zavarovalnic, namesto da bi se znižale premije za zadevna tveganja za potrošnike.
Finally, the Commission’s assessment is by no means called into question by France’s argument that supplementary health insurance policies are a product which secures loyalty for insurers, which are encouraged to practise an attractive rates policy.
Nazadnje, te ugotovitve Komisije nikakor ne omaja trditev Francije, da police za dopolnilno zdravstveno zavarovanje za zavarovalnice pomenijo sredstvo za pridobitev zaupanja zavarovancev, zato naj bi se spodbujale k uporabi politike ugodnih premij.
It should be recalled that Article 107(2)(a) TFEU requires that the advantage be in fact passed on to individual consumers.
Treba je namreč opozoriti, da člen 107(2)(a) PDEU zahteva, da se ugodnost dejansko prenese nazaj na posamezne potrošnike.
Consequently, the existence of a mere incentive to pass on part of the advantage to end consumers cannot satisfy the requirement of an actual passing on of this advantage.
Zato naj samo s spodbujanjem k prenosu dela ugodnosti nazaj na končne potrošnike ne bi bilo mogoče izpolniti zahteve po dejanskem prenosu.
The Commission therefore considers that the measure does not guarantee that the advantage is in fact passed on to individual consumers, as required by Article 107(2)(a) TFEU.
Komisija torej meni, da ukrep ne zagotavlja dejanskega prenosa ugodnosti na posamezne potrošnike, kot se zahteva v členu 107(2)(a) PDEU.
The Commission’s examination also concludes that there is non-compliance with the condition concerning the absence of discrimination related to the origin of the product (third condition).
Preučitev Komisije je pokazala tudi neupoštevanje pogoja v zvezi z neobstojem diskriminacije glede na poreklo proizvoda (tretje merilo).
For this to be the case, consumers would have to benefit from the aid irrespective of the economic operator supplying the product or service capable of fulfilling the social objective referred to by the Member State concerned and there would have to be no barrier to entry for insurers established in the European Union [48].
Pri ugotavljanju upoštevanja tega pogoja je treba preveriti, ali so potrošniki deležni zadevne pomoči ne glede na to, kateri gospodarski subjekt ponuja izdelek ali storitev, ki lahko izpolni socialni cilj, na katerega se sklicuje zadevna država članica, in ali ni nobenih ovir za vstop zavarovalnic s sedežem v Evropski uniji [48].
However, besides the conditions relating to the type of policy eligible, companies wishing to benefit from the measure must respect the thresholds of a minimum number (120000/150000) or proportion (80 %/90 %) of contrats solidaires et responsables in their supplementary health insurance policy portfolio.
Družbe, ki želijo imeti korist od sheme, morajo poleg pogojev v zvezi z vrsto upravičenih polic upoštevati pragove glede števila (120000 oziroma 150000 polic) ali deleža (85- oziroma 93-odstotni delež) polic, ki temeljijo na načelu solidarne odgovornosti, v okviru svojega portfelja polic za dopolnilno zdravstveno zavarovanje.
The French authorities consider that these thresholds constitute an incentive to develop this type of policy on a massive scale through the mutualisation of the ‘bad risk’ characterised by the age or level of financial resources of the insured person in their portfolio and are also necessary to prevent the tax advantage from relating to too low a fraction of the business of the undertakings and in this way to attain the objectives of solidarity and mutualisation.
Francoski organi menijo, da ti pragovi pomenijo spodbudo za množično sklepanje takih vrst polic, tako da se „slabo tveganje“, povezano s starostjo ali ravnijo sredstev zavarovanca, razprši po portfelju, nujni pa so tudi za preprečitev, da se davčna ugodnost ne bi nanašala na premajhen delež dejavnosti ustanov, ter tako za dosego ciljev solidarnosti in vzajemnosti.
Pursuit of the social objective of the measure can be ensured only by a mechanism requiring insurers to hold in their sickness insurance policy portfolio a minimum number or a significant proportion of contrats solidaires et responsables.
Izpolnitev socialnega cilja ukrepa naj bi bilo mogoče zagotoviti samo z mehanizmom, ki zavarovalnicam nalaga, da morajo imeti v svojem portfelju polic za zdravstveno zavarovanje vsaj minimalno število ali znaten delež pogodb, ki temeljijo na solidarni odgovornosti.
In the absence of this threshold mechanism, no provision would have allowed an increase to be ensured in the rate of cover of the populations currently not covered and the tax exemptions would be reflected simply in a windfall for insurers.
Brez takega mehanizma pragov naj ne bi bilo z nobeno določbo mogoče zagotoviti povečanja stopnje pokritosti prebivalstva, ki trenutno ni zavarovano, davčne oprostitve pa bi zavarovalnicam povzročile samo učinek mrtvih izgub.
