natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Italian authorities declared, in their letter of 11 October 1999, that the legal basis of the aid granted to WAM SpA, namely Law 394 of 29 July 1981, had been notified to the Commission and to the World Trade Organisation (WTO) pursuant to Article 25 of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing measures (WTO-GATT 1994) [36].
Italijanske oblasti so v dopisu z dne 11. oktobra 1999 izjavile, da je bila pravna podlaga za pomoč, odobreno podjetju WAM SpA, in sicer zakon št. 394 z dne 29. junija 1981, Komisiji in Svetovni trgovinski organizaciji (STO) priglašena v skladu s členom 25 Sporazuma o subvencijah in izravnalnih ukrepih (WTO-GATT 1994) [36].
The Commission notes that the Italian authorities are trying by this means to qualify as a notification the communication of some very concise data relating to the scheme in a table which has been sent to the Commission either for the purpose of transmission to the WTO Subsidies Committee or for the purpose of the annual report on State aid in the European Union since at least the sixth report (1996).
Komisija opozarja, da želijo italijanske oblasti kot priglasitev označiti obvestilo z zelo jedrnatimi podatki, vsaj od šestega poročila (1996) dalje, ki se nanašajo na shemo v razporedu pomoči, ki je bil predložen Komisiji bodisi za namen prenosa Odboru STO za subvencije ali za namen letnega poročila o državni pomoči v EU.
The Commission has also been informed of the existence of the scheme as part of its survey on national support schemes for foreign direct investment (FDI) outside the European Union that exist in the Member States.
Komisija je bila obveščena tudi o obstoju sheme v okviru raziskave o nacionalnih shemah podpor za tuje neposredne naložbe zunaj EU, ki obstajajo v državah članicah.
These kinds of communications, however, cannot be deemed to be in compliance with Article 88(3) of the EC Treaty, now Article 108(3) of the TFEU, which states that ‘the Commission shall be informed, in sufficient time to enable it to submit its comments, of any plans to grant or alter aid’.
Vendar pa takšnih obvestil ni mogoče šteti za skladne s členom 88(3) Pogodbe ES, zdaj členom 108(3) PDEU, ki navaja, da „mora biti Komisija obveščena o vseh načrtih za dodelitev ali spremembo pomoči dovolj zgodaj, da lahko predloži pripombe“.
Since it has not been previously notified to the Commission as regards its compatibility with the State aid rules, the aforementioned aid scheme has been implemented in contravention of Article 88(3) of the EC Treaty, now Article 108(3) of the TFEU, and is therefore unlawful.
Ker navedena shema pomoči, kar se tiče združljivosti s pravili glede državnih pomoči, ni bila predhodno priglašena Komisiji, je bila izvedena v nasprotju s členom 88(3) Pogodbe ES, zdaj členom 108(3) PDEU, in je zato nezakonita.
As the aid to WAM SpA was granted under that scheme, apart from any block-exempted aid, it must also be considered unlawful.
Ker je bila pomoč za podjetje WAM SpA dodeljena po tej shemi, je zato nezakonita, razen skupinsko izvzete pomoči.
Aid exempted under the de minimis rules and compatibility of the aid with Article 107 of the TFEU
Pomoč, izvzeta v skladu s pravili de minimis, in združljivost pomoči s členom 107 PDEU
The Commission has to verify whether any of the aid granted to WAM SpA can be exempted on the basis of the de minimis rules.
Komisija mora preveriti, ali je mogoče pomoč, dodeljeno podjetju WAM SpA, izvzeti na podlagi pravil de minimis.
In the same vein, having concluded that the measures under scrutiny constitute State aid within the scope of Article 107(1) of the TFEU, this aid has to be assessed for its compatibility under the relevant State aid rules.
V enakem smislu, po ugotovitvi, da ukrepi iz pregleda pomenijo državno pomoč v okviru člena 107(1) PDEU, je treba to pomoč oceniti z vidika združljivosti v skladu z zadevnimi pravili glede državnih pomoči.
