natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
This is in line with the principle of mutuality, by which cooperatives act in the interest of their members.
To se ujema z načelom vzajemnosti, po katerem zadruge delujejo v interesu svojih članov.
The members of a retail or consumers’ cooperative receive financial benefits based on the total value of their transactions with the cooperative (individual dividends or profits) at the end of the financial year.
Člani distribucijske ali potrošniške zadruge na koncu proračunskega leta prejmejo ekonomske ugodnosti, ki temeljijo na skupni vrednosti njihovih poslov z zadrugo (dobiček ali vračilo na posameznika).
They may however decide to allow the cooperative to keep some of these dividends or surpluses for the different reserves.
Vendar lahko del tega vračila ali poslovnega presežka prepustijo zadrugi za različne rezerve.
Pure mutual cooperatives may thus be defined as trading solely with their members.
Čisto vzajemne zadruge je tako mogoče opredeliti kot zadruge, ki trgujejo izključno s svojimi člani.
As a result, as regards company tax in particular, in true mutual cooperatives the cooperative does not make any profit because it only operates for the benefit of its members.
Tako zlasti v zvezi z davkom od dobička pravnih oseb čisto vzajemne zadruge ne ustvarijo dobička, ker delujejo samo v korist svojih članov.
For this reason, the Commission considers that true mutual cooperatives and corporations for profit are not in comparable legal and factual situations with regard to the taxation of profits.
Zato Komisija meni, da z vidika obdavčenja dobičkov čisto vzajemne zadruge in pridobitne družbe niso v pravno in dejansko primerljivem položaju.
Given this situation, the deduction of the taxable income of true mutual cooperatives does not therefore constitute State aid.
V takem položaju davčni odbitek za čisto vzajemne zadruge ne bi bil državna pomoč.
Be that as it may, the Commission also recognises that Royal Decree-Law No 10/2000 introduces factors which alter the true cooperative model, particularly the possibility of waiving the maximum limit of 50 % imposed on agricultural cooperatives in their B diesel transactions with non-member third parties without losing their status as protected cooperatives; in other words, the principle of exclusivism in favour of agricultural cooperatives is called into question.
V zvezi s tem Komisija priznava tudi, da se s kraljevim zakonodajnim odlokom št. 10/2000 uvajajo elementi, s katerimi se spreminja čisto vzajemni zadružni model, s tem ko omogoča ukinitev omejitve za zadruge v višini 50 % za dobavo dizelskega goriva B tretjim osebam, ki niso člani zadruge, ne da bi izgubile status davčno zaščitene zadruge, oziroma da zbuja dvom o načelu izključnosti v korist kmetijskih zadrug.
Indeed, the mere fact that the cooperatives can exceed the 50 % limit taints their ‘true mutual’ nature and, what is more, a large proportion of this business may be concluded with non-members.
Že s samim dejstvom, da zadruge lahko presežejo omejitev 50 %, se poruši „čista vzajemnost“ zadrug, saj bodo lahko velik del prometa ustvarile v poslih z nečlani zadruge.
The activity of the agricultural cooperative may also be altered profoundly by pursuing a profit-seeking objective and it is appropriate to ask whether the principles that characterise a true mutual cooperative (such as the active participation of cooperative members in the administration, decision-making or even management of the cooperative, the principles of exclusivism, altruism and democracy) can be upheld whilst the cooperative’s services are made available to non-members on an unlimited basis.
Dejavnost kmetijske zadruge se bo lahko temeljito spremenila, če si bo prizadevala za ustvarjanje dobička, in vprašati se je treba, ali se bodo načela, ki so značilna za čisto vzajemno zadrugo (kot so dejavna udeležba članov zadruge pri vodenju, odločanju ali upravljanju zadruge, načelo izključnosti, altruizma in demokracije), še lahko ohranila, če bodo zadruge svoje storitve brez omejitev odprle nečlanom zadruge.
