natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Consequently, the French authorities will make no further comments on this subject.
Zato teh pripomb ne bodo dodatno komentirali.
On the other hand, concerning the comments presented by the Italian authorities and the anonymous company presenting itself as one of Trèves’ competitors, the French authorities wish to communicate the following comments to the Commission.
Po drugi strani pa želijo glede pripomb, ki so jih predložili italijanski organi in neimenovana družba, ki se je predstavila kot konkurentka družbe Trèves, Komisiji sporočiti naslednje.
The French authorities find that the Italian authorities confine themselves to asserting that the FMEA investment in Trèves must be categorised as State aid on account of the ‘decisive role’ played by public resources.
Francoski organi ugotavljajo, da italijanski organi trdijo samo, da je treba naložbo sklada FMEA v družbo Trèves opredeliti kot državno pomoč zaradi „ključne vloge“, ki so jo imela javna sredstva.
This assertion is not substantiated by any demonstration or justification.
Ta trditev ni podprta z nobenim dokazom ali utemeljitvijo.
Still according to the French authorities, the company competing with Trèves also presumes, without proving it, the existence of State aid which would be incompatible with the guidelines and with the temporary framework adopted by the Commission in December 2008 in the context of the economic and financial crisis.
Francoski organi še navajajo, da tudi konkurent družbe Trèves brez dokazov domneva o obstoju državne pomoči, ki naj bi bila nezdružljiva s Smernicami in začasnim okvirom, ki ga je Komisija leta 2008 sprejela med gospodarsko in finančno krizo.
The factors relied upon by this company are either entirely inaccurate or taken out of context and therefore interpreted in an erroneous and biased manner.
Elementi, na katere se sklicuje ta družba, so ali netočni ali iztrgani iz konteksta, njihova razlaga pa je zato napačna in pristranska.
V. ASSESSMENT OF THE MEASURES UNDER INVESTIGATION
V. PRESOJA OBRAVNAVANIH UKREPOV
When the Commission investigates a national measure, it must first examine whether this measure can be categorised as State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU.
Ko Komisija presoja nacionalni ukrep, mora najprej preučiti, ali je mogoče navedeni ukrep opredeliti kot državno pomoč v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU.
Once this categorisation has been established, the Commission can then assess the extent to which this measure can be considered compatible with the common market on the basis of the derogations permitted by the TFEU to the principle of prohibition of State aid.
Ko je ta opredelitev dokazana, lahko presodi, v kakšnem obsegu je mogoče ta ukrep šteti za združljiv s skupnim trgom na podlagi dovoljenih odstopanj od načela prepovedi državnih pomoči, ki so določena v PDEU.
If the measure under investigation does not constitute State aid, the examination of the compatibility of the aid is not applicable.
Če preučeni ukrep ni državna pomoč, je presoja združljivosti pomoči brezpredmetna.
Evaluation of the presence of State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU
Presoja obstoja državne pomoči v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU
Article 107(1) of the TFEU provides that: ‘any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, in so far as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the internal market.’
Člen 107(1) PDEU določa, da „razen če Pogodbi ne določata drugače, je vsaka pomoč, ki jo dodeli država članica, ali kakršna koli vrsta pomoči iz državnih sredstev, ki izkrivlja ali bi lahko izkrivljala konkurenco z dajanjem prednosti posameznim podjetjem ali proizvodnji posameznega blaga, nezdružljiva z notranjim trgom, kolikor prizadene trgovino med državami članicami“.
This provision mentions the criteria according to which a national measure can be categorised as State aid.
V tej določbi so navedena merila, na podlagi katerih je mogoče nacionalni ukrep opredeliti kot državno pomoč.
As the Court of Justice recalls in its judgment of 15 June 2006, these criteria are ‘the financing of that measure by the State or through State resources, the existence of a benefit for an undertaking, the selective nature of the said measure, and its effect on trade between Member States and the distortion of competition resulting therefrom’ [16].