First loan granted to WAM SpA
Prvo posojilo, dodeljeno podjetju WAM SpA
Evidence has been provided by the Italian Government that at the time the first loan was granted (1995), WAM SpA fulfilled the requirements for it to be considered an SME within the meaning of Commission Recommendation 96/280/EC of 3 April 1996 concerning the definition of small and medium-sized enterprises [37].
Italijanska vlada je predložila dokaze, da je podjetje WAM SpA v času, ko mu je bilo odobreno prvo posojilo (1995), izpolnjevalo vse zahteve za obravnavo kot MSP v smislu Priporočila Komisije 96/280/ES z dne 3. aprila 1996 o opredelitvi majhnih in srednje velikih podjetij [37].
In the case at hand, the Commission is basing its analysis on the actual expenditure taken into consideration in granting the loan (see table in recital 44).
V zadevnem primeru analiza Komisije temelji na dejanskih izdatkih, upoštevanih pri dodelitvi posojila (glej preglednico v uvodni izjavi 44).
Bearing in mind that the objective of the loan contract was to subsidise a market penetration programme and, in particular, to subsidise export undertakings carrying out market penetration programmes outside the European Union, the aid in question must be classified as export aid, i.e. aid for export-related activities, in the sense that it is directly linked to the establishment and operation of a distribution network or to other current expenditure related to the export activity.
Ob upoštevanju, da je bil namen posojilne pogodbe subvencionirati program uveljavitve na trgu in zlasti subvencionirati izvozna podjetja, ki prodirajo na trge zunaj Evropske unije, je zadevno pomoč treba označiti kot izvozno pomoč, tj. kot pomoč za dejavnosti, povezane z izvozom, saj je neposredno povezana z vzpostavljanjem in delovanjem distribucijskega omrežja oziroma z drugimi tekočimi izdatki, povezanimi z izvozno dejavnostjo.
Similarly, the ultimate goal of the market penetration programme was to sell WAM SpA’s products in Japan.
Podobno je bil glavni cilj programa uveljavitve na trgu prodaja izdelkov podjetja WAM SpA na japonskem trgu.
This is another reason why it cannot be regarded as being linked to foreign direct investment (FDI).
To je še en razlog, zakaj pomoči ni mogoče označiti kot povezane z neposrednimi tujimi naložbami.
Regulation (EC) No 1998/2006 excludes export aid from its scope.
Uredba (ES) št. 1998/2006 iz svojega področja uporabe izključuje izvozno pomoč.
Article 1(d) stipulates in fact that this Regulation does not apply to ‘aid towards export-related activities towards third countries or Member States, namely directly linked to the quantities exported, to the establishment and operation of the distribution network or to other current expenditure linked to export activity’.
Člen 1(d) dejansko določa, da ta uredba ne velja za „pomoči za z izvozom povezane dejavnosti v tretje države ali države članice, kot je pomoč, neposredno povezana z izvoženimi količinami, z ustanovitvijo in delovanjem distribucijske mreže ali drugimi tekočimi izdatki, povezanimi z izvozno dejavnostjo“.
However, Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1998/2006 stipulates that aid not meeting the conditions of Article 1 shall be assessed in accordance with the relevant frameworks, guidelines, communications and notices.
Vendar pa člen 5 Uredbe (ES) št. 1998/2006 določa, da se pomoč, ki ne izpolnjuje pogojev iz člena 1, oceni v skladu z ustreznimi okviri, smernicami, sporočili in obvestili.
However, as in the present case a portion of the aid exceeds the permissible de minimis threshold (EUR 50000), the whole of the aid has to be regarded as not falling under the de minimis exemption and for this reason must be considered to constitute State aid [39].
Vendar ker v zadevnem primeru del pomoči presega dovoljeni prag de minimis (50000 EUR), je treba celotno pomoč označiti kot pomoč, ki ne spada v izjemo de minimis, in zato je treba pomoč obravnavati kot državna pomoč [39].
Having established that the measure constitutes State aid, it must be decided whether this can be considered compatible with the internal market under the rules on State aid.
Po ugotovitvi, da je ukrep državna pomoč, je treba ugotoviti, ali je ta pomoč združljiva z notranjim trgom v skladu s pravili o državni pomoči.
