natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The risk of default by the supplier is determined by Coface on the basis of the Score@rating rating system of French undertakings launched by Coface in 2002 which is based on its 20 years of experience in rating businesses.
Družba COFACE tveganje neizpolnjevanja obveznosti dobavitelja določi na podlagi sistema ocenjevanja francoskih podjetij „Score @rating“, ki ga je uvedla leta 2002 in temelji na njenih 20-letnih izkušnjah na področju ocenjevanja družb.
With its Score@rating, Coface obtained the status of External Credit Assessment Institution (ECAI) from the Commission bancaire for its rating activities in France.
Družba COFACE je s svojim sistemom „Score @rating“ od odbora za bančništvo pridobila status institucije za zunanjo bonitetno oceno („External Credit Assesment Institution“) za dejavnosti ocenjevalca v Franciji.
That approval was granted in accordance with the Basel II rules.
Ta status je bil odobren v skladu z uredbo Basel II.
The following table gives the equivalences between different recognised rating systems [7].
V naslednji razpredelnici so prikazana razmerja med različnimi priznanimi sistemi ocenjevanja [7]:
ECAI
Institucija za zunanjo bonitetno oceno
Risk Weight
Utež tveganja
Basel mapping
Okvir Basel
Aaa to Aa3
Aaa do Aa3
A+ to A-
A + do A-
A1 to A3
A1 do A3
BBB+ to BBB-
BBB + do BBB-
Baa1 to Baa3
Baa1 do Baa3
Evaluation of long-term risk
Ocena dolgoročnega tveganja
BB+ to BB-
BB + do BB-
to Ba3
do Ba3
B+ to B-
B + do B-
B1 to B3
B1 do B3
CCC+ and below
CCC + in slabše
Caa1 and below
Caa1 in slabše
Score@rating is a risk rating which divides probability of default into phases.
„Score @rating“ je ocena tveganja, ki ustreza razdelitvi verjetnosti neizpolnjevanja obveznosti na tranše.
The risk analysed is default by the undertaking under the terms of the law, or a failure to pay of equivalent seriousness.
Analizirano tveganje je neizpolnjevanje zakonitih obveznosti družbe ali temu enakovredno neplačilo.
Each rating, measured on a scale of 1 to 10, corresponds to an average annual default rate.
Vsaka ocena, merjeno na lestvici od 1 do 10, ustreza povprečni stopnji neizpolnjevanja obveznosti za eno leto.
The table below shows the annual default rate corresponding to different Score@rating ratings [8]:
V naslednji razpredelnici je označena stopnja neplačil za eno leto in ustrezne ocene sistema „Score @rating“ [8]:
Very high risk
Zelo visoko tveganje
Average risk
Srednje visoko tveganje
Annual default rate
Stopnja neplačil za eno leto
In order to deal with the risk of default by the insured undertaking in the event of a strong dollar, Coface must be covered for the probability of default by financial instruments [9].
Da bi uravnotežila tveganje neplačila zavarovanca v primeru močnega dolarja, mora družba COFACE zagotoviti kritje s finančnimi instrumenti v višini verjetnosti neplačila [9].
The Bloomberg software can calculate the price of the instruments required to cover the credit risk on the day a guarantee is quoted.
Prek programske opreme Bloomberg je mogoče izračunati ceno potrebnih instrumentov za kritje kreditnega tveganja na dan ocene jamstva.
The premium is therefore adjusted according to the default risk determined on the basis of the Score@rating system and the cost of the instruments required to cover that risk.
Premija se torej prilagodi glede na tveganje neplačila, določenega na podlagi sistema Score @rating, in stroške potrebnih instrumentov za kritje tega tveganja.
The factors described in recitals 40 to 49 form the basis for calculating the current premiums under the Aero 2008 guarantee.
Elementi iz uvodnih izjav od 40 do 49 so osnova za določitev premij, ki se uporabljajo v okviru jamstva „Aero 2008“.