Kot je Sodišče Evropskih skupnosti opozorilo v sodbi z dne 15. junija 2006, so ta merila „financiranje tega ukrepa s strani države ali iz državnih sredstev, [obstoj ugodnosti za podjetje,] selektivnost tega ukrepa, ter vpliv na trgovino med državami članicami in izkrivljanje konkurence med njimi“ [16].
These criteria are cumulative and must therefore all be satisfied in order for it to be possible to categorise a measure as State aid.
Ta merila so kumulativna, tako da morajo biti izpolnjena vsa, da je mogoče ukrep opredeliti kot državno pomoč.
Consequently, as soon as the Commission establishes that one of these criteria is not satisfied, it can assert with certainty that the measure under investigation does not constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU.
Takoj ko Komisija ugotovi, da eno od teh meril ni izpolnjeno, lahko torej z gotovostjo potrdi, da preučevani ukrep ni državna pomoč v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU.
The FMEA investment of EUR 55 million
Naložba sklada FMEA v višini 55 milijonov EUR
As regards the FMEA investment in Trèves amounting to EUR 55 million, it should first be verified whether the criterion of benefit is met.
V zvezi z naložbo sklada FMEA v družbo Trèves v znesku 55 milijonov EUR je treba najprej preveriti, ali je izpolnjeno merilo ugodnosti.
According to settled case-law [17], a contribution of funds to an undertaking does not constitute State aid if this contribution is made in circumstances which would be acceptable for a private investor operating in the normal conditions of a market economy (‘criterion of private investor operating in a market economy’).
V skladu z ustaljeno sodno prakso [17] kapitalski vložek v podjetje ni državna pomoč, kadar se v podjetje prispeva svež kapital v razmerah, ki bi bile sprejemljive za zasebnega vlagatelja, ki posluje pod običajnimi pogoji tržnega gospodarstva („merilo zasebnega vlagatelja v tržnem gospodarstvu“).
In this respect, assuming that the FMEA will sell its participating interest in Trèves during 2012, the internal rate of return (‘IRR’) calculated by the FMEA on the basis of its investment is [> 12 %] per year.
Če pri tem predpostavljamo, da bo sklad FMEA svoj delež v podjetju Trèves odprodal leta 2012, je letna notranja stopnja donosa glede na izračune sklada FMEA na podlagi njegove naložbe [več kot 12-odstotna].
This rate represents the pre-tax rate of return on the entire FMEA investment, i.e. both the direct capital injection of EUR [5-15] million and the contribution in the form of debt securities giving access to capital (convertible bonds with adjustable parity) amounting to EUR [40-50] million.
Ta stopnja pomeni donosnost celotne naložbe sklada FMEA pred obdavčitvijo za neposredni kapitalski vložek v višini [5–15] milijonov EUR in vložek v obliki dolžniških instrumentov, ki zagotavljajo dostop do kapitala, v znesku [40–50] milijonov EUR.
Consequently, with a view to assessing whether the criterion of the private investor operating in a market economy is respected, the Commission must reach a decision on the following questions:
Komisija se mora pri presoji upoštevanja načela zasebnega vlagatelja v tržnem gospodarstvu zato izreči o naslednjih vprašanjih:
Is Trèves’ restructuring plan, the basis for the FMEA’s commitment, credible and realistic?
Ali je načrt prestrukturiranja družbe Trèves, na podlagi katerega se je sklad FMEA odločil za naložbo, prepričljiv in stvaren?
Was the Trèves group valued appropriately before the FMEA capital injection of EUR [5-15] million?
Ali je bila vrednost skupine Trèves pred kapitalskim vložkom sklada FMEA v višini [5–15] milijonov EUR ustrezno ocenjena?
Were the assumptions of the restructuring plan underlying the IRR reasonable and realistic at the time of the FMEA investment?
Ali so bile predpostavke iz načrta prestrukturiranja, na katerih temelji notranja stopnja donosa, ob izvedbi naložbe sklada FMEA razumne in stvarne?
Is an expected IRR of [> 12 %] sufficient?
Ali je [več kot 12-odstotna] notranja stopnja donosa zadostna?