In addition, it cannot be ignored that the change in the nature of the revenues from transactions concluded with non-member third parties marks a departure from the nature of cooperativism.
Poleg tega ni mogoče prezreti, da se spremeni narava prihodkov, ki so ustvarjeni v poslih s tretjimi osebami, ki niso člani zadruge, in ki izgubljajo svoj zadružni značaj.
Thus, it seems that the true mutual nature of cooperatives in the agricultural sector concerned by the measure is definitely called into question by Royal Decree-Law No 10/2000 in this case.
V tem primeru se torej izkaže, da se s kraljevim zakonodajnim odlokom št. 10/2000 zbuja dvom o čisti vzajemnosti zadrug v kmetijskem sektorju, ki jih ukrep zadeva.
For these reasons, and in the light of existing Spanish legislation, the Commission is unable unequivocally to confirm the true mutual nature of the Spanish agricultural cooperatives concerned.
Iz teh razlogov in ob upoštevanju veljavne španske zakonodaje Komisija ne more z gotovostjo ugotoviti čiste vzajemnosti zadevnih španskih kmetijskih zadrug.
It would therefore seem that agricultural cooperatives and their revenue should be compared not to true mutual cooperative societies but indeed to companies with share capital.
Zdi se torej, da je treba te zadruge in njihove prihodke obravnavati ne v primerjavi s čisto vzajemnimi zadrugami, ampak v primerjavi s kapitalskimi družbami.
It is however necessary to determine the legal system within which the measures must be evaluated, that is to say the reference framework.
Vendar je kljub temu treba določiti pravno ureditev, v kateri je treba presoditi te ukrepe, tj. referenčni okvir.
In this respect, it should be noted that as regards the tax advantages conferred on Spanish agricultural cooperatives, the measures in question constitute special exemptions provided for by Law No 20/1990 on the tax arrangements applying to cooperatives.
V zvezi s tem je treba ugotoviti, da v primeru davčnih ugodnosti za španske kmetijske zadruge zadevni ukrepi štejejo za posebno odstopanje, določeno z zakonom št. 20/1990 o davčni ureditvi zadrug.
Articles 16(5), 18(2), 33(1), 33(2), 33(3), 33(4), 34(1) and 34(2) of the Law provide for a whole series of favourable measures for specially protected cooperatives, including agricultural cooperatives, in respect of company tax, tax on capital transfers and documented legal acts, tax on economic activities and tax on immovable property (see recital 20 above for details of these advantages).
Zakon v členih 16(5), 18(2), 33(1), 33(2), 33(3), 33(4), 34(1) in 34(2) določa vrsto ukrepov v korist posebej zaščitenih zadrug, med katerimi so kmetijske zadruge, iz naslova davka od dobička pravnih oseb, davka na prenos premoženja in kolkovine za sklenitev pravnega posla, davka na gospodarske dejavnosti ter davka na nepremičnine (za podrobnosti o teh ugodnostih glej točko 20 zgoraj).
Next, it is important to determine the objective of each of these four taxes.
Nato je treba ugotoviti, kakšen je namen vsakega od teh štirih davkov.
To this end, it should be observed that the objective of company tax is the taxation of the profits of businesses.
V zvezi s tem je treba ugotoviti, da je namen davka od dobička pravnih oseb obdavčitev dobička podjetij.
The objective of each of the remaining taxes is the taxation of capital transfers and of the execution of documented legal acts, the taxation of the exercise of an economic activity and the taxation of the possession of a right on immovable property.
Nameni drugih davkov pa so obdavčitev prenosa premoženja in sklenitve pravnega posla, obdavčitev opravljanja gospodarske dejavnosti ter obdavčitev uživanja pravice nad nepremičnino.
Finally, as mentioned above, it is necessary to determine whether cooperatives and companies with share capital find themselves in comparable factual and legal situations as regards these objectives and these four types of taxation.
