natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
However, unlike La Poste, France Télécom set aside accounting provisions in its accounts to meet its future liabilities in the absence of the reform, which means that the financial situations of each undertaking were objectively different.
V nasprotju s podjetjem La Poste pa je podjetje France Télécom v svoje računovodske izkaze vključilo računovodske rezervacije za kritje prihodnjih obveznosti, ne da bi bila sprejeta reforma, kar pomeni, da sta bili podjetji v zelo različnih finančnih položajih.
Likewise, the absence of reform for France Télécom and the continuation of the arrangements introduced by the 1990 Law would have been reflected in an increase in the retirement pension costs which would become significant from 2005-07 according to the forecasts of the time set out in recital 30, which is corroborated ex post by the results shown in Table 3.
Podobno bi nesprejetje reforme za podjetje France Télécom in nadaljnje izvajanje ureditve, sprejete z zakonom iz leta 1990, povzročila povečanje stroškov za pokojnine, ki naj bi bilo po takratnih napovedih, navedenih v uvodni izjavi 30, bistveno od obdobja 2005–2007, kar potrjujejo rezultati v preglednici 3 zgoraj.
At the time of the reform, the continuation of the arrangements established by the Law applicable to La Poste was reflected immediately in an additional annual cost of approximately EUR […] million for La Poste [68].
Vendar pa so se ob sprejetju reforme letni dodatni stroški podjetja La Poste zaradi nadaljnjega izvajanja ureditve, sprejete z zakonom, ki se uporablja za podjetje La Poste, takoj zvišali za […] milijonov EUR [68].
It has not therefore been established that the situation of the two undertakings under the effect of the law applicable before the respective reforms and, consequently, the competitive impact of these reforms, was similar.
Zato podobnost položajev teh dveh podjetij na podlagi veljavne zakonodaje pred sprejetjem zadevnih reform in posledično zaradi vpliva teh reform na konkurenco ni dokazana.
The facts point to the contrary.
Dejstva kažejo ravno nasprotno.
As a result, an examination coming to similar conclusions in both cases is not justified.
Iz tega sledi, da je pregled, katerega ugotovitve so bile v obeh primerih podobne, neupravičen.
Furthermore, in the case of the La Poste decision, there were sufficient reasons to consider that the exceptional flat-rate contribution could be reallocated in the future as an advance on the payment of the contributions linked to the adjusted competitively fair rate.
Poleg tega so v primeru odločbe o La Poste obstajali zadostni razlogi, da bi se lahko izredni pavšalni prispevek v prihodnosti obravnaval kot predplačilo prispevkov, povezanih s spremenjeno pravično in konkurenčno stopnjo.
Such reasons are lacking in the present case.
Ti razlogi v obravnavanem primeru ne obstajajo.
In fact, the condition imposing the reallocation of the exceptional contribution by La Poste was established after the Commission had initiated the formal investigation procedure, calling into question the underestimation of the contribution in full discharge of liabilities necessary to attain a competitively fair rate.
Dejansko je bil pogoj za drugačno obravnavo izrednega prispevka podjetja La Poste določen po tem, ko je Komisija začela formalni postopek preiskave, v okviru katerega je bil obravnavan podcenjen znesek odvezujočega prispevka, potrebnega za doseganje pravične in konkurenčne stopnje.
To a large extent, and even though the French authorities did not recognise it explicitly, the allocation of the exceptional flat-rate contribution in question in the La Poste decision was therefore the result of negotiations between the Commission and the Member State with a view to ensuring the payment of a contribution in full discharge of liabilities ensuring a competitively fair rate.
Čeprav francoski organi tega niso izrecno priznali, je bila torej dodelitev izrednega pavšalnega prispevka v odločbi o La Poste v veliki meri rezultat pogajanj med Komisijo in državo članico, katerih cilj je bil zagotoviti plačilo odvezujočega prispevka, s katerim bi se zagotovila pravična in konkurenčna stopnja.
In these negotiations, the starting point of the French authorities expressed in their notification of 23 June 2006, after the first contacts on the file in December 2005, was that the exceptional contribution for La Poste provided for was not necessary from the point of view of the level playing field, contrary to the envisaged draft reform of the annual contribution.
