natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In particular, fiscal measures, which do not constitute an adaptation of the general system to particular characteristics of certain undertakings, but have been conceived as a means of improving their competitiveness, fall within the scope of Article 87(1) of the Treaty [51].
Zlasti davčni ukrepi, ki ne pomenijo prilagajanja splošnega sistema posebnim značilnostim posameznih družb, ampak so bili oblikovani kot sredstvo za izboljšanje konkurenčnosti, spadajo na področje člena 87(1) Pogodbe [51].
The concept of State aid does not, however, apply to State measures which differentiate between undertakings where that differentiation arises from the nature or the overall structure of the system of which they form part.
Vendar se pojem državne pomoči ne uporablja za državne ukrepe, ki razlikujejo med družbami, če to razlikovanje izhaja iz narave ali celotne strukture sistema, katerega del so.
As explained in the Commission Notice [52], ‘some conditions may be justified by objective differences between taxpayers’.
Kot je pojasnjeno v Obvestilu Komisije [52], „je nekatere pogoje mogoče razložiti z objektivnimi razlikami med davkoplačevalci“.
As explained in more detail in the following section, the Commission considers that the measure at issue is selective in that it only favours certain groups of undertakings that carry out certain investments abroad and that this specific character is not justified by the nature of the scheme, regardless of whether the reference system is defined as the rules on the tax treatment of financial goodwill under the Spanish tax system (see recitals 92 to 114) or as the tax treatment of goodwill deriving from an economic interest taken in a company resident in a country other than Spain (see recitals 115 to 119).
Komisija meni, kot je podrobneje razloženo v nadaljevanju, da je zadevni ukrep selektiven, ker daje prednost le nekaterim skupinam družb, ki izvajajo nekatere naložbe v tujini, in da ta značilnost ni utemeljena z naravo sheme, ne glede na to, ali je referenčni sistem opredeljen kot pravila o davčni obravnavi finančnega dobrega imena na podlagi španskega davčnega sistema (glej uvodne izjave od 92 do 114) ali kot davčna obravnava dobrega imena, ki izhaja iz ekonomskega interesa v družbi rezidentki iz države, ki ni Španija (glej uvodne izjave od 115 do 119).
The Commission considers that the measure at issue should be assessed in the light of the general provisions of the corporate tax system as applicable to situations in which the emergence of goodwill leads to a fiscal benefit (see recitals 35 to 55), essentially because the Commission considers that the situations in which financial goodwill can be amortised do not cover the whole category of taxpayers placed in a similar factual and legal situation.
Komisija meni, da je treba zadevni ukrep presoditi ob upoštevanju splošnih določb sistema o davku od dohodkov pravnih oseb, kot se uporablja za razmere, v katerih nastanek dobrega imena vodi k davčni ugodnosti (glej uvodne izjave od 35 do 55), zlasti ker Komisija meni, da primeri, v katerih je mogoče amortizirati finančno dobro ime, ne zajemajo celotne kategorije davčnih zavezancev v dejansko in pravno primerljivem položaju.
Moreover, even if an alternative reference system inspired by the one suggested by the Spanish authorities were chosen (see recitals 56 to 58), the Commission concludes that the measure at issue would still constitute a State aid measure essentially due to the different factual and legal conditions required for the different scenarios to benefit from the provisions on the goodwill that arises from an economic interest acquired in a company resident in a country other than Spain.
Poleg tega Komisija sklepa, da tudi če bi bil izbran drug referenčni sistem, ki se zgleduje po tistem, ki so ga predlagali španski organi (glej uvodne izjave od 56 do 58), bi zadevni ukrep še vedno pomenil ukrep državne pomoči, predvsem zaradi različnih dejanskih in pravno primerljivih položajev, ki se zahtevajo v različnih okoliščinah za izkoriščanje ugodnosti iz določb o dobrem imenu, ki izhaja iz ekonomskega interesa, pridobljenega v družbi rezidentki v državi, ki ni Španija.
Under this alternative scenario, the measure at issue is too imprecise and arbitrary as it does not set any conditions, such as the existence of specific, legally circumscribed situations which would justify different tax treatment.
V skladu s tem drugim scenarijem je zadevni ukrep preveč nenatančen in samovoljen, ker ne določa nobenih pogojev, kot je obstoj posebnih, pravno omejenih položajev, ki bi utemeljevali različno davčno obravnavo.
Consequently, situations which have not been demonstrated to be sufficiently different to justify a selective exception from general goodwill rules end up benefiting from the measure at issue.