The French authorities have provided a detailed breakdown of the premiums invoiced to the four suppliers taking out the guarantee.
Francoski organi so predložili informacije o podrobni strukturi premij, zaračunanih štirim dobaviteljem, ki so sklenili jamstvo.
This is illustrated in the table below:
To je prikazano v razpredelnici v nadaljevanju:
Quotation date
Datum ocene
Coface note on quotation
Ocena Coface
Year commencing
Leto začetka
Year ending
Leto konca
Sharing percentage
Udeležba pri dobičku
15-cent ceiling?
Udeležba pri dobičku omejena na 15 centov?
2 months
2 meseca
Total amount USD
Skupni znesek v USD
Market price of the guarantee
Tržna cena jamstva
Credit risk
Kreditno tveganje
Margin for administrative costs
Marža za upravne stroške
Coface premium
Premija Coface
Difference related to execution risk [10]
Odstopanje zaradi tveganja pri izvrševanju [10]
According to the French authorities, the structure of the premium as set out makes the guarantee less attractive than the products offered by the banking sector.
Po navedbah francoskih organov je zaradi tako opredeljene strukture premije jamstvo manj privlačno kot produkti bančnega sektorja.
The conditions offered under the Aero 2008 guarantee are therefore not more favourable than market conditions and the premiums clearly incorporate the market value of the financial products required to set up the guarantee, including a profit margin, Coface’s administrative costs, and the value of the default risk of the supplier.
Pogoji jamstva „Aero 2008“ zato niso ugodnejši od tržnih pogojev in premije upoštevajo tržno vrednost potrebnih finančnih instrumentov za izvajanje jamstva, vključno s profitno maržo, upravnimi stroški družbe COFACE in vrednostjo tveganja neplačila dobaviteljev.
France therefore argued that the measure does not involve selective economic advantage and so does not constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU.
Zato Francija meni, da ukrep ne pomeni selektivne gospodarske prednosti in zato tudi ne državne pomoči v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU.
France also stated that seven of the eleven undertakings which received an offer from Coface decided to reject the offer.
Francija je tudi navedla, da je sedem družb od enajstih, ki so prejele ponudbo družbe COFACE, to ponudbo zavrnilo.
According to information provided by the French authorities, two of the undertakings in question stated that the banks’ terms were more favourable (in particular, no premium) and two others stated that the terms offered by Coface were not advantageous (in particular, unattractive guaranteed rates).
Prav tako so francoski organi predložili informacije, po katerih sta dve zadevni družbi trdili, da so bančni pogoji ugodnejši (zlasti ni treba plačati premije), dve družbi pa sta menili, da pogoji, ki jih je predlagala družba COFACE, niso zanimivi (zlasti neprivlačen zajamčeni tečaj).
One undertaking stated that its terms of payment were incompatible with the guarantee offered, another stated that it had finally managed to enter into an agreement in EUR and a third undertaking stated that the negotiations with the purchaser had broken down at the end of the validity of the guarantee commitment.
Ena od družb je navedla, da njeni plačilni pogoji niso združljivi s predlaganim jamstvom, druga družba je izjavila, da je lahko svojo pogodbo sklenila v eurih, tretja pa, da se do konca veljavnosti zaveze za jamstvo pogajanja s kupcem niso končala.
A measure constitutes State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU if it fulfils four conditions: it must be granted by the State or through State resources, confer a selective advantage to some undertakings or economic activities, distort or threaten to distort competition, and be liable to affect trade between Member States.
Ukrep pomeni državno pomoč v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU, če izpolnjuje naslednje štiri pogoje: dodeli ga država ali izvira iz državnih sredstev, daje selektivno prednost posameznim podjetjem ali posameznim gospodarskim dejavnostim, izkrivlja ali bi lahko izkrivljal konkurenco ter lahko prizadene trgovino med državami članicami.
As stated in recital 34, the decision to initiate a formal investigation procedure was based, first, on the existence of concerns about whether the premiums paid by the beneficiary undertakings were consistent with market prices.
