natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Financing Guidelines state for this latter case as well that, whenever the compensation constitutes State aid, the recipient undertaking, together with the municipality owning it needs to take in advance measures to avoid overcompensation.
Poleg tega je v direktivi o financiranju za zadnji primer predvideno, da mora upravičeno podjetje, če pomoč pride v poštev, skupaj z občino, ki je njegova lastnica, vnaprej določiti pravila za preprečevanje čezmerne kompenzacije.
As Germany considers that the present measure does not constitute State aid, no such preventive measures have been implemented so far.
Ker Nemčija meni, da obravnavani ukrep ne pomeni državne pomoči, se doslej v zvezi s tem ni ukrepalo.
The transport undertakings need to report each year the actual costs they have encountered for discharging the public service obligations.
Prevozniki morajo vsako leto navesti dejanske stroške, ki so jim nastali pri izpolnjevanju obveznosti javne službe.
VRR verifies these reports and, should the compensation calculated in advance exceed the actual costs, orders the recovery of the amounts in excess.
VRR preveri te navedbe, in če začasno nadomestilo presega dejanske stroške, odredi vračilo presežkov.
The Commission considers that, as they are currently worded, the Financing Guidelines are not sufficient to guarantee, on their own, the absence of overcompensation for RBG and BSM, for the following reasons:
Komisija meni, da sedanje besedilo direktive o financiranju samo ne zadošča, da bi se izključila čezmerna kompenzacija za podjetji RBG in BSM, in sicer iz teh razlogov:
No consideration of profits from economically viable transport services in peak periods: As they are currently worded, the Financing Guidelines consider as public service obligations only the obligations imposed upon undertakings with respect to the four cost categories for which the Financing Guidelines provide for compensation.
Prihodki od dobičkonosnih storitev prevoza v prometnih konicah se ne upoštevajo: v skladu s sedanjim besedilom direktive o financiranju se le obveznosti, ki se naložijo podjetjem in ki spadajo v navedene štiri kategorije stroškov, za katere je v direktivi o financiranju predvideno nadomestilo, štejejo za obveznosti javne službe.
The calculation of the compensation takes into account revenues from services which are covered by the four cost categories, i.e. in particular services in off-peak periods and to remote areas, but they exclude profits from economically viable transport services provided in peak periods.
Pri izračunu zneska nadomestila se upoštevajo prihodki od storitev, ki spadajo v navedene štiri kategorije stroškov, to pomeni predvsem storitve v urah redkega prometa in na oddaljenih območjih; prihodki od dobičkonosnih storitev prevoza v prometnih konicah so izvzeti.
No claw-back mechanism for overcompensation received under control and profit/loss transfer agreements and shareholder agreements: In their current form, the Financing Guidelines treat transport undertakings that receive compensation from VRR differently from transport undertakings that receive compensation in the form of control and profit/loss transfer agreements and shareholder agreements.
Neobstoj mehanizma za vračilo sredstev pri čezmerni kompenzaciji na podlagi sporazumov o nadzoru in prenosu dobička: v sedanji obliki direktive o financiranju je za podjetja, ki prejemajo nadomestila od združenja VRR, in podjetja, ki prejmejo nadomestilo na podlagi sporazumov o nadzoru in prenosu dobička, predvideno različno obravnavanje.
Whereas the former have at their disposal only the amount corresponding to the compensation calculated according to the Financing Guidelines, the latter obtain complete coverage of their costs.
Medtem ko prva prejmejo le znesek nadomestila, ki se izračuna na podlagi direktive o financiranju, so zadnja upravičena do popolnega kritja stroškov.
They are entitled to keep any difference between their actual losses and the amount to which they are entitled on the basis of the Financing Guidelines, as there is no legally binding procedure that would allow VRR to claw back the difference.
Lahko namreč zadržijo razliko med svojimi dejanskimi izgubami in zneskom, ki jim pripada na podlagi direktive o financiranju, saj ni pravno zavezujočega postopka, na podlagi katerega bi lahko združenje VRR zahtevalo vračilo te razlike.