The Commission will add considerations relating to the structure of the FMEA investment and the sharing of the capital gain to the replies to questions b) and d) respectively.
Komisija bo v odgovora na vprašanji (b) in (d) vključila ugotovitve, ki se nanašajo na strukturo naložbe sklada FMEA in delitev kapitalskega dobička.
The replies given to these questions will enable the Commission to determine whether the FMEA acted under similar conditions to those that a private investor would have required whose investment presents a risk arising from both the situation in the motor vehicle sector at the time of the investment and that of the undertaking which was experiencing certain financial difficulties.
Na podlagi teh podatkov bo lahko ugotovila, ali je sklad FMEA deloval pod podobnimi pogoji, kot bi jih zahteval zasebni vlagatelj, katerega naložba je tvegana zaradi razmer v avtomobilski industriji ob naložbi in razmer v podjetju, ki se spopada z nekaterimi finančnimi težavami.
Concerning the credible and realistic nature of the restructuring plan
Prepričljivost in stvarnost načrta prestrukturiranja
As already indicated in recital 23, shortly before the outbreak of the financial and economic crisis of 2008, Trèves was starting to reap the benefits of a first restructuring plan, launched in 2005, aiming to cut the workforce and to rationalise production capacity [18].
Kot je bilo navedeno že v uvodni izjavi 23, je podjetje Trèves tik pred izbruhom finančne in gospodarske krize v letu 2008 začelo uživati koristi prvega načrta prestrukturiranja, uvedenega leta 2005 ter namenjenega zmanjšanju števila zaposlenih in racionalizaciji proizvodnih zmogljivosti [18].
When the crisis occurred, Trèves decided to modify and intensify its restructuring plan.
Ob izbruhu krize se je podjetje Trèves odločilo spremeniti in poglobiti načrt prestrukturiranja.
In this way, from the end of summer 2008, Trèves gave fresh impetus to its restructuring plan and at the end of December 2008, i.e. several months before the conciliation protocol of 25 May 2009, the following results could already be observed:
Tako je že konec poletja 2008 svojemu načrtu prestrukturiranja dalo nov zagon, in že konec decembra 2008, to je več mesecev pred sklenitvijo protokola o poravnavi z dne 25. maja 2009, je bilo mogoče opaziti naslednje rezultate:
a significant reduction in overhead costs: the measures taken in this respect allowed a reduction of [20-30] % in the total amount of Trèves’ actual overhead costs in the last 4 months of 2008 compared with the 2008 budget forecast,
precejšnje znižanje splošnih izdatkov: ukrepi na tem področju so omogočili [20–30]-odstotno znižanje skupnega zneska dejanskih splošnih izdatkov podjetja Trèves v zadnjem štirimesečnem obdobju leta 2008 v primerjavi s predvidenim finančnim načrtom za leto 2008,
a hefty reduction in stocks: the cost of stocks fell by [30-40] % during the second half of 2008, from EUR [20-80] million in June to EUR [0-60] million in December,
znatno zmanjšanje zalog: stroški zalog so se v drugem polletju 2008 znižali za [30–40] %, tako da so se z [20–80] milijonov EUR v juniju znižali na [0–60] milijonov EUR v decembru,
control of tangible investments: these were reduced by [40-50] % in 2008 compared with the 2008 budget forecast,
nadzor nad opredmetenimi naložbami: te so se v letu 2008 zmanjšale za [40–50] % v primerjavi s predvidenim finančnim načrtom za leto 2008,
a cut in the workforce: the group’s workforce in France was cut by [10-20] % during 2008 alone ([…] employees in France in December 2008 compared with […] employees in January 2008).
zmanjšanje števila zaposlenih: število zaposlenih skupine v Franciji se je samo v letu 2008 zmanjšalo za [10–20] % ([…] zaposlenih v Franciji decembra 2008 v primerjavi z […] zaposlenimi januarja 2008).
At the beginning of 2009, Trèves then drew up more formally a new version of the restructuring plan, with the assistance of the independent consultancy firm […].