Article 44(2) of the 2008 Block Exemption Regulation stipulates that any aid granted before the entry into force of the Regulation which fulfils neither the conditions laid down in it nor the conditions laid down in Commission Regulations (EC) No 68/2001 [40], (EC) No 70/2001, (EC) No 2204/2002 [41] or (EC) No 1628/2006 [42] must be assessed according to the frameworks, guidelines, communications and notices in force at the time it was granted.
Člen 44(2) Uredbe o splošnih skupinskih izjemah iz leta 2008 določa, da je treba vsako pomoč, dodeljeno pred začetkom veljavnosti Uredbe, ki ne izpolnjuje niti pogojev iz Uredbe niti pogojev iz uredb (ES) št. 68/2001 [40], (ES) št. 70/2001, (ES) št. 2204/2002 [41] ali (ES) št. 1628/2006 [42], oceniti v skladu z ustreznimi okviri, smernicami, sporočili in obvestili, ki so veljala v času dodelitve pomoči.
In the present case, the 2008 General Block Exemption Regulation is not applicable since it introduces an additional step – verifying the incentive effect of a project or activity before it begins – which was not carried out by Italy.
V zadevnem primeru Uredba o splošnih skupinskih izjemah iz leta 2008 ne velja, saj uvaja dodaten ukrep – preverjanje spodbujevalnega učinka projekta ali dejavnosti še pred njenim začetkom – česar pa Italija ni izvedla.
Therefore, by virtue of Article 8(6) of the 2008 General Block Exemption Regulation, the entire aid measure cannot be exempted under that Regulation.
Zato na podlagi člena 8(6) Uredbe o splošnih skupinskih izjemah iz leta 2008 celotnega ukrepa pomoči ni mogoče izvzeti na podlagi zadevne uredbe.
Moreover, the expenses mentioned in the table in recital 44 and listed at recital 118 cannot be block-exempted on the basis of Regulations (EC) No 68/2001, (EC) No 70/2001, (EC) No 2204/2002 nor (EC) No 1628/2006 either as the conditions laid down in those Regulations are not fulfilled.
Poleg tega stroškov iz preglednice v odstavku 44 in odstavka 118 ni mogoče skupinsko izvzeti na podlagi uredb (ES) št. 68/2001, (ES) št. 70/2001, (ES) št. 2204/2002 ali (ES) št. 1628/2006, saj pogoji iz teh uredb niso izpolnjeni.
As none of these instruments justifies the compatibility of the aid, it must be assessed on the basis of the 1992 SME guidelines since they contain the substantive rules in force when the aid was granted in 1995 [43].
Ker noben od teh instrumentov ne utemeljuje združljivosti pomoči, je treba pomoč oceniti na podlagi smernic za MSP iz leta 1992, saj te smernice vsebujejo materialna pravila, ki so veljala v času dodelitve pomoči leta 1995 [43].
As regards the aid for participation in fairs and exhibitions (ITL 12,19 million), it can be considered compatible with the 1992 SME guidelines on the basis of point 4.5 ‘Aid for other purposes’, as it can be regarded as aid for other means of SME promotion, such as encouraging cooperation.
Pomoč za udeležbo na sejmih in razstavah (12,19 milijona ITL) je mogoče obravnavati kot združljivo s smernicami za MSP iz leta 1992 na podlagi točke 4.5 „Pomoč za druge namene“, saj jo je mogoče označiti kot pomoč za druge načine spodbujanja MSP, kot je npr. spodbujanje sodelovanja.
The remainder of the aid (see the table in recital 44) cannot be considered compatible as it is not intended to support any productive investments nor any other admissible aim laid down in the 1992 SME guidelines, i.e. aid for general investments outside or inside national assisted areas, aid for environmental protection investment and aid for research and development.
Preostale pomoči (glej preglednico v uvodni izjavi 44) ni mogoče šteti za združljivo, saj ta pomoč ni bila namenjena podpori produktivnim naložbam niti kateremu koli drugemu dopustnemu cilju iz smernic za MSP iz leta 1992, tj. pomoč za splošne naložbe zunaj in znotraj nacionalnih območij, ki prejemajo pomoč, pomoč za naložbe v varstvo okolja ter pomoč za raziskave in razvoj.