Assessment of RBG and BSM
Presoja podjetij RBG in BSM
The public service compensations in the present case can be disbursed directly through contributions from the public shareholders of the undertakings in question, a control and profit/loss transfer agreement and/or by VRR.
Nadomestilo za opravljanje javne službe se lahko v obravnavanem primeru zagotovi neposredno s prispevki javnih delničarjev zadevnih podjetij, na podlagi sporazuma o nadzoru in prenosu dobička in/ali prek združenja VRR.
The Commission notes that, in order to fulfil the third Altmark criterion, there is no requirement according to which the payments have to be disbursed by the organising authority, such as VRR.
Komisija ugotavlja, da se s tretjim merilom Altmark ne predpisuje, da mora izplačila izvesti organizacijski organ – v tem primeru VRR.
However, it has to be ensured that the annual compensation does not exceed what is necessary to cover all actual costs in relation to the public service obligation.
Vendar mora biti zagotovljeno, da letno nadomestilo ne presega zneska, s katerim se pokrijejo vsi stroški, ki so dejansko povezani z obveznostmi javne službe.
The financing notices state that the amount which is established in them constitutes the maximum amount to be paid subject to an ex post examination of the actual costs incurred.
V odločbah o financiranju je navedeno, da se tam določeni znesek šteje za najvišji znesek, ki se izplača ob upoštevanju naknadne presoje dejansko nastalih stroškov.
The maximum amount of financing is defined as the amount of funds which are available for a given municipality.
Za najvišji znesek financiranja se štejejo finančna sredstva, ki jih ima na razpolago posamezna občina.
The transport undertakings need to report each year the actual costs that they have incurred in discharging the public service obligations.
Prevozniki morajo vsako leto navesti dejanske stroške, ki so jim nastali pri izpolnjevanju obveznosti javne službe.
The ex post assessment reflects the actual costs incurred for each of the four categories in each of the transport sectors.
Iz naknadne presoje so razvidni dejanski stroški, ki nastanejo v posameznem sektorju obratovanja in vsaki od štirih kategorij.
The sum of the ex post costs is then compared with the sum in the ex ante calculations.
Vsota naknadno ugotovljenih stroškov se nato primerja z vsoto predhodno navedenih stroškov.
The ex post calculation is set out in a financing notice having the same structure as the ex ante financing notices in order to enable a comparison.
Naknadni izračun je določen v odločbah o financiranju, katerih sestava ustreza sestavi začasnih odločb, da se omogoči primerjava.
According to Germany these financing notices are set up ex ante and ex post for RBG and BSM for each of the years under assessment.
Po navedbah Nemčije se te začasne in naknadne odločbe o financiranju za podjetji RBG in BSM izdajo za vsako leto, ki se presoja.
However, the Financing Guidelines do not contain any detailed rules on overcompensation or the method of clawing back any overpayment.
Vendar v direktivi o financiranju ni predvidena podrobnejša ureditev v zvezi s čezmerno kompenzacijo ali metodo za izračun vračila preveč izplačanih sredstev.
Therefore, for the period from 1 January 2006 until 31 December 2009, the Commission needs to verify whether BSM and RBG received any overcompensation.
Zato mora Komisija za obdobje od 1. januarja 2006 do 31. decembra 2009 preveriti, ali sta bili podjetji BSM in RBG deležni čezmerne kompenzacije.
Germany has provided the Commission with information on the actual payments that BSM and RBG received.
Nemčija je Komisiji predložila informacije o dejanskih izplačilih podjetjema BSM in RBG.
For this purpose, it has transmitted to the Commission the annual profit and loss statements of RBG and BSM.
V ta namen ji je predložila letne izkaze poslovnega izida za podjetji RBG in BSM.
Earnings and costs for each of the companies are checked annually by certified public accountants who also certified the respective annual balance sheets.