Nazadnje je treba, kot je bilo navedeno, ugotoviti, ali so zadruge in kapitalske družbe v dejansko in pravno primerljivem položaju glede na namene teh štirih davkov.
First of all, as far as company tax is concerned, since the Commission is unable to confirm the mutual nature of the Spanish agricultural cooperatives in question, which by definition would not make a profit, it is consequently also unable to exclude that cooperatives and companies with share capital find themselves in comparable factual and legal situations regarding advantages related to the tax.
Najprej v zvezi z davkom od dobička pravnih oseb, ker Komisija ne more ugotoviti čiste vzajemnosti zadevnih španskih kmetijskih zadrug, ki naj po definiciji ne bi ustvarjale dobička, tudi ne more izključiti, da so, kar zadeva davčne ugodnosti, zadruge in kapitalske družbe v dejansko in pravno primerljivem položaju.
When a cooperative engages in transactions with non-member third parties, it operates in the market in the same manner as any other business and, consequently, finds itself in a comparable factual and legal situation as far as the objective of company tax is concerned.
Kadar zadruga trguje s tretjimi osebami, ki niso člani zadruge, deluje na trgu enako kot vsako drugo podjetje in je zato v dejansko in pravno primerljivem položaju glede na namen davka od dobička pravnih oseb.
In addition, as regards tax measures in respect of the undistributable reserves of cooperatives, the Commission considers that these can be compared to the reserves of companies with share capital for the purposes of company tax.
Poleg tega Komisija v zvezi z davčnimi ukrepi za nedeljive zadružne rezerve meni, da so z vidika uporabe davka od dobička pravnih oseb primerljive z rezervami kapitalskih družb.
Indeed, for the cooperative, the allocation of profits to the undistributable reserves would in essence be comparable to companies with share capital keeping their profits, because the undistributable reserves are used in the course of cooperative activities in a similar manner to the profits reserved by companies with share capital.
Z vidika zadruge bi bila dodelitev dobička v nedeljive rezerve namreč primerljiva s primerom kapitalskih družb, ki shranijo dobiček, kajti nedeljive rezerve se uporabijo za dejavnosti zadruge, podobno kot nerazdeljeni dobički kapitalskih družb.
The comparison must concern the business rather than cooperative members or shareholders.
Primerjavo je treba narediti z vidika podjetja, in ne z vidika delničarjev ali članov zadruge.
Even the mandatory nature of the cooperative’s undistributable reserves cannot change the fact that the measure constitutes aid, since companies with share capital also have mandatory legal reserves which are in contrast subject to taxation.
Celo obvezni značaj nedeljivih rezerv zadrug ne more spremeniti tega, da ima ukrep značaj pomoči, kajti tudi kapitalske družbe imajo obvezne zakonite rezerve, ki so vendarle obdavčene.
Thus, the Commission is of the opinion that the undistributable reserves are economically comparable to any other reserve of any other business.
Komisija torej meni, da so nedeljive rezerve gospodarsko primerljive s kakršnimi koli rezervami, določenimi za kakršna koli podjetja.
As a result, any measure in relation to company tax which aims to introduce differentiated and more advantageous treatment of profits in general and of profits destined for undistributable reserves in particular is likely to provide cooperatives with an economic advantage over companies with share capital which would not be able to qualify for them even if their situation were comparable.
Tako lahko vsak ukrep iz naslova davka od dobička pravnih oseb, katerega namen je različno in ugodnejše obravnavanje dobičkov na splošno in zlasti dobičkov, namenjenih v nedeljive rezerve, v korist zadrug, tem zagotovi ekonomsko prednost v primerjavi s kapitalskimi družbami, ki te ugodnosti ne bi mogle izkoristiti, čeprav bi bile v primerljivem položaju.
The Commission is of the opinion that these considerations suggest that companies with share capital are on the same plane as cooperative societies and that, consequently, it is possible to state that cooperative societies enjoy an advantage as regards company tax over companies with share capital.