Kakor je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 34, je bila odločitev o začetku formalnega postopka preiskave sprejeta zlasti zaradi pomislekov glede tržne cene premij, ki so jih vplačale upravičene družbe.
Specifically, the Commission took the view that the French authorities did not show that the premiums paid covered the following factors: the administrative costs of Coface for administering the guarantee, the risk of default by suppliers, the credit risk in respect of staggered payment of premiums, and a profit margin.
Zlasti je Komisija menila, da francoski organi niso dokazali, da so vplačane premije zajemale naslednje elemente: upravne stroške družbe COFACE za upravljanje jamstva, tveganje v zvezi z neplačili dobavitelja, kreditno tveganje v primeru plačila premij na obroke in profitno maržo.
The possibility therefore remained that there was a selective economic advantage for suppliers who took out the guarantee.
Zato ni bilo mogoče izključiti, da so bili dobavitelji, ki so sklenili jamstvo, deležni selektivne gospodarske prednosti.
The Commission’s services analysed the information provided by the French authorities following the opening of the procedure laid down in Article 108(2) TFEU with a view to determining whether the measure is consistent with the market economy private investor principle, that is to say, whether or not the conditions offered by Coface are consistent with the market conditions offered by private operators.
Službe Komisije so preučile informacije, ki so jih predložili francoski organi po začetku postopka po členu 108(2) PDEU, da bi ugotovile, ali je ukrep skladen z načelom zasebnega vlagatelja v tržnem gospodarstvu, tj. če so pogoji, ki jih ponuja družba COFACE, skladni s tržnimi pogoji, kot jih ponujajo zasebni subjekti.
The Commission notes, first, that the French authorities undertook to ensure that when Coface determines the applicable rate of the premium, it uses the same methodology for all undertakings applying for the guarantee, namely the methodology set out in Section IV [11].
Komisija najprej ugotavlja, da so francoski organi za določitev stopnje premije na podlagi metodologije, kot je zlasti opisana v oddelku IV, za vse družbe, ki so zaprosile za jamstvo, izbrali družbo COFACE [11].
The Commission finds that products comparable to those offered by Coface are also available on the markets.
Komisija ugotavlja, da so na trgih na voljo tudi drugi produkti, primerljivi tistim, ki jih ponuja družba COFACE.
The Commission then verified that the market price of the guarantee invoiced by Coface is consistent with the market price applied by private operators.
Komisija je nato preverila, ali je tržna cena jamstva, kot jo je zaračunala družba COFACE, skladna s tržno ceno, ki jo ponujajo zasebni subjekti.
The Commission takes the view that the price of the financial instruments required to set up the guarantee are in fact market prices, as shown by the extracts from the Bloomberg software provided by France, and that they are accurately reflected in the premiums invoiced by Coface.
Komisija ugotavlja, da je cena finančnih instrumentov, potrebnih za izvajanje jamstva, dejansko tržna cena, kakor to potrjujejo izpiski iz programske opreme Bloomberg, ki jih je poslala Francija, kar družba COFACE natančno upošteva tudi pri zaračunavanju premij.
In addition, the market prices of those financial products include a profit margin for the financial institutions from which Coface bought the instruments in question.
Poleg tega tržna cena teh finančnih instrumentov vključuje profitno maržo v korist finančnih institucij, pri katerih je družba COFACE kupila zadevne instrumente.
The French authorities also showed that an additional margin of 40 base points is invoiced in order to cover Coface’s administrative costs.
Francoski organi so prav tako pokazali, da je za kritje upravnih stroškov družbe COFACE zaračunana dodatna marža v višini 40 bazičnih točk.
As set out in recital 45, that margin represents a substantial proportion of the value of the premiums invoiced.
Kakor je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 45, ta marža pomeni znaten del vrednosti zaračunanih premij.
The Commission therefore considers that the premiums invoiced incorporate a profit margin and a margin to cover Coface’s administrative costs, which removes the uncertainty expressed when the formal investigation procedure was initiated.