Revizorji vsako leto preverijo prihodke in stroške posameznega podjetja ter potrdijo vsakokratne letne računovodske izkaze.
Payments under the Financing Guidelines and the control and profit/loss transfer agreements
Izplačila na podlagi direktive o financiranju ter sporazuma o nadzoru in prenosu dobička
In 2006, RBG incurred losses of EUR 65 million [37].
Podjetje RBG je za leto 2006 izkazalo izgube v višini 65 milijonov EUR [37].
RBG earned a net profit of zero in 2007.
Leta 2007 je bilančni dobiček podjetja RBG znašal nič.
In 2008, RBG received compensation payments from the Land of North Rhine-Westphalia and VRR for discharging public service obligations in the amount of EUR 41,9 million, which covered its losses so that RBG earned a net profit of zero.
Leta 2008 je podjetje RBG za izpolnjevanje obveznosti javne službe prejelo nadomestila v višini 41,9 milijona EUR, s katerimi so se pokrile izkazane izgube, tako da je njegov bilančni dobiček znašal nič.
This is EUR 14,1 million less than what RBG was entitled to according to VRR’s financing notice.
Ta znesek je za 14,1 milijona EUR manjši od zneska, do katerega bi bilo podjetje RBG upravičeno na podlagi odločbe združenja VRR o financiranju.
In 2009, RBG received compensation payments from the Land of North Rhine-Westphalia and VRR for discharging public service obligations in the amount of EUR 45,3 million, which covered its losses so that RBG earned a net profit of zero.
Leta 2009 je podjetje RBG za izpolnjevanje obveznosti javne službe prejelo nadomestila v višini 45,3 milijona EUR, s katerimi so se pokrile izkazane izgube, tako da je njegov bilančni dobiček znašal nič.
This is EUR 11,4 million less than what RBG was entitled to according to VRR’s financing notice.
Ta znesek je za 11,4 milijona EUR manjši od zneska, do katerega bi bilo podjetje RBG upravičeno na podlagi odločbe združenja VRR o financiranju.
In the years 2006-09, BSM each year incurred the following losses in the public passenger transport sector: EUR […] (2006), EUR […] (2007), EUR […] [38] (2008) and EUR […] (2009).
Podjetje BSM je v letih 2006–2009 v javnem potniškem prevozu izkazalo naslednje izgube: […] EUR (2006), […] EUR (2007), […] EUR [38] (2008) in […] EUR (2009).
When comparing these losses with the amounts established in the financing notices, the Commission has found that the losses incurred by BSM in the public passenger transport exceeded the amounts established in the financing notices.
Ob primerjavi teh izgub z zneski, določenimi v odločbah o financiranju, Komisija ugotavlja, da izgube podjetja BSM v javnem potniškem prevozu presegajo zneske, določene v odločbah o financiranju.
The total losses, that is the sum of the amounts authorised in the financing notices and the additional losses, were covered by loss assumption through the existing control and profit/loss transfer agreement with Monheimer Versorgungs- und Verkehrs-GmbH leading to an annual profit/annual loss of zero.
Skupna izguba – to pomeni vsota zneskov, odobrenih v odločbah o financiranju, in dodatnih izgub – je bila pokrita s sporazumom o nadzoru in prenosu dobička, sklenjenim z družbo Monheimer Versorgungs- und Verkehrs-GmbH, tako da je letni presežek/letni primanjkljaj podjetja BSM znašal nič.
With regard to the assumption of the additional losses, the Commission notes that it is based, not on the new financing system, but solely on the control and profit/loss transfer agreement.
Komisija ugotavlja, da prevzem dodatnih izgub ne temelji na novem sistemu financiranja, temveč izključno na sporazumu o nadzoru in prenosu dobička.
The Commission notes that the market for public passenger transport has been opened to competition by EU law as of 3 December 2009, when Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 entered into force.
Komisija ugotavlja, da se je trg za storitve potniškega prevoza odprl na podlagi predpisov Unije 3. decembra 2009 ob začetku veljavnosti Uredbe (ES) št. 1370/2007.