Po mnenju Komisije v zvezi z ugodnostmi pri davku od dobička pravnih oseb iz teh ugotovitev izhaja, da so kapitalske družbe na isti ravni kot zadruge in da je zato mogoče trditi, da imajo zadruge prednost v primerjavi s kapitalskimi družbami.
In relation to tax on capital transfers and documented legal acts, it should be recalled that this indirect form of taxation is designed to be charged on different legal acts such as taxable capital transfers, documented legal acts or even certain company transactions (i.e., corporate financing such as increasing share capital, for example).
V zvezi z davkom na prenos premoženja in kolkovino za sklenitev pravnega posla je treba opozoriti, da ta posredni davek bremeni različne pravne akte, kot so dragi prenosi premoženja, pravne listine ali nekatera dejanja družb (kot je financiranje družbe, na primer dokapitalizacija).
A company with share capital would be taxed on the execution of these acts.
Kapitalska družba, ki bi izvedla te različne pravne akte, bi bila obdavčena.
Whereas, as explained in recital 20 of this Decision, cooperative societies enjoy a tax exemption on the same acts (incorporation, capital increase, taking out and cancelling loans, and so on [33]).
Nasprotno pa, kot je navedeno v točki 20 te odločbe, so zadruge upravičene do oprostitve za iste obdavčljive dogodke (ustanovitev, dokapitalizacija, dodelitev in razveljavitev posojil itd. [33].
Therefore, cooperative societies enjoy an advantage over companies with share capital.
Zadruge imajo torej prednost v primerjavi s kapitalskimi družbami.
Next, the tax on economic activities is charged directly on any type of entrepreneurial, professional or artistic economic activity performed by natural or legal persons on Spanish territory [34].
Nato, davek na gospodarske dejavnosti neposredno bremeni vse vrste podjetniških, poklicnih ali umetniških gospodarskih dejavnosti, ki jih na španskem ozemlju opravljajo fizične ali pravne osebe [34].
A company with share capital with a turnover in excess of one (1) million euro is subject to this tax depending on the economic activity that it is engaged in.
Kapitalska družba, ki ima več kot 1 milijon EUR prometa, bo glede na svojo gospodarsko dejavnost obdavčena s tem davkom.
As mentioned in recital 20 of this Decision, cooperative societies enjoy a 95 % rebate on this tax [35].
Kot je navedeno v točki 20 te odločbe, imajo zadruge 95-odstotno olajšavo za ta davek [35].
Therefore, cooperative societies enjoy an advantage over the aforementioned companies with share capital, which are taxed at the full rate.
Zato imajo zadruge prednost v primerjavi z omenjenimi kapitalskimi družbami, ki morajo v celoti plačati ta davek.
Lastly, it should be recalled as regards tax on immovable property that this is a local tax charged on the rights of ownership and other property rights attached to a building.
Nazadnje je treba v zvezi z davkom na nepremičnine opozoriti, da je to lokalni davek, ki bremeni uživanje lastninske pravice in drugih stvarnih pravic, povezanih z nepremičnino.
Companies with share capital are taxed at the full rate, unlike cooperative societies, as described in recital 20 of this Decision.
Kapitalske družbe morajo v nasprotju z zadrugami v celoti plačati ta davek, kot je opisano v točki 20 te odločbe.
Indeed, the latter enjoy a 95 % rebate on this local tax in respect of rural property belonging to agricultural cooperatives and community land cooperatives [36].
Zadruge imajo namreč za ta davek na kmečka sredstva kmetijskih zadrug in skupnostno obdelovanje zemlje 95-odstotno olajšavo [36].
Therefore, cooperative societies in non-urban areas enjoy an advantage over companies with share capital, which are subject to the full rate of this tax.
Zato imajo zadruge na zunajmestnih območjih prednost v primerjavi z navedenimi kapitalskimi družbami, ki morajo ta davek plačati v celoti.