Družba Trèves je tako v začetku leta 2009 pripravila bolj poglobljeno novo različico načrta prestrukturiranja, pri tem pa ji je pomagalo neodvisno svetovalno podjetje […].
This firm in particular confirmed the amount of cash resource requirements considered necessary to finance the plan (EUR [110-140] million, see recitals 25 et seq.).
To je zlasti potrdilo znesek likvidnostnih potreb, ki naj bi bil potreben za financiranje načrta ([110–140] milijonov EUR, glej uvodno izjavo 25 in naslednje).
Firstly, it must be stressed that the forecasts for future turnover appearing in the restructuring plan seem to be credible and realistic.
Najprej je treba poudariti, da se zdijo napovedi prihodnjega prometa v načrtu prestrukturiranja zanesljive in stvarne.
In fact, the estimate of orders from manufacturers on which these forecasts are based had been revised substantially downwards.
Temeljijo namreč na pričakovanem in zelo velikem zmanjšanju povpraševanja proizvajalcev.
The plan remains prudent concerning the trend in the sector and counts on a level of activity in 2011 […] than the sales recorded in 2008.
Načrt ostaja previden glede razvoja sektorja in računa na raven dejavnosti v letu 2011 […] v primerjavi s prodajo v letu 2008.
Secondly, the plan introduces a significant reduction in costs.
Dalje, z načrtom se uvaja znatno znižanje stroškov.
This reduction is achieved, inter alia, by boosting the efficiency of the workforce and by cutting operating costs […] [19] […].
To je med drugim posledica povečanja učinkovitosti delovne sile in doseženih prihrankov pri stroških poslovanja […] [19] […].
The reduction in costs is also based on a sizeable reduction in the workforce (the restructuring involves a total of 1300 persons).
Znižanje stroškov izhaja tudi iz precejšnjega zmanjšanja števila zaposlenih (prestrukturiranje skupaj zadeva 1300 oseb).
On the basis of these measures, the restructuring plan provides for:
Na podlagi teh ukrepov je v načrtu prestrukturiranja predvideno:
a return to breakeven from 2010, with a pre-tax result of EUR [0-10] million, a positive cash flow of EUR [0-10] million and an EBITDA of EUR [40-70] million,
ponovna vzpostavitev ravnotežja od leta 2010 s prihodki pred obdavčitvijo v višini [0–10] milijonov EUR, pozitivnim denarnim tokom v višini [0–10] milijonov EUR ter dobičkom pred obrestmi, davki in amortizacijo v višini [40–70] milijonov EUR,
a pre-tax result of EUR [10-30] million from 2011, with a cash flow of EUR [10-30] million and an EBITDA of EUR [50-80] million.
poslovni izid pred obdavčitvijo v višini [10–30] milijonov EUR od leta 2011 s pozitivnim denarnim tokom v višini [10–30] milijonov EUR ter dobičkom pred obrestmi, davki in amortizacijo v višini [50–80] milijonov EUR.
It should be noted that, before committing itself, the FMEA itself instructed the firm […] to conduct a full audit, between mid-March and end-April 2009, of Trèves’ situation (due diligence exercises).
Treba je navesti, da je sklad FMEA pred naložbo pooblastil svetovalno podjetje […], da od sredine marca do konca aprila 2009 izvede celovito revizijo položaja družbe Trèves (tako imenovani skrbni pregled poslovanja).
The FMEA teams themselves also analysed and confirmed the restructuring plan.
Načrt prestrukturiranja so preučile in potrdile tudi skupine sklada FMEA.
Moreover, in the context of its restructuring, Trèves undertakes to dispose of its ‘[…]’ activity, taking into account the industrial and social balances relating to this operation and seeking to contribute to the competitiveness of the industrial plant and processes of the new Trèves group.
Družba Trèves se je tudi zavezala, da bo svojo dejavnost „[…]“ prodala ob upoštevanju sektorskih in družbenih ravnovesij, povezanih s to transakcijo, in v prizadevanju za konkurenčnost industrijskega orodja nove skupine Trèves.