Pursuant to Article 1(b)(v) of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999, as a result of the liberalisation of the activity by an act of the EU, all existing aid for public passenger transport has therefore become new aid as of that day.
V skladu s členom 1(b)(v) Uredbe (ES) št. 659/1999 se zaradi liberalizacije dejavnosti s pravnim aktom Unije vse obstoječe pomoči za storitve potniškega prevoza po tem datumu štejejo za nove pomoči.
For the reasons set out above in recitals 114 to 124, the present Decision covers only the period until the entry into force of Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007.
Iz razlogov, navedenih v uvodnih izjavah od 114 do 124, je s tem sklepom zajeto le obdobje do začetka veljavnosti Uredbe (ES) št. 1370/2007.
In view of the above, the Commission can conclude that, for the period 2006 to 2009, BSM and RBG have not received any overcompensation based on the new financing system, and the third Altmark criterion is thus fulfilled with regard to payments based on the new financing system.
Zato lahko Komisija za obdobje med letoma 2006 in 2009 ugotovi, da podjetji BSM in RBG po novem sistemu financiranja nista bili deležni čezmerne kompenzacije in da je tretje merilo Altmark glede na izplačila na podlagi novega sistema financiranja izpolnjeno.
TYPICAL UNDERTAKING, WELL RUN AND ADEQUATELY PROVIDED WITH MEANS OF TRANSPORT
POVPREČNO, DOBRO VODENO PODJETJE, KI JE USTREZNO OPREMLJENO S PREVOZNIMI SREDSTVI
Lastly, the Altmark judgment states that ‘where the undertaking which is to discharge public service obligations … is not chosen pursuant to a public procurement procedure … the level of compensation needed must be determined on the basis of an analysis of the costs which a typical undertaking, well run and adequately provided with means of transport so as to be able to meet the necessary public service requirements, would have incurred in discharging those obligations, taking into account the relevant receipts and a reasonable profit for discharging the obligation’.
Končno je v sodbi Altmark predvideno, da „če podjetje, ki se mu naloži izpolnjevanje obveznosti javne službe, v konkretnem primeru ni izbrano s postopkom oddaje javnega naročila, ki omogoča, da se izbere tisti ponudnik, ki lahko te storitve opravlja z najnižjimi stroški za skupnost, se mora raven potrebnega nadomestila določiti na podlagi analize stroškov, ki bi jih povprečno, dobro vodeno podjetje, ki je ustrezno opremljeno s prevoznimi sredstvi, zato da lahko zadosti zahtevam javne službe, imelo pri izpolnjevanju teh obveznosti ob upoštevanju realiziranih prejemkov in razumnega dobička zaradi izpolnjevanja teh obveznosti“.
Neither RBG nor BSM was entrusted with the public service obligations at issue in the course of an open, transparent and non-discriminatory tendering procedure.
Niti podjetju RBG niti podjetju BSM niso bile naložene obravnavane obveznosti javne službe na podlagi javnega in preglednega razpisnega postopka, ki bi bil opravljen nediskriminatorno.
Consequently, the Commission has to examine the second alternative stipulated in the fourth Altmark criterion, which provides that the level of compensation must be determined on the basis of an analysis of the costs of a typical, well run and adequately equipped undertaking.
Zato mora Komisija v zvezi z vprašanjem, ali je četrti pogoj, naveden v sodbi Altmark, izpolnjen, preveriti tam predvideno drugo alternativo, po kateri se znesek nadomestila izračuna na podlagi analize stroškov povprečnega, dobro vodenega podjetja, ki je ustrezno opremljeno s prevoznimi sredstvi.
Germany argues that the parameters on the basis of which the compensation is calculated are established on the basis of the average costs of all the undertakings subject to VRR’s financing system.
Nemčija navaja, da se parametri, uporabljeni pri izračunu nadomestila, določijo na podlagi povprečnih stroškov vseh podjetij, ki spadajo v sistem financiranja združenja VRR.