Posledično imajo nazadnje primeri, za katere ni bilo dokazano, da so dovolj različni za utemeljitev selektivne izjeme od splošnega pravila o dobrem imenu, koristi od zadevnega ukrepa.
Tax treatment of financial goodwill under the Spanish tax system as regards intra-Community acquisitions
Davčna obravnava finančnega dobrega imena na podlagi španskega davčnega sistema v zvezi s prevzemi znotraj Skupnosti
Reference system
Referenčni sistem
In the initiating Decision, the Commission considered that the appropriate reference system is the Spanish corporate tax system, in particular the rules on the tax treatment of financial goodwill contained in the Spanish tax system.
Komisija je v odločitvi o sprožitvi postopka menila, da je ustrezen referenčni sistem španski sistem o davku od dohodkov pravnih oseb, zlasti pravila o davčni obravnavi finančnega dobrega imena, ki jih vsebuje španski davčni sistem.
This approach is in line with previous Commission practice and the case-law of the European Courts, which consider the ordinary corporate tax system as the reference system [54].
Ta pristop je v skladu s predhodno prakso Komisije in sodno prakso evropskih sodišč, ki običajni sistem o davku od dohodkov pravnih oseb obravnavajo kot referenčni sistem [54].
The Spanish authorities’ comments stress that the constraints on cross-border business combinations place taxpayers that buy shareholdings in domestic companies in a different legal and factual situation from those that buy shareholdings in foreign companies.
V pripombah španskih organov je poudarjeno, da so zaradi ovir pri čezmejnih poslovnih združitvah davčni zavezanci, ki kupujejo deleže v domačih družbah, v drugačnem dejanskem in pravnem položaju kot tisti, ki kupujejo deleže v tujih družbah.
According to the Spanish authorities, the reason for this situation is the existence of barriers which, following shareholdings acquisitions, do not allow Spanish investors to carry out cross-border combinations, whereas this can be done in a national context.
Po mnenju španskih organov so razlog za to ovire, ki po prevzemu deležev španskim vlagateljem ne omogočajo izvajanja čezmejnih združitev, medtem ko je to na nacionalni ravni mogoče.
First, as regards the existence of these alleged barriers, it should be stressed that the Spanish authorities and the 30 interested parties did not provide detailed information on the existence of such barriers and confined themselves, even in their latest submissions, to general and unsubstantiated allegations, highlighting general features such as differences arising from non-implementation of the Company Law Directive, differences concerning minority shareholders’ rights, creditors’ rights, labour law, the national trademark, and general political or commercial considerations.
Prvič, v zvezi z obstojem domnevnih ovir je treba poudariti, da španski organi in trideset zainteresiranih strani niso zagotovili podrobnih informacij o obstoju takih ovir in so se tudi v zadnjih predloženih dopisih omejili na splošne in neutemeljene trditve, ki poudarjajo splošne značilnosti, kot so razlike, ki izhajajo iz neizvajanja Direktive o pravu družb, razlike v zvezi s pravicami manjšinskih delničarjev, pravicami upnikov, delovnim pravom, nacionalno blagovno znamko in splošnimi političnimi ali trgovinskimi pomisleki.
If unsubstantiated and general elements such as these could be taken into account for determining the scope of Article 87 of the Treaty, the notion of aid would run the risk of becoming largely arbitrary.
Če bi bilo take neutemeljene in splošne elemente mogoče upoštevati za določanje področja uporabe člena 87 Pogodbe, bi obstajalo tveganje, da bi pojem pomoči postal večinoma poljuben.
Furthermore, these subjective statements are neither developed nor justified.
Poleg tega te subjektivne trditve niso niti razvite niti upravičene.
In addition, the Spanish authorities also cite the Commission Report on the implementation of the Directive on Takeover Bids [55] but did not explain the link between the barriers to takeovers and the alleged barriers to cross-border business combinations.
Poleg tega se španski organi sklicujejo tudi na poročilo Komisije o izvajanju Direktive o ponudbah za prevzem [55], vendar niso pojasnili povezave med ovirami za prevzeme in domnevnimi ovirami za čezmejne poslovne združitve.
Second, as regards the nature of these alleged barriers, the Spanish authorities and the 30 parties did not explicitly identify any fiscal barrier in the common market.
Drugič, v zvezi z naravo teh domnevnih ovir španski organi in trideset strani niso izrecno opredelili nobene davčne ovire na skupnem trgu.
Since 1 January 1992, the date when Member States had to implement the Cross-border Tax Directive, tax barriers to cross-border business combinations have been removed.
Davčne ovire za čezmejne poslovne združitve so bile odpravljene 1. januarja 1992, ko so morale države članice začeti izvajati Direktivo o čezmejni obdavčitvi.