Zato Komisija meni, da zaračunane premije dejansko vključujejo profitno maržo in maržo za kritje upravnih stroškov družbe COFACE, zaradi česar so odpravljeni pomisleki, izraženi ob začetku formalnega postopka preiskave.
The Commission observes that such an additional margin is not included by private banks, which merely receive the margin included in the Bloomberg database price.
Komisija ugotavlja, da take dodatne marže zasebne banke ne vključujejo in pobirajo le maržo, ki je vključena v ceni iz podatkovne zbirke Bloomberg.
Accordingly, that margin may be considered to be consistent with the market price.
Zato lahko za takšno maržo velja, da je skladna s tržno ceno.
The Commission takes the view that France has also succeeded in demonstrating that the default risk by the supplier [12] was reflected correctly in the calculation of the amount of the premiums invoiced.
Komisija ugotavlja, da je Francija uspešno utemeljila tudi svoje stališče, da je bilo tveganje neplačevanja dobaviteljev [12] ustrezno upoštevano pri določitvi zneska zaračunanih premij.
In order to deal with the risk of default by the insured undertaking, Coface must obtain cover for the probability of default by:
Da bi družba COFACE izravnala tveganje neizpolnjevanja obveznosti zavarovanca, mora zagotoviti kritje v višini verjetnega zneska neplačila, in sicer z:
buying a EUR/USD put at a strike price equal to the guaranteed forward rate for (1 – sharing %) × the guaranteed dollar amount, or
nakupom prodajne opcije EUR/USD po enaki ceni kot zajamčeni terminski tečaj (1-odstotna udeležba pri dobičku) za znesek x v dolarjih,
buying a EUR/USD put at a strike price equal to the guaranteed forward rate less 15 cents for profit-sharing × the guaranteed dollar amount if there is a ceiling on the sharing rate.
nakupom prodajne opcije EUR/USD po enaki ceni kot zajamčeni terminski tečaj z odbitkom 15 centov za udeležbo pri dobičku v znesku x dolarjev, če je udeležba pri dobičku omejena.
The value of the credit risk for a year’s cover is therefore equal to the sum of the option price multiplied by the probability of default in respect of the year in question.
Vrednost kritja kreditnega tveganja za določeno leto je tako enaka ceni opcij, pomnoženo z verjetnostjo neizpolnjevanja obveznosti za zadevno leto.
That default probability is determined by an internationally recognised rating system, as described in recitals 47 and 48 and used by Coface and its clients in their commercial transactions.
Ta verjetnost neizpolnjevanja obveznosti je opredeljena z mednarodno priznanim sistemom ocenjevanja, kakor je opisano v uvodnih izjavah 47 in 48, ki ga družba COFACE in njene stranke uporabljajo pri poslovanju.
The Commission considers that the reason for the use by Coface of its own rather than external ratings is that it makes efficiency savings by doing so.
Komisija meni, da se lahko dejstvo, da družba COFACE ne uporablja zunanjega sistema ocenjevanja ampak svojega, upraviči z večjo učinkovitostjo.
On the basis of the additional information provided by the French authorities and the undertaking of the French authorities referred to in recital 56 of this Decision, the Commission concludes that Coface’s price for the Aero 2008 guarantees is consistent with the market conditions offered by private operators.
Na podlagi dodatnih informacij, ki so jih predložili francoski organi, in njihovo izbiro iz uvodne izjave 56 tega sklepa Komisija meni, da je cena, ki jo družba COFACE zahteva za jamstvo „Aero 2008“ skladna s tržnimi pogoji, kot jih ponujajo zasebni subjekti.
The Aero 2008 guarantee may therefore be considered to operate in accordance with the market economy investor principle.
Za jamstvo „Aero 2008“ tako lahko velja, da je skladno z načelom vlagatelja v tržnem gospodarstvu.
Accordingly, the suppliers who took out the guarantee did not obtain any economic advantage.