In the light of the factors above, the Commission concludes that the restructuring plan on which the FMEA based its investment in Trèves can be considered credible and realistic.
Komisija na podlagi navedenega ugotavlja, da se načrt prestrukturiranja, na podlagi katerega je sklad FMEA izvedel naložbo v družbo Trèves, lahko šteje za zanesljivega in stvarnega.
Regarding the valuation of Trèves before the FMEA investment and the structure of this investment
Ocena vrednosti družbe Trèves pred naložbo sklada FMEA in struktura te naložbe
Trèves’ equity prior to the FMEA investment was valued at EUR [15-40] million. On this basis, the FMEA acquired [< 50] % of Trèves’ equity through a capital increase of EUR [5-15] million. The Commission has to check that this valuation is appropriate and prudent in the light of the situation of the undertaking at the time.
Vrednost lastnih sredstev družbe Trèves pred naložbo sklada FMEA je bila določena na [15–40] milijonov EUR. Na tej podlagi je sklad FMEA pridobil [več kot 50] % kapitala družbe Trèves z dokapitalizacijo v višini [5–15] milijonov EUR. Komisija mora preveriti, ali je ta ocena vrednosti ustrezna in premišljena glede na takratni položaj podjetja.
Several methods exist for estimating the value of the equity of an undertaking [20].
Za oceno vrednosti lastnih sredstev podjetja je na voljo več metod [20].
One method often used is that of the multiple of the EBITDA.
Pogosto se uporablja metoda večkratnika dobička pred davki, obrestmi in amortizacijo.
It allows the value of the equity of an undertaking for year X to be assessed by multiplying the EBITDA of year X by a factor (the multiple) considered to be appropriate for the sector and subtracting the net debt from the result.
Z njo je mogoče oceniti vrednost lastnih sredstev podjetja za leto X, in sicer s pomnožitvijo dobička pred davki, obrestmi in amortizacijo iz leta X s faktorjem (večkratnikom), ki naj bi bil ustrezen za ta sektor, pri čemer se od rezultata odšteje neto dolg.
Another method is discounted cash flow analysis.
Druga metoda se imenuje „analiza diskontiranega denarnega toka“.
The undertaking’s nominal free cash flows for the coming years are discounted at the weighted average cost of capital, or WACC) and the net debt is subtracted from the value obtained.
Nominalna vrednost razpoložljivih denarnih tokov podjetja se za prihodnja leta diskontira na podlagi tehtanega povprečja stroškov nominalnega kapitala, od dobljene vrednosti pa se odšteje neto dolg.
A third method is that of the multiple of turnover.
Tretja metoda je metoda večkratnika prometa.
It allows the value of an undertaking’s equity in year X to be assessed by multiplying the turnover of year X by a factor (the multiple) considered to be appropriate for the sector and subtracting the net debt from the result.
Z njo je mogoče oceniti vrednost lastnih sredstev podjetja za leto X, in sicer s pomnožitvijo prometa iz tega leta X s faktorjem (večkratnikom), ki naj bi bil ustrezen za ta sektor, pri čemer se od rezultata odšteje neto dolg.
To value the company Trèves prior to its investment, the FMEA used the discounted cash flow analysis and the multiple of turnover methods.
Sklad FMEA je za oceno vrednosti podjetja Trèves pred naložbo uporabil metodi analize diskontiranega denarnega toka in večkratnika prometa.
In fact, since Trèves did not have a positive EBITDA at the end of 2008, the first method mentioned, i.e. the multiple of the EBITDA, was not practicable.
Ker podjetje konec leta 2008 ni imelo pozitivnega dobička pred davki, obrestmi in amortizacijo, namreč prva metoda, metoda večkratnika dobička pred davki, obrestmi in amortizacijo, ni bila izvedljiva.
On the other hand, the method of the discounted cash flow analysis was possible and allowed the prospects of return to profitability to be taken into account, which results in the integration in the valuation of the beneficial effects expected from the improvement in the performance of the undertaking.