Having found that companies with share capital definitely are on the same plane and find themselves in a similar situation to that of cooperative societies, the Commission is in a position to ascertain that they are excluded from enjoying the aforementioned advantages [37] and that as a result these advantages are indeed selective since they only apply to cooperative societies.
Ker je Komisija ugotovila, da so kapitalske družbe na isti ravni in v podobnem položaju kot zadruge, je mogoče trditi, da so izključene iz teh ugodnosti [37] in da so te ugodnosti selektivne, ker se nanašajo samo na zadruge.
Therefore, the Commission finds that the measures introduced by Article 1 of Royal Decree-Law No 10/2000 do confer a selective advantage [38] on agricultural cooperatives.
Komisija torej ugotavlja, da ukrepi, ustvarjeni s členom 1 kraljevega zakonodajnega odloka št. 10/2000, dajejo selektivno ugodnost [38] kmetijskim zadrugam.
Are the measures justified by the nature or scheme of the system?
Ali so ukrepi upravičeni zaradi narave ali splošne sheme sistema?
Next, it should be determined whether the tax measures in question can be justified by the nature or scheme of the tax system, which the Member State concerned has a duty to prove.
Nato je treba preučiti, ali zadevne davčne ukrepe lahko upraviči narava ali splošna shema davčnega sistema, kar mora dokazati zadevna država članica.
A measure introducing an exception to the application of the general tax system may be justified by the general scheme and nature of the tax system if the Member State concerned can prove that this measure results directly from the founding principles or policy of its tax system [39].
Ukrep, ki ustvarja izjemo od uporabe splošnega davčnega sistema, lahko opraviči narava ali splošna shema davčnega sistema, če lahko zadevna država članica dokaže, da ta ukrep neposredno izhaja iz temeljnih ali usmerjevalnih načel davčnega sistema [39].
A justification based on the nature or scheme of the tax system at issue constitutes an exception to the principle that State aid is prohibited and must therefore be interpreted strictly [40].
Utemeljitev z naravo ali splošno shemo zadevnega davčnega sistema je izjema od načela prepovedi državnih pomoči, zato jo je treba razumeti ozko [40].
It is the duty of the Member State to prove that the exception in question is justified by the nature and scheme of the system and therefore that it does not constitute aid within the meaning of Article 107 of the TFEU.
Država članica mora dokazati, da je zadevno odstopanje upravičeno zaradi narave ali splošne sheme sistema in da torej ni državna pomoč v smislu člena 107 PDEU.
To this end, a distinction should be drawn between the objectives assigned to a particular tax system and which are external to it, on the one hand, and the mechanisms inherent to the tax system itself which are necessary for the achievement of such objectives, on the other [41].
Pri tem je treba razlikovati med cilji, določenimi posebnemu davčnemu sistemu, ki so zunaj njega, in mehanizmi, ki so lastni samemu davčnemu sistemu in so potrebni za uresničitev teh ciljev [41].
In the case in question, Agri-food Cooperatives Spain considers that the measures provided for in Royal Decree-Law No 10/2000, particularly in relation to the impact on company tax, are intended to offset the double taxation of cooperative income through company tax and personal income tax.
V tem primeru Konfederacija kmetijskih zadrug Španije meni, da so ukrepi, določeni s kraljevim zakonodajnim odlokom št. 10/2000, zlasti glede vpliva na davek od dobička pravnih oseb namenjeni izravnavi dvojnega obdavčenja poslovnih presežkov z davkom od dobička pravnih oseb in dohodnino.
The Commission is unable to make a decision as to the accuracy of this assertion on the basis of the arguments put forward.
Komisija na podlagi predstavljenih argumentov ne more odločiti o pravilnosti te trditve.
Nevertheless, it recognises that this assertion is not made by the Spanish authorities in order to prove that the measure results directly from the founding principles or the policy of its tax system.
Vendar ugotavlja, da Španija tega ne trdi, da bi dokazala, da ta ukrep neposredno izhaja iz temeljnih ali usmerjevalnih načel davčnega sistema.