Zato dobavitelji, ki so sklenili to jamstvo, niso pridobili nobene gospodarske prednosti.
It is not therefore necessary to analyse the other concerns on which the opening of the formal investigation procedure was based.
Torej ni treba preučiti preostalih pomislekov, zaradi katerih je Komisija začela formalni postopek preiskave.
Since the existence of selective economic advantage is a condition required to show that there is State aid, it may be concluded that the Aero 2008 guarantee does not constitute a State aid measure.
Ker je za dokaz obstoja državne pomoči treba med drugim dokazati, da so imele družbe selektivno gospodarsko prednost, lahko ugotovimo, da jamstvo „Aero 2008“ ne pomeni ukrepa državne pomoči.
As far as the conditions applied by Coface for staggered payment of premiums are concerned, the Commission considers, however, that the interest rate applied, that is to say, the 12-month EURIBOR rate plus 60 base points, cannot be regarded as a rate consistent with market practices.
Kar zadeva pogoje, ki jih družba COFACE uporablja pri obročnem odplačevanju premij, pa Komisija meni, da se veljavna obrestna mera, tj. 12-mesečna obrestna mera EURIBOR, zvišana za 60 bazičnih točk, ne more obravnavati kot obrestna mera, ki je v skladu s tržno prakso.
In particular, the premium of 60 base points is a fixed premium which is not adjusted in relation to the default risk of the supplier or the guarantee level.
Premija 60 bazičnih točk je fiksna premija, ki ni prilagojena niti tveganju neizpolnjevanja obveznosti dobavitelja niti ravni varnosti.
Since France has provided no specific justification, the Commission will, in order to establish the reference rate, apply the method for setting the reference and discount rates laid down in its Communication on the revision of the method for setting the reference and discount rates [13] (‘the Communication on reference rates’).
Ker Francija ni navedla nobene utemeljitve, Komisija za določitev referenčnih obrestnih mer uporablja metodo izračuna referenčnih obrestnih mer in diskontnih stopenj, kot je predvideno v Sporočilu Komisije o spremembi metode določanja referenčnih obrestnih mer in diskontnih stopenj [13] (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Sporočilo o referenčnih obrestnih merah).
By letter of 31 January 2011, the French authorities gave an undertaking that the difference between the premiums obtained by applying Coface’s interest rate and those determined on the basis of the reference rates in the Communication on reference rates would always remain under the de minimis threshold and that they would comply with all of the provisions of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1998/2006 of 15 December 2006 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty to de minimis aid [14].
Z dopisom z dne 31. januarja 2011 so se francoski organi zavezali, da bo razlika med premijami, ki izhajajo iz uporabe obrestnih mer družbe COFACE, in tistimi, določenimi na podlagi referenčnih obrestnih mer iz Sporočila o referenčnih obrestnih merah, zmeraj manjša od zgornje meje pomoči de minimis in da bodo upoštevali vse določbe Uredbe Komisije (ES) št. 1998/2006 o uporabi členov 87 in 88 Pogodbe pri pomoči de minimis [14].
The Commission therefore concludes on the basis of that undertaking that the interest invoiced in respect of staggered payment does not fulfil all the conditions of Article 107(1) TFEU and does not therefore constitute a State aid measure.
Komisija lahko torej na podlagi te zaveze ugotovi, da zaračunane obresti pri obročnem odplačevanju ne izpolnjujejo vseh meril člena 107(1) PDEU in zato ne pomenijo ukrepov državne pomoči.
In the light of the all of the foregoing, the Commission considers that the Aero 2008 guarantee does not constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU,
Ob upoštevanju navedenega Komisija ugotavlja, da jamstvo „Aero 2008“ ne pomeni državne pomoči v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU –
The measure implemented by the French Republic to aeronautic suppliers (‘the Aero 2008 guarantee’) does not constitute State aid pursuant to Article 107(1) TFEU.
Ukrep, ki ga je Francoska republika izvršila v korist dobaviteljev v letalskem sektorju (jamstvo „Aero 2008“), ne pomeni pomoči v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU.