Nasprotno pa je bila metoda analize diskontiranega denarnega toka izvedljiva in je omogočala upoštevanje možnosti za ponovno vzpostavitev donosnosti, zaradi česar so se v oceno vrednosti vključili pričakovani ugodni učinki povečanja uspešnosti podjetja.
The multiple of turnover method was also used as a precaution and for confirmation.
Iz previdnosti in za potrditev se je uporabila tudi metoda večkratnika prometa.
As regards the method of the discounted cash flow analysis of the undertaking, the sectoral capital cost or WACC, integrating the specific sectoral risk, was estimated at 12 %.
Kar zadeva metodo analize diskontiranega denarnega toka podjetja, so bili stroški kapitala ali sektorsko tehtano povprečje stroškov nominalnega kapitala, ki vključuje posebno tveganje sektorja, ocenjeni na 12 %.
The FMEA then calculated a more prudent WACC of [> 12] % by integrating the additional specific risk premiums associated with the dimension of the undertaking and the non-liquid nature of the investment.
Sklad FMEA je nato izračunal previdnejše, [več kot 12]-odstotno sektorsko tehtano povprečje stroškov nominalnega kapitala, ki je vključevalo dodatne premije za posebno tveganje, povezane z velikostjo podjetja in nelikvidnostjo naložbe.
It finally adopted a WACC of [> 12] % to take account of the additional risk associated with the turnaround (i.e. restructuring) of the undertaking.
Na koncu je uporabil [več kot 12]-odstotno sektorsko tehtano povprečje stroškov nominalnega kapitala, da bi se upoštevalo dodatno tveganje, povezano z okoliščinami preoblikovanja (to je prestrukturiranja) podjetja.
As regards the multiple of turnover method, the multiple adopted and applied to the end-2008 turnover was [0-1].
Pri metodi večkratnika prometa se je za promet konec leta 2008 upošteval in uporabil večkratnik [0–1].
This multiple corresponds to the multiples observed on the market for comparable undertakings at the time of the transaction.
Ta je enak večkratnikom, ki so jih ob transakciji na trgu dosegla primerljiva podjetja.
It should be pointed out that in late 2008 and early 2009, these multiples reached historically low levels on account of the financial and economic crisis which greatly affected the motor vehicle manufacturing sector and the automobile parts manufacturers (in fact the long-term average of the multiple of turnover for the automobile parts manufacturers is set at 0,51).
Treba je poudariti, da so ti večkratniki konec leta 2008 in začetek leta 2009 dosegli zgodovinsko nizke ravni zaradi finančne in gospodarske krize, ki je močno prizadela avtomobilsko industrijo in proizvajalce opreme (dolgoročno povprečje večkratnika prometa za sektor proizvajalcev avtomobilske opreme znaša 0,51).
On the basis of a multiple of [0-1], the value of Trèves’ equity stands at EUR [15-40] million.
Vrednost lastnih sredstev skupine Trèves na podlagi večkratnika [0–1] znaša [15–40] milijonov EUR.
Therefore, even though the multiple of [0-1] is a multiple which has to be considered to be historically weak, the FMEA adopted the value based on this multiple and not that resulting from an average long-term multiple or a multiple smoothed over several years.
Tudi če bi bilo treba večkratnik [0–1] šteti za zgodovinsko nizkega, je sklad FMEA uporabil vrednost, dobljeno s tem večkratnikom, in ne vrednosti na podlagi povprečja dolgoročnega večkratnika ali večkratnika za več let.
Likewise, the FMEA did not adopt the valuation resulting from the discounted cash flow analysis either.
Prav tako ni uporabil ocene vrednosti, dobljene z analizo diskontiranega denarnega toka.
As a result of the above, the valuation of Trèves’ equity before the FMEA made its investment is appropriate and prudent.
Iz navedenega izhaja, da je ocena vrednosti lastnih sredstev družbe Trèves pred naložbo sklada FMEA ustrezna in razumna.
It is in fact at the low end of the interval calculated according to the discounted cash flow analysis method and the stock market multiples.
Uvršča se namreč v spodnji del razpona, določenega z metodo analize diskontiranega denarnega toka in borznih večkratnikov.