During the formal investigation procedure Germany submitted that VRR established the costs which are incurred by a typical undertaking which is well run and adequately provided with means of transport for the discharge of the activities covered by the four cost categories, on the basis of statistical data elaborated by its expert.
Med formalnim postopkom preiskave je Nemčija navedla, da je združenje VRR na podlagi statističnih podatkov zadevnega strokovnjaka ugotovilo stroške, ki bi povprečnemu, dobro vodenemu podjetju, ki je ustrezno opremljeno s prevoznimi sredstvi, nastali pri opravljanju tistih obveznosti javne službe, ki spadajo v navedene štiri kategorije stroškov.
These data were then adjusted by VRR taking account of certain (e.g. regional) specificities.
Nato je združenje VRR prilagodilo podatke ob upoštevanju ustreznih (na primer regionalnih) posebnosti.
At the end of the analysis VRR establishes a margin for average market prices in the various cost categories.
Na podlagi analize VRR določi maržo na povprečne tržne cene po posameznih kategorijah stroškov.
In this context, the Commission firstly notes that the use of statistical data aims at ensuring that the compensation was established with reference to the costs of a typical undertaking.
V zvezi s tem Komisija ugotavlja, prvič, da je treba z upoštevanjem statističnih podatkov zagotoviti, da se nadomestilo določi na podlagi stroškov povprečnega podjetja.
Secondly, all the operators which provide public transport services have a licence and/or a public service contract and must fulfil certain requirements imposed on them by the licences and/or public service contracts (e.g. they must have been adequately provided with means of transport to meet the necessary quality requirements).
Drugič, vsi izvajalci, ki opravljajo storitve javnega prevoza, morajo imeti dovoljenje oziroma pogodbo o izvajanju javne službe in morajo izpolnjevati nekatere zahteve, ki so jim naložene z dovoljenji oziroma pogodbami (na primer, da so ustrezno opremljeni s prevoznimi sredstvi, tako da izpolnjujejo ustrezne zahteve glede kakovosti).
However, as mentioned in the decision to open the procedure, the use of the statistical transport cost cannot per se lead to the conclusion that operators who have agreed to provide services under these parameters should be considered well managed carriers.
Vendar, kot je navedeno v odločitvi o sprožitvi postopka, na podlagi uporabe statističnih prevoznih stroškov kot take ni mogoče ugotoviti, ali so izvajalci, ki so se strinjali z opravljanjem storitev v skladu s temi parametri, dobro vodeni prevozniki.
The Commission also came to this conclusion in its final decisions in case C 3/08 Southern Moravia Bus Companies [40] and case C 16/07 Postbus AG [41].
Komisija je do enakega sklepa prišla tudi v dokončnih odločbah v zadevah C-3/08 – Southern Moravia Bus Companies [40] in C-16/07 – Postbus AG [41].
The reasons set out in recitals 85 and 86 of the latter Decision are also valid for the present Decision.
Razlogi, podani v uvodnih izjavah 85 in 86 zadnjenavedene odločbe, veljajo tudi za ta sklep.
Furthermore, the Commission observes that the statistical data were established for the year 2003 and then updated annually according to an index in accordance with Annex 9 to the Financing Guidelines and according to volume increases/decreases and changes in structures.
Dalje Komisija ugotavlja, da so bili statistični podatki pridobljeni za leto 2003, nato pa vsako leto posodobljeni z ustreznim indeksom v skladu s Prilogo 9 k direktivi o financiranju ter glede na povečanje/zmanjšanje obsega in strukturne spremembe.
The index uses a statistical price index by applying a methodology based on a basket of goods used for the public transport service sector by the German Association of Transport Enterprises (Verband deutscher Verkehrsunternehmen) using data of the German Statistical Office.
Pri stroškovni posodobitvi statističnih indeksov cen se pretežno uporabljajo metode, ki jih tudi združenje nemških prevoznikov uporablja za košarico dobrin pri javnem prevozu, in podatki zveznega statističnega urada.