Accordingly, the Commission is of the opinion that the bulk of the eligible costs for the establishment of permanent structures abroad which were taken into consideration by the Italian Government in granting the first subsidised loan to WAM SpA in 1995 can in no way be regarded as productive investment; on the contrary, aid towards them must be classified as operating aid.
V skladu s tem Komisija meni, da večino upravičenih stroškov, namenjenih ustanovitvi trajnih struktur v tujini, ki jih je italijanska vlada upoštevala pri odobritvi prvega subvencioniranega posojila podjetju WAM SpA v letu 1995, nikakor ni mogoče obravnavati kot produktivno naložbo; nasprotno, to pomoč je treba označiti kot pomoč za tekoče poslovanje.
The costs considered eligible: rent of premises, insurance and miscellaneous facilities (ITL 122,56 million) and operating costs such as personnel, fittings and equipments for premises (ITL 556,94 million) are costs which the firm should itself have borne; the same applies to display models and spare parts for after-sale service (ITL 38,23 million).
Upravičeni stroški: najemnina za prostore, zavarovanje in stroški objektov (122,56 milijona ITL) in stroški poslovanja, kot so stroški za osebje, pohištvo in opremo za prostore (556,94 milijona ITL), so stroški, ki bi jih podjetje moralo kriti samo; enako velja za vzorce in nadomestne dele za poprodajne storitve (38,23 milijona ITL).
Similarly, with respect to the eligible costs in support of trade promotion, the cost of storage of goods (ITL 456,28 million) does not comply with the 1992 SME guidelines, in the Commission’s opinion, as it cannot be considered an initial investment; the advertising costs (ITL 94,39 million) and business trips (ITL 7,52 million) do not comply with the guidelines either.
Podobno, v zvezi z upravičenimi stroški, namenjenimi podpori pospeševanja prodaje, Komisija meni, da stroški skladiščenja blaga (456,28 milijona ITL) niso skladni s smernicami za MSP iz leta 1992, saj jih ni mogoče šteti za začetno naložbo; s smernicami niso skladni niti stroški za oglaševanje (94,39 milijona ITL) in poslovna potovanja (7,52 milijona ITL).
On the basis of the above assessment, the Commission therefore concludes that
Na podlagi zgornje ocene je Komisija sklenila naslednje:
the portion of aid relating to the aid for consultancy services (ITL 29,43 million) and market surveys (ITL 40,95 million) as well the aid for participation in fairs and exhibitions (ITL 12,19 million) constitutes State aid compatible with the internal market on the basis of the 1992 SME guidelines; the portion of the aid not mentioned under (a) (see recital 118) constitutes State aid incompatible with the internal market.
del pomoči v zvezi s pomočjo za svetovalne storitve (29,43 milijona ITL) in tržne raziskave (40,95 milijona ITL) ter pomoč za udeležbo na sejmih in razstavah (12,19 milijona ITL) predstavljata državno pomoč, združljivo z notranjim trgom na podlagi smernic za MSP iz leta 1992; del pomoči, ki ni naveden pod točko (a) (glej uvodno izjavo 118) predstavlja državno pomoč, ki ni združljiva z notranjim trgom.
Second loan granted to WAM SpA
Drugo posojilo, dodeljeno podjetju WAM SpA
At the time the second amount of aid was granted in 2000, WAM SpA was, as the Italian authorities themselves admitted, a large undertaking.
Leta 2000, ko je bil dodeljen drugi znesek pomoči, je bilo podjetje WAM SpA, kakor so priznale tudi italijanske oblasti, veliko podjetje.
Furthermore, it was located in a non-assisted area.
Poleg tega se podjetje ni nahajalo v regiji prejemnici pomoči.
The 2000 loan can also be regarded as an export aid to WAM SpA as it had the same objective as the 1995 loan and was also intended for the purpose of penetrating and exporting to foreign markets (specifically the Chinese market).
Posojilo iz leta 2000 je mogoče obravnavati tudi kot izvozno pomoč podjetju WAM SpA, saj je bil cilj tega posojila enak cilju posojila iz leta 1995, namenjeno pa je bilo prodoru in izvozu na tuje trge (natančneje na kitajski trg).