Spain holds that the aim is to allow cooperatives to carry out this activity without having to set up a separate legal entity, since the same company tax is payable in both situations in so far as the revenue from sales of B diesel to third parties is subject to the general company tax regime.
Španija meni, da je zastavljeni cilj, omogočiti zadrugi opravljanje te dejavnosti, ne da bi ji bilo treba ustanoviti drug ločen subjekt, saj je v obeh primerih obdavčenje z davkom od dobička pravnih oseb enako, tako da za prihodke, ustvarjene z dobavo dizelskega goriva B tretjim osebam, velja splošna ureditev za davek od dobička pravnih oseb.
The objective of the two measures is to allow farms to continue their business activities and to maintain their competitiveness so that they can cope with the difficult economic conditions created by the exorbitant increase in fuel prices and the depreciation of the euro against the dollar [42].
Cilj obeh ukrepov je omogočiti kmetijskim in živinorejskim gospodarstvom, da še naprej opravljajo svojo dejavnost in ohranijo potrebno raven konkurenčnosti, da se lahko spopadajo z ekonomskimi težavami zaradi nesorazmernega dviga cen dizelskega goriva in zmanjšanja vrednosti eura v primerjavi z dolarjem [42].
Concerning the other taxes, the Spanish authorities consider that the tax advantages predate Royal Decree-Law No 10/2000, so that cooperatives are not entitled to them as a result of the aforementioned Decree-Law.
V zvezi z drugimi davki Španija meni, da so davčne ugodnosti obstajale pred kraljevim zakonodajnim odlokom št. 10/2000, tako da zadruge do njih niso upravičene zaradi začetka veljavnosti tega dekreta.
However, the Commission considers that the mere fact that the tax advantages brought to bear on the various taxes by the two measures in question were designed to offset difficult economic conditions does not allow it to consider that all the disputed tax advantages granted by the Spanish authorities are justified by the nature and scheme of the national tax system [43].
Vendar Komisija meni, da samo zato, ker so davčne ugodnosti, povezane z različnimi davki in ustvarjene z zadevnima ukrepoma, zasnovane tako, da rešujejo gospodarsko težaven položaj, ni mogoče meniti, da so vse zadevne davčne ugodnosti, ki so jih dodelili španski organi, upravičene zaradi narave ali splošne sheme nacionalnega davčnega sistema [43].
As a result, with regard to the measures provided for in Article 1 of Royal Decree-Law No 10/2000, the Commission considers that the ‘selectivity’ criterion is fulfilled.
Zato Komisija meni, da je za ukrepe iz člena 1 kraljevega zakonodajnega odloka št. 10/2000 izpolnjeno merilo „selektivnosti“.
Conclusions on the nature of ‘aid’ within the meaning of Article 107(1) of the TFEU
Ugotovitve o naravi „pomoči“ v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU
The Commission considers, in light of the above explanations, that the measures in favour of agricultural cooperatives referred to in Article 1 of Royal Decree-Law No 10/2000 adopted following the increase in fuel prices confer an advantage on them to which other operators are not entitled, which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods, and that it is therefore likely to affect trade between Member States.
Komisija ob upoštevanju zgornjih pojasnil meni, da ukrepa v korist kmetijskih zadrug iz člena 1 kraljevega zakonodajnega odloka št. 10/2000, ki sta bila sprejeta po dvigu cen goriva, pomenita ugodnost za zadruge, ki jih drugi gospodarski subjekti ne morejo uživati in ki izkrivlja ali bi lahko izkrivljala konkurenco z dajanjem prednosti posameznim podjetjem ali proizvodnji posameznega blaga, ker lahko prizadene trgovino med državami članicami.
Consequently, the Commission concludes that these measures fall within the scope of Article 107(1) of the TFEU.
Zato Komisija ugotavlja, da ta ukrepa spadata na področje uporabe člena 107(1) PDEU.