Izhodišče francoskih organov v teh pogajanjih, ki so ga izrazili v svojem obvestilu z dne 23. junija 2006, potem ko so bili s Komisijo prvič v stikih decembra 2005, je bilo, da izredni pavšalni prispevek, predviden za podjetje La Poste, z vidika konkurenčne pravičnosti ni potreben, kar je bilo v nasprotju s predlogom reforme glede predvidenega letnega prispevka.
In this way, the Commission decision did not confirm a reform which had entered into force, as France Télécom seems to maintain.
Na podlagi sklepa Komisije torej ne bi bilo mogoče potrditi veljavne reforme, kot naj bi trdilo podjetje France Télécom.
In fact, the notification and the decision to initiate the procedure of 12 October 2006 preceded the establishment of the amount of the exceptional contribution by Law No 2006-1771 of 30 December 2006 (Amending Finance Act 2006).
Obvestilo o priglasitvi in sklep o začetku postopka z dne 12. oktobra 2006 sta bila dejansko sprejeta pred določitvijo zneska izrednega prispevka z zakonom št. 2006-1771 z dne 30. decembra 2006 (dopolnilni finančni zakon za leto 2006).
These negotiations concerned several aspects of the reform and in particular, the taking into account of the advantage which the notified reform could have represented in the past, the scope of the contribution rate envisaged and the terms for taking into account the specific nature of the La Banque Postale in relation to the postal activities and the staff allocated.
Med navedenimi pogajanji je bilo obravnavanih več vidikov reforme, zlasti upoštevanje prednosti, ki bi jo lahko zagotovila reforma, priglašena v preteklosti, obseg izračuna predvidene stopnje prispevka ter načini za upoštevanje posebnih značilnosti poštne banke v zvezi s poštnimi storitvami in zadevnim osebjem.
These negotiations continued and it is only in their comments of 8 June 2007 that the French authorities accepted the terms of allocation of the exceptional contribution under an overall agreement relating to the reform, in this way going back on their position notified on the subject of the exceptional contribution and the method of calculating the future annual contributions.
Ta pogajanja so se nadaljevala, pri čemer so se francoski organi šele v svojih pripombah z dne 8. junija 2007 strinjali s pogoji za dodelitev izrednega prispevka v okviru splošnega dogovora o reformi, pri čemer so se sklicevali na stališče glede izrednega prispevka in načina za izračun letnih prispevkov v prihodnosti.
On the other hand, contrary to the provisions of the Finance Act 1997 setting up the public body managing the contribution of France Télécom, which provided for inflexible rules concerning the annual repayments to the State, the public body managing the contribution of La Poste did not have specific rules imposed on it [69].
Poleg tega v nasprotju z določbami finančnega zakona za leto 1997, s katerim je bil ustanovljen javni zavod za upravljanje prispevka podjetja France Télécom, pri čemer so te določbe določale stroga pravila v zvezi z letnimi vplačili v državni proračun, posebna pravila za javni zavod, ki upravlja prispevek podjetja La Poste [69], niso veljala.
Since it was an exceptional contribution to be paid and was not earmarked, the Commission was able to consider that the French Republic could have reduced the amount and at the same time increased the annual contribution rate of La Poste.
Ker je to izredni prispevek, ki ga je treba plačati, vendar njegova višina ni določena, je Komisija ocenila, da bi ga lahko Francoska republika znižala in hkrati zvišala stopnjo letnega prispevka podjetja La Poste.
Moreover, it must be noted that the terms of the 1996 Law define the parameters for the calculation of the annual contribution paid regularly to the State in return for the pensions of the civil service staff, without there being any question of taking into account the risks not common to civil servants and ordinary employees.
Prav tako je treba opozoriti, da zakon iz leta 1996 določa parametre za izračun letnega prispevka, ki se redno plačuje državi kot protidajatev za pokojnine javnih uslužbencev, pri čemer vprašanje upoštevanja tveganj, ki niso skupna javnim uslužbencem in osebam, zaposlenim v skladu z zasebnim pravom, ni pomembno.