It is obvious that aid for technical assistance, workshop premises and staff abroad (1 sales manager, 1 general manager, 4 employees and 6 technicians) was unlikely to have been intended for anything other than commercial activities.
Jasno je, da pomoč za tehnično pomoč, prostore za delavnice in osebje v tujini (en vodja prodaje, en generalni direktor, štirje zaposleni in šest tehnikov) ni bila namenjena za nič drugega kot za komercialne dejavnosti.
As a consequence, the reasoning used for the 1995 loan is also applicable to the 2000 loan.
Zato argumenti, uporabljeni za posojilo iz leta 1995, veljajo tudi za posojilo iz leta 2000.
This constitutes evidence of the established presence of WAM SpA in the specific market in question.
To dokazuje, da je podjetje WAM SpA na tem trgu že prisotno.
As the aid in question is an export aid, Regulation (EC) No 1998/2006, as has been stated above, does not apply.
Ker je zadevna pomoč izvozna pomoč, Uredba (ES) št. 1998/2006, kakor je bilo navedeno zgoraj, ne velja.
The compatibility of the aid with the internal market must therefore be assessed.
Zato je treba oceniti združljivost pomoči z notranjim trgom.
The Commission takes the view that the procedural rule in force at the time the decision was taken, the 2008 General Block Exemption Regulation, does not apply to the case in question.
Komisija meni, da postopkovno pravilo, veljavno v času sprejetja sklepa, tj. Uredba o splošnih skupinskih izjemah iz leta 2008, ne velja za zadevni primer.
This Regulation introduces an additional step – verifying the incentive effect of a project or activity before it begins – which was not carried out by Italy.
Ta uredba uvaja dodaten ukrep – preverjanje spodbujevalnega učinka projekta ali dejavnosti, še preden se ta začne – česar pa Italija ni storila.
The Commission takes the view that the training expenses detailed in the letter of 22 July 2003 (EUR 25240 out of total loan of EUR 1,8 million in 2000) (as shown in the table in recital 65), may be exempted on the basis of Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 68/2001 and are therefore compatible with the internal market according to Article 87(3) of the EC Treaty, now Article 107(3) of the TFEU, whether the assessment is based on Article 4(2) (specific training) or (3) (general training).
Komisija meni, da je stroške za usposabljanje, podrobneje opisane v dopisu z dne 22. julija 2003 (25240 EUR od celotnega posojila v višini 1,8 milijona EUR) (kakor je prikazano v preglednici iz uvodne izjave 65), mogoče izvzeti na podlagi člena 4 Uredbe (ES) št. 68/2001 o uporabi členov 87 in 88 Pogodbe ES pri pomoči za usposabljanje [44] in so zato združljivi z notranjim trgom v skladu s členom 87(3) Pogodbe ES, zdaj členom 107(3) PDEU, ne glede na to, ali ocena temelji na členu 4(2) (posebno usposabljanje) ali členu 4(3) (splošno usposabljanje).
However, the remainder of the aid in question cannot be considered compatible on the basis of Regulations (EC) No 70/2001, (EC) No 2204/2002 or (EC) No 1628/2006 or any other any legal basis, as it does not promote any other horizontal objective of the European Union within the meaning of Article 107(3)(c) of the TFEU, such as research and development, employment, the environment or rescue and restructuring within the meaning of the relevant guidelines, frameworks and regulations.
Vendar pa preostanka zadevne pomoči ni mogoče šteti za združljivega na podlagi uredb (ES) št. 70/2001, (ES) št. 2204/2002 ali (ES) št. 1628/2006 oziroma na kateri koli drugi pravni podlagi, saj ne podpira nobenega drugega horizontalnega cilja Evropske unije v smislu člena 107(3) PDEU, kot so npr. raziskave in razvoj, zaposlovanje, okolje ali reševanje in prestrukturiranje v smislu zadevnih smernic, okvirov in uredb.
As regards the modification of the interest rate during the loan repayment period, the Italian authorities argued that general rules allowing such reductions did exist within the Italian legal framework.
Splošne ugotovitve
However, the Ministerial Decree of 31 March 2000, which is the only legal basis provided for this purpose, applies only to the initiatives funded by Laws Nos 394/81 and 304/1990, and is therefore very restrictive.