The tax treatment of business combinations, whether in the context of domestic or cross-border operations, is therefore considered to be harmonised.
Davčna obravnava poslovnih združitev, naj bodo to domače ali čezmejne operacije, se torej šteje za usklajeno.
As regards non-tax barriers and in particular company law barriers attributable to the target company’s country of residence, the Commission considers that since 8 October 2004, the date when Council Directive 2001/86/EC of 8 October 2001 supplementing the Statute for a European company with regard to the involvement of employees [56], together with Council Regulation (EC) No 2157/2001 of 8 October 2001 on the Statute for a European company (SE) [57] or, at the latest, since the date of transposal [58] of the Cross-border Mergers Directive, obstacles to business combinations have been eliminated within the common market.
V zvezi z nedavčnimi ovirami in zlasti ovirami v pravu družb, pripisljivimi za državo sedeža ciljne družbe, Komisija meni, da so bile od 8. oktobra 2004, to je datuma Direktive Sveta 2001/86/ES z dne8. oktobra 2001 o dopolnitvi Statuta evropske družbe glede udeležbe delavcev [56], skupaj z Uredbo Sveta (ES) št. 2157/2001 z dne 8. oktobra 2001 o statutu evropske družbe (SE) [57], ali, najpozneje, od datuma prenosa [58] Direktive o čezmejnih združitvah, ovire za poslovne združitve na skupnem trgu odpravljene.
The Commission has not been notified by the Spanish authorities or the 30 interested parties of any other substantiated barrier that could justify different legal treatment as in the case of the measure at issue.
Španski organi ali trideset zainteresiranih strani Komisiji niso priglasili nobene druge utemeljene ovire, ki bi upravičevala različno pravno obravnavo kot v primeru zadevnega ukrepa.
Although the Spanish authorities provided a list of problems [60] connected with constraints on cross-border business combinations on 16 June 2009, this document does not contain substantiated information or relevant factual elements that justify the discriminatory aspects of the measure at issue.
Čeprav so španski organi 16. junija 2009 predložili seznam težav [60], ki so povezane z omejitvami za čezmejne poslovne združitve, ta dokument ne vsebuje utemeljenih informacij ali pomembnih dejanskih elementov, ki upravičujejo diskriminacijske vidike zadevnega ukrepa.
Third, the Commission observes that, in line with the case-law of the Court of Justice [61], if the Member States do not treat cross-border business combinations in similar terms to domestic business combinations, this may constitute an infringement of the obligations arising from the Treaty.
Tretjič, Komisija ugotavlja, da v skladu s sodno prakso Sodišča [61], če države članice ne obravnavajo čezmejnih poslovnih združitev podobno kot domačih poslovnih združitev, to lahko pomeni kršenje obveznosti na podlagi Pogodbe.
In effect, when a national law establishes a difference in treatment between companies according to the internal or cross-border nature of the merger, this is likely to deter the exercise of freedom of establishment laid down by the Treaty.
Če se z nacionalno zakonodajo uveljavi različna obravnava družb glede na notranjo ali čezmejno naravo združitve, je dejansko verjetno, da to poslabša izvajanje pravice do ustanavljanja, določene v Pogodbi.
In the light of the above, the Commission considers that there is no reason to depart from the reference system in the initiating Decision: the appropriate reference framework for the assessment of the measure at issue is constituted by the general Spanish corporate tax system, and more precisely, by the rules on the tax treatment of financial goodwill contained in this tax system.
Glede na navedeno Komisija meni, da ni razloga za odstopanje od referenčnega sistema v odločitvi o sprožitvi postopka: ustrezni referenčni okvir za presojo zadevnega ukrepa sestavljajo splošni španski sistem o davku od dohodkov pravnih oseb in, natančneje, pravila o davčni obravnavi finančnega dobrega imena iz tega davčnega sistema.
Existence of an exemption from that reference system
Obstoj izjeme v referenčnem sistemu
Under the Spanish tax system, the tax base is calculated from the accounting statement, to which adjustments are then made by applying specific tax rules.
Davčna osnova se na podlagi španskega davčnega sistema izračuna iz bilance stanja, ki se nato prilagodi z uporabo posebnih davčnih pravil.
As a preliminary remark and on a subsidiary basis, the Commission notes that the measure at issue derogates from the Spanish accounting system.
Komisija v uvodni pripombi in podredno ugotavlja, da zadevni ukrep odstopa od španskega računovodskega sistema.
The appearance of financial goodwill can only be computed in abstract by consolidating the accounts of the target company with those of the acquiring company.