Done at Brussels, 8 March 2011.
V Bruslju, 8. marca 2011
OJ C 268, 2.10.2010, p. 4.
UL C 268, 2.10.2010, str. 4.
This measure does not therefore concern Tier 1 and Super Tier 1, which are partners sharing the risk with aircraft manufacturers.
Ta ukrep torej ne zadeva dobaviteljev na vrhu piramide, t. i. „Tier 1“ in „super Tier 1“, ki so partnerji izdelovalcev letal in z njimi delijo tveganja.
This information was supplied by France in its observations of 20 September 2010.
Te informacije je navedla Francija v dopisu z dne 20. septembra 2010.
The variation is explained by the fact that the margin in respect of administrative costs is fixed whereas other items making up the cost of the premium are variable on the basis of the risk specific to the undertaking and the costs of the necessary hedging instruments.
Razlika v vrednosti nastane, ker je marža za upravne stroške nespremenljiva, drugi elementi stroškov premije pa se spreminjajo glede na tveganje za družbe in stroške potrebnih instrumentov za kritje tveganj.
Source: Coface’s Internet site at: http://www.Coface.fr/CofacePortal/ShowBinary/BEA%20Repository/FR_fr_FR/pages/home/wwd/i/_docs/Score@rating.pdf
Vir: spletna stran družbe COFACE: http://www.coface.fr/CofacePortal/ShowBinary/BEA%20Repository/FR_fr_FR/pages/home/wwd/i/_docs/Score@rating.pdf.
This involves buying a EUR/USD put at a strike price equal to the forward rate guaranteed for (1 – sharing %) × the guaranteed dollar amount or buying a EUR/USD put at a strike price equal to the guaranteed forward rate less 15 cents for profit-sharing × the guaranteed dollar amount if there is a ceiling on the sharing rate.
Gre za nakup prodajne opcije EUR/USD po enaki ceni kot zajamčeni terminski tečaj (1-odstotna udeležba pri dobičku) za znesek × v dolarjih ter nakup prodajne opcije EUR/USD po enaki ceni kot zajamčeni terminski tečaj z odbitkom 15 centov za udeležbo pri dobičku v znesku × dolarjev, če je udeležba pri dobičku omejena.
This involves a premium to cover market volatility between the time when the contract is concluded and the market conditions on the quotation date, ranging between 9 and 19 base points depending on market conditions on the quotation date.
Gre za premijo, ki krije nestanovitnost trga med trenutkom sklenitve pogodbe in tržnimi pogoji na dan ocene ter znaša med 9 in 19 bazičnih točk, odvisno od tržnih pogojev na dan ocene.
Letter from the French authorities of 20 September 2010.
Dopis francoskih organov z dne 20. septembra 2010.
Where Coface is liable to pay out compensation (weak dollar), default by the undertaking means that Coface does not have to pay it compensation, whereas when the guarantee leads to a repayment by the undertaking, the latter’s default results in a corresponding loss for the State.
Kar zadeva nadomestilo družbe COFACE (v primeru šibkega dolarja), tej v primeru neplačevanja dobavitelja ni treba nakazati nadomestila, če pa mora na podlagi jamstva dobavitelj nadomestilo nakazati družbi COFACE, pa njegovo neizpolnjevanje obveznosti za državo pomeni izgubo zadevnega zneska nadomestila.
Requests for information were sent to the French Republic on 4 November 2008, 15 May 2009 and 30 September 2009.
Komisija je z dopisi z dne 4. novembra 2008, 15. maja 2009 in 30. septembra 2009 od Francoske republike zahtevala informacije.
The French Republic replied on 8 December 2008, 18 June 2009 and 30 October 2009 respectively.
Francoska republika je nanje odgovorila z dopisi z dne 8. decembra 2008, 18. junija 2009 oziroma 30. oktobra 2009.
The replies were registered on those same days.
Vsi odgovori so bili evidentirani na dan prejema.