However, such an updating procedure cannot fully reflect efficiency gains realised in the meantime in the sector.
Vendar v takem postopku posodobitve ni mogoče v celoti upoštevati povečanja učinkovitosti, v panogi doseženega v vmesnem obdobju.
Finally, the Commission observes that very existence of cost category 4b of the Financing Guidelines (which allows for the compensation of additional costs resulting from the politically induced application of pay scales which are above the pay scales normally observed in the market) indicates that transport undertakings in VRR pay salaries which are above the salaries that are usually observed in the market.
Končno Komisija ugotavlja, da je mogoče iz dejstva, da je v direktivi o financiranju predvidena kategorija stroškov 4b (nadomestilo za dodatne stroške, nastale zaradi politično motivirane uporabe tarifnih postavk za osebje, ki presegajo stroške v modelih nadomestil, ki so na trgu običajni), izpeljati, da prevozniki v okviru združenja VRR izplačujejo višje plače od običajnih na trgu.
Germany has confirmed that RBG and BSM pay such salaries and receive compensation payments under cost category 4b.
Nemčija je potrdila, da podjetji RBG in BSM izplačujeta take plače in prejemata nadomestila v okviru kategorije stroškov 4b.
In conclusion, the evidence which the Commission has received does not show that the level of compensation has been calculated by comparing the costs incurred by RBG and BSM with a well run undertaking.
Skratka, iz dokazov, ki jih je prejela Komisija, ne izhaja, da bi bila višina nadomestil izračunana na podlagi primerjave stroškov, ki so nastali podjetjema RBG in BSM, in stroškov nekega dobro vodenega podjetja.
The level of compensation therefore has not been calculated with reference to a well run undertaking.
Zato višina nadomestila ni bila izračunana ob sklicevanju na neko dobro vodeno podjetje.
The Commission therefore concludes that the fourth Altmark criterion is not satisfied in respect of the payments made to RBG and BSM as compensation for the discharge of public service obligations.
Komisija tako ugotavlja, da četrto merilo Altmark v zvezi z izplačili, ki se podjetjema RBG in BSM nakažejo kot nadomestilo za izpolnjevanje obveznosti javne službe, ni izpolnjeno.
As the fourth Altmark criterion is not fulfilled, the Commission considers that the financing system in question has granted an economic advantage to RBG and BSM.
Ker četrto merilo Altmark ni izpolnjeno, sistem financiranja v obravnavanem primeru po mnenju Komisije pomeni ekonomsko prednost za podjetji RBG in BSM.
The financing system might lead to a distortion of competition since the public financing strengthens the position of the operators entrusted with the public service obligation and allows them to use these advantages for a prolongation of the entrustment whereas competitors could not use these advantages when applying for an entrustment.
Sistem financiranja bi lahko povzročil izkrivljanje konkurence, saj se z javnim financiranjem krepi položaj podjetij, pooblaščenih za izpolnjevanje obveznosti javne službe, omogoča pa se jim tudi, da te prednosti izkoristijo za podaljšanje pooblastila, medtem ko konkurenti ne morejo izkoristiti teh prednosti, če izrazijo interes za pooblastitev.
The fact that the companies may be qualified as in-house companies does not impede a possible effect on competition since these companies act in a market together with other public and private companies.
Dejstvo, da se zadevna podjetja eventualno štejejo za notranja podjetja, ne preprečuje morebitnih učinkov na konkurenco, saj so ta podjetja na trgu dejavna skupaj z drugimi javnimi in zasebnimi podjetji.
In addition, the operators which receive financing might use these advantages in order to compete with other companies in other markets.
Poleg tega bi lahko podjetja, ki prejemajo finančna sredstva, te prednosti izkoristila pri konkuriranju drugim podjetjem na drugih trgih.
EFFECT ON TRADE BETWEEN MEMBER STATES
UČINEK NA TRGOVINO MED DRŽAVAMI ČLANICAMI