Pojav finančnega dobrega imena se lahko izračuna le v povzetku s konsolidacijo računov ciljne družbe z računi prevzemne družbe.
However, under the Spanish accounting system, the consolidation of accounts is required in case of ‘control’ [64] and is done both for domestic and foreign associations of companies, in order to provide the global situation of a group of companies subject to unitary control.
Vendar se na podlagi španskega računovodskega sistema konsolidacija računov zahteva v primeru „nadzora“ [64] ter se opravi za domača in tuja združenja družb, da se zagotovi globalni položaj skupine družb, za katere velja enoten nadzor.
Such a situation is deemed to exist [65], for instance, if the parent company holds the majority of the voting rights of the subsidiary company.
Tak položaj domnevno obstaja [65], če ima na primer matična družba večino glasovalnih pravic odvisne družbe.
None the less, the measure at issue does not require any such type of control and applies as from a 5 % level of shareholding.
Kljub temu zadevni ukrep ne zahteva nobenega takega nadzora in se uporablja pri vsaj 5-odstotnem deležu.
Finally, the Commission also notes that as of 1 January 2005 [66], in line with accounting rules, financial goodwill can no longer be amortised by any company.
Nazadnje, Komisija tudi ugotavlja, da v skladu z računovodskimi pravili od 1. januarja 2005 [66] nobena družba ne more več amortizirati finančnega dobrega imena.
In effect, in this connection the 30 interested parties refer to provisions [67] that are no longer in force under the current Spanish accounting system.
Dejansko se v zvezi s tem trideset zainteresiranih strani sklicuje na določbe [67], ki na podlagi sedanjega španskega računovodskega sistema ne veljajo več.
As a result of Act No 16/2007 of 4 July 2007 reforming and adapting commercial law in the field of accounting for the purposes of international accounting harmonisation under EU legislation, as well as Royal Decree 1514/2007 of 16 November 2007 on the General Accounting Plan, from an accounting point of view, neither the amortisation of goodwill nor financial goodwill is allowed any more.
Kot posledica zakona št. 16/2007 z dne 4. julija 2007 o preoblikovanju in prilagoditvi gospodarskega prava na področju računovodstva za namene mednarodnega računovodskega usklajevanja na podlagi zakonodaje EU in kraljeve uredbe št. 1514/2007 z dne 16. novembra 2007 o splošnem računovodskem načrtu z računovodskega vidika niti amortizacija dobrega imena niti finančnega dobrega imena ni več dovoljena.
These amendments to Spanish accounting law are in line with Regulation (EC) No 1606/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 July 2002 on the application of international accounting standards [68].
Te spremembe španske računovodske zakonodaje so v skladu z Uredbo (ES) št. 1606/2002 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 19. julija 2002 o uporabi mednarodnih računovodskih standardov [68].
Therefore, in the light of these considerations, the measure at issue constitutes a departure from the ordinary accounting rules applicable in Spain.
Zato glede na te pomisleke zadevni ukrep pomeni odstopanje od običajnih računovodskih pravil, ki se uporabljajo v Španiji.
That being said, because of the fiscal nature of the measure at issue, the existence of an exception must be assessed in comparison to the reference tax system, and not merely on an accounting basis.
Glede na navedeno in zaradi davčne narave zadevnega ukrepa je treba obstoj izjeme presoditi v primerjavi z referenčnim davčnim sistemom, in ne le na osnovi računovodstva.
In this context, the Commission notes that the Spanish tax system has never permitted the amortisation of financial goodwill, except under Article 12(5) TRLIS.
Glede na navedeno Komisija ugotavlja, da španski davčni sistem nikoli ni dovoljeval amortizacije finančnega dobrega imena, razen na podlagi člena 12(5) TRLIS.
In particular, no such amortisation is possible for domestic transactions.
Zlasti taka amortizacija ni mogoča za domače transakcije.
This is demonstrated by the following factors:
To dokazujejo naslednji dejavniki:
For Spanish tax purposes, goodwill can only be booked separately following a business combination [69], which materialises either in case of acquisition or transfer of the assets that make up an independent business, or following a legal business combination.
Za namene španskega davka se lahko dobro ime knjiži posebej po poslovni združitvi [69], ki se izvede v primeru prevzema ali prenosa sredstev, ki sestavljajo neodvisno družbo, ali po zakoniti poslovni združitvi.
In such cases, the goodwill arises as the accounting difference between the acquisition cost and the market value of the assets that make up the business acquired or held by the combined company.
V takih primerih dobro ime nastane kot računovodska razlika med stroški prevzema in tržno vrednostjo sredstev, ki sestavljajo prevzeto družbo ali so v lasti skupne družbe.