Italijanske oblasti so v zvezi s spremembo obrestne mere v obdobju odplačevanja trdile, da v okviru italijanskega pravnega sistema dejansko obstajajo splošna pravila, ki dovoljujejo takšno znižanje.
Moreover, it must be emphasised that no further evidence has been provided that the interest rate in respect of the aid in question was modified [44].
Vendar pa se ministrski odlok z dne 31. marca 2000, ki je edina pravna podlaga, navedena v ta namen, nanaša samo na pobude, financirane z zakonoma št. 394/81 in 304/1990, in je zato zelo omejevalen. Treba je tudi poudariti, da ni bil predložen noben drug dokaz, da je bila obrestna mera v zvezi z zadevno pomočjo spremenjena [45].
With regard to both loans, the Italian authorities argue that the cost of the compulsory bank guarantee which was requested prior to the granting of the loans has to be deducted from the amount of the aid.
Italijanske oblasti trdijo, da je treba pri obeh posojilih od njunih zneskov odšteti stroške obvezne bančne garancije, ki se zahteva pred odobritvijo posojil.
The Commission observes, first of all, that such a guarantee, or its equivalent, would usually have been requested even by a private credit institution granting loans according to the market economy investor principle.
Komisija meni, da bi, prvič, takšno garancijo oziroma njeno ustreznico običajno zahtevala tudi zasebna kreditna institucija, ki dodeljuje posojila v skladu z načelom vlagatelja pod tržnimi pogoji.
Secondly, the specifications annexed to the contract stipulate that the overlapping of aid for the same programme is not allowed, except for aid related to the guarantee, which consequently is deemed to be itself eligible for aid.
Drugič, specifikacije, priložene pogodbi, določajo, da prekrivanje pomoči za isti program ni dovoljeno, z izjemo pomoči, povezane z garancijo, ki se zato sama šteje za upravičeno do pomoči.
The Commission notes that the exemptions provided for in Article 107(2)(a) to (c) [45] of the TFEU do not apply to the loans in question since they do not pursue any of the objectives listed in that Article, nor has the Italian Government argued that this was the case.
Komisija ugotavlja, da izjeme iz člena 107(2) (a) do (c) [46] PDEU ne veljajo za zadevni posojili, saj nista namenjeni za nobenega od ciljev, navedenih v tem členu, pa tudi italijanska vlada ne trdi, da sta.
The loans were not intended to promote the economic development of certain areas or promote the execution of an important project of common European interest or to remedy a serious disturbance in the economy of a Member State, nor were they intended to promote culture or heritage conservation.
Zadevni posojili nista namenjeni spodbujanju gospodarskega razvoja določenih regij ali spodbujanju izvajanja pomembnega projekta, ki bi bil v skupnem evropskem interesu, ali za odpravljanje resne motnje v gospodarstvu države članice, niti nista namenjeni pospeševanju kulture in ohranjanju kulturne dediščine.
The Commission therefore considers that Article 107(3)(a) [46], (b) [47] and (d) [48] of the TFEU do not apply to the loans under consideration.
Komisija zato meni, da v primeru zadevnih posojil ne veljajo niti člen 107(3)(a) PDEU [47], člen 107(3)(b) PDEU [48] niti člen 107(3)(d) PDEU [49].
Both loans to WAM SpA were granted without being previously notified to the Commission.
Obe posojili za podjetje WAM SpA sta bili dodeljeni brez predhodne priglasitve Komisiji.
The aid Italy granted to WAM SpA on 24 November 1995 in the form of an interest-rate subsidy constitutes State aid.
Pomoč, ki jo je Italija podjetju WAM SpA dodelila 24. novembra 1995 v obliki subvencionirane obrestne mere, predstavlja državno pomoč.
The portion corresponding to eligible costs for consultancy services, participation in fairs and exhibitions and market surveys constitutes State aid compatible with the internal market.
Del pomoči, ki ustreza upravičenim stroškom za svetovalne storitve, udeležbo na sejmih in razstavah in tržne raziskave, predstavlja državno pomoč, ki je združljiva z notranjim trgom.