The threshold reflected as a percentage allowed small undertakings operating almost exclusively in these policies to benefit from the measure without reaching a purely quantitative threshold, whereas the thresholds in absolute terms allowed undertakings offering a significant number of this type of policy (without it being exclusive) to benefit from the measure.
Prag, izražen v odstotkih, naj bi malim ustanovam, katerih tako rekoč izključna dejavnost je sklepanje takih zavarovanj, vendar ne dosežejo popolnoma količinskih pragov, omogočil upravičenost do ukrepa, medtem ko bi pragovi v absolutni vrednosti omogočali upravičenost do ukrepa ustanovam, ki ponujajo veliko število te vrste polic (vendar ne izključno).
The Commission notes firstly that no precise information could be supplied by the French authorities concerning the current breakdown of contrats solidaires et responsables among the various market operators or concerning the number and proportion of these policies in their portfolios.
Komisija najprej ugotavlja, da francoski organi niso predložili nobene natančne informacije o trenutni porazdeljenosti polic, ki temeljijo na solidarni odgovornosti, med različnimi akterji na trgu, niti glede števila in deleža teh polic v njihovih portfeljih.
According to the Commission’s analysis, it nevertheless emerges that mutual societies and unions of mutual societies are legally bound to offer only contrats solidaires [49].
Iz ugotovitev Komisije vendarle izhaja, da imajo vzajemne družbe in združenja vzajemnih družb zakonsko obveznost, da ponujajo samo pogodbe, ki temeljijo na solidarnosti [49].
In practice, it also appears that provident societies are subject to the same obligation.
V praksi se je izkazalo, da tudi za ustanove dodatne socialne varnosti velja ista obveznost.
Mutual societies and provident societies should therefore always fulfil the condition of the threshold expressed as a percentage, whereas insurance undertakings with a limited presence in the market for contrats solidaires and wishing to invest in it could have difficulties in meeting the threshold conditions (either in terms of proportion or in absolute terms) and therefore in benefiting from the tax exemptions.
Vzajemne družbe in ustanove dodatne socialne varnosti bi torej morale vedno izpolnjevati merilo odstotkovnega praga, medtem ko bi lahko imele zavarovalnice, ki so slabo prisotne na trgu polic, ki temeljijo na solidarni odgovornosti, in bi se na njem rade uveljavile, težave pri izpolnjevanju meril v zvezi s pragom (v smislu deleža in tudi v absolutnem smislu), torej tudi pri upravičenosti do davčnih oprostitev.
This would be the case more specifically for insurance undertakings with a large existing portfolio of ‘traditional’ supplementary health policies which do not meet the conditions for being considered contrats solidaires.
To naj bi še zlasti veljalo za zavarovalnice, ki že razpolagajo z obsežnim portfeljem „klasičnih“ polic za dopolnilno zavarovanje, vendar te ne izpolnjujejo pogojev, da bi se lahko štele za police, ki temeljijo na solidarnosti.
In this context, the thresholds would not therefore lead to an equivalent effort, whoever the insurer, and would not have the effect of an incentive for insurers already meeting the threshold criteria (in particular mutual societies, unions of mutual societies and provident societies).
V okviru tega naj pragovi ne bi zahtevali enakega truda ne glede na zavarovalnico in naj ne bi bili spodbuda za zavarovalnice, ki že izpolnjujejo merila v zvezi s pragovi (zlasti vzajemne družbe, združenja vzajemnih družb in ustanove dodatne socialne varnosti).
Contrary to France’s assertions, the introduction of the thresholds is therefore unlikely to avoid a possible windfall effect.
V nasprotju s trditvami Francije uvedba pragov torej ne more preprečiti morebitnega učinka mrtvih izgub.
In the Commission’s view, these thresholds will quite simply have the effect of causing discrimination related to the origin of the product.
Po mnenju Komisije bodo ti pragovi preprosto povzročili diskriminacijo glede na poreklo proizvoda.
In this way, the thresholds seem likely to exclude a number of insurers from benefiting from the exemption, even if they were to offer the contrats solidaires et responsables that the French authorities wish to promote.
Zdi se torej, da bi bile zaradi teh pragov številne ustanove izključene iz ugodnosti oprostitve, tudi če bi ponujale police, ki temeljijo na načelu solidarne odgovornosti in jih francoski organi želijo podpreti.
The existence of these thresholds could also place at an advantage undertakings already present in the market and constitute a barrier to entry to the relevant market for certain operators which could not or which feared that they might not be able to meet them.
Poleg tega bi lahko ti pragovi dajali prednost ustanovam, ki so že na trgu, in ovirali vstop na zadevni trg nekaterim udeležencem, ki jih ne bi mogli upoštevati ali bi imeli pomisleke v zvezi s tem.