When the acquisition of the business of a company is made by way of the acquisition of its shares, as in the case of the measure at issue, goodwill can only arise if the acquiring company combines subsequently with the acquired company, over which it will then have control.
Če se prevzem poslovanja družbe izvede s prevzemom njenih delnic, kot v primeru zadevnega ukrepa, lahko dobro ime nastane le, če se prevzemna družba nato poveže s prevzeto družbo, nad katero nato dobi nadzor.
However, under the measure at issue, neither control nor the combination of the two businesses is necessary.
Vendar na podlagi zadevnega ukrepa ni potreben niti nadzor niti združitev obeh družb.
The mere acquisition of a minimum 5 % shareholding in a foreign company is sufficient.
Zadostuje že prevzem vsaj 5-odstotnega deleža v tuji družbi.
Thus, by allowing financial goodwill, which is the goodwill that would have been booked if the companies had combined, to appear separately — even without there being a business combination — constitutes a derogation from the reference system.
Tako z omogočanjem, da se finančno dobro ime, to je dobro ime, ki bi se knjižilo, če bi se družbi združili, pojavi posebej, čeprav poslovna združitev ne obstaja, pomeni odstopanje od referenčnega sistema.
It must be stressed that the derogation is not due to the length of the period during which financial goodwill is amortised compared with the period that applies to traditional goodwill [70] but to the different treatment received by domestic and cross-border transactions.
Poudariti je treba, da vzrok odstopanja ni trajanje obdobja, med katerim se finančno dobro ime amortizira, v primerjavi z obdobjem, ki se uporablja za običajno dobro ime [70], ampak različna obravnava domačih in čezmejnih transakcij.
The measure at issue cannot be considered a new general accounting rule in its own right because the amortisation of financial goodwill deriving from the acquisition of domestic shareholdings is not allowed.
Zadevni ukrep se ne more šteti za novo splošno računovodsko pravilo samo po sebi, ker amortizacija finančnega dobrega imena, ki izhaja iz prevzema domačih deležev, ni dovoljena.
Given all the above considerations, the Commission concludes that the measure at issue derogates from the reference system.
Glede na navedene pomisleke Komisija sklepa, da zadevni ukrep odstopa od referenčnega sistema.
As will be demonstrated in recitals 128 to 138, the Commission considers that neither the Spanish authorities nor the 30 interested parties have put forward sufficiently convincing arguments to alter this conclusion.
Kot bo dokazano v uvodnih izjavah od 128 do 138, Komisija meni, da niti španski organi niti trideset zainteresiranih strani niso predložili dovolj prepričljivih argumentov, da bi spremenili ta sklep.
Under Article 12(5) TRLIS, part of the financial goodwill deriving from the acquisition of shareholdings in foreign companies can be deducted from the tax base by way of derogation from the reference system.
Na podlagi člena 12(5) TRLIS je mogoče del finančnega dobrega imena, ki izhaja iz prevzema deležev v tujih družbah, odšteti od davčne osnove z odstopanjem od referenčnega sistema.
Therefore, by reducing the tax burden of the beneficiary, Article 12(5) TRLIS provides them with an economic advantage.
Člen 12(5) TRLIS zato upravičencem z zmanjšanjem davčne obremenitve zagotavlja gospodarsko prednost.
It takes the form of a reduction in the tax to which the companies concerned would otherwise be liable.
Prednost je v obliki zmanjšanja davka, ki bi ga sicer zadevne družbe morale plačati.
This reduction is proportionate to the difference between the acquisition price paid and the market value of the underlying booked assets of the shareholdings purchased.
To zmanjšanje je sorazmerno z razliko med plačano ceno prevzema in tržno vrednostjo osnovnih knjiženih sredstev iz kupljenih deležev.
The precise amount of the advantage with respect to the acquisition price paid corresponds to the net discounted value of the tax burden reduction provided by the amortisation that is deductible throughout the amortisation period following the acquisition.
Natančen znesek prednosti ob upoštevanju plačane cene prevzema ustreza neto diskontni vrednosti zmanjšane davčne obremenitve na podlagi amortizacije, ki se odšteva v obdobju amortizacije po prevzemu.
It is therefore contingent on the company tax rate in the corresponding years and the discount interest rate applicable.
Zato je znesek odvisen od stopnje davka od dohodka pravnih oseb v ustreznih letih in uporabljene diskontne obrestne mere.
If the acquired shareholdings are resold, part of this advantage would be recouped via capital gains tax.
Če se prevzeti deleži preprodajo, se del te prednosti nadomesti z davkom na kapitalski dobiček.