In this respect, the Court and the Court of Justice specified, with regard to the business tax payable by France Télécom, that a reduction in charges could not be offset by a different specific charge, in particular where the Member State, the French Republic in this case, has failed to demonstrate that earlier charges were introduced in anticipation of a reduced tax burden in the future under different arrangements [70].
Kar zadeva davek od dohodka, ki ga mora plačati podjetje France Télécom, sta v zvezi s tem Splošno sodišče in Sodišče Evropske unije odločila, da zmanjšanja stroškov ni mogoče izravnati z naložitvijo druge posebne dajatve, zlasti če država članica, v tem primeru Francoska republika, ne dokaže, da so bili predhodni stroški določeni zaradi domnevno nižjih stroškov v prihodnosti na podlagi drugačne davčne ureditve [70].
The Commission cannot disregard the fact that the purpose of the specific flat-rate contribution already paid in 1997 was, as expressly established by Article 6 of the 1996 Law, to compensate the French State in part for the financial burden it was assuming on account of the 1996 Law.
Komisija ne more prezreti, da je bil poseben pavšalni prispevek, ki je bil že plačan v letu 1997 in je izrecno določen v členu 6 zakona iz leta 1996, namenjen delni nadomestitvi stroškov, ki jih je Francoska republika prevzela v skladu z zakonom iz leta 1996.
In addition, it is inferred from the content of the Senate report cited in recital 27 that, in adopting the principle of the exceptional contribution, the legislator did not seek to take into consideration, and still less to compensate for, the difference between the annual contributions of France Télécom and the relatively higher contributions of the competitors.
Poleg tega je iz vsebine poročila senata, povzete v uvodni izjavi 27, razvidno, da cilj zakonodajalca, ko je sprejel načelo izrednega prispevka, ni bil upoštevati razlike med letnimi prispevki podjetja France Télécom in prispevki njegovih konkurentov, ki so bili precej višji, še manj pa nadomestiti to razliko.
On the contrary, the legislator deliberately imposed on France Télécom the payment of annual costs not covering the risks which are not common to the two categories of staff (civil servant and non-civil servant) and did not establish a link between this choice and the levying of the exceptional contribution paid in 1997.
Nasprotno, zakonodajalec je namenoma določil, da mora podjetje France Télécom plačati letne stroške, ki ne krijejo tveganj, ki niso skupna obema kategorijama zaposlenih (javnim in drugim uslužbencem), pri čemer ni vzpostavljal povezave med to odločitvijo in odmero izrednega prispevka, plačanega v letu 1997.
The burden for France Télécom represented by the flat-rate contribution was paid as general revenue to the State budget, assigned to the public body responsible for its management and used.
Stroški podjetja France Télécom zaradi pavšalnega prispevka so bili v državni proračun vplačani kot splošni prihodek, ki je namenjen javnemu zavodu, odgovornemu za njegovo upravljanje, in se za to tudi porabi.
Under these circumstances, the Commission cannot therefore, in whole or in part, reallocate fictitiously and retrospectively the exceptional flat-rate contribution already used for a purpose totally divorced from that assigned to it by the French authorities and not provided for by the Law, i.e. compensation of not taking into account risks not common to ordinary employees and civil servants.
Komisija v teh okoliščinah izrednega pavšalnega prispevka, ki je že porabljen, ne more v celoti ali delno ter navidezno in naknadno dodeliti za cilj, ki se popolnoma razlikuje od cilja, ki so ga zanj določili francoski organi in ni predviden z zakonom, in sicer nadomestiti neupoštevanje tveganj, ki niso skupna osebam, zaposlenim v skladu z zasebnim pravom, in javnim uslužbencem.
This flat-rate contribution was not therefore introduced in anticipation of full equalisation, under different legislative and regulatory arrangements, of the annual charges of France Télécom with those of its competitors.
Ta pavšalni prispevek torej ni bil določen v pričakovanju popolne uskladitve različnih letnih stroškov podjetja France Télécom in njegovih konkurentov v okviru različne zakonodajne in regulativne ureditve.
For the same reasons, on account of the rules for the management and repayment to the budget provided for in the Finance Law since 1997 and implemented up to now, the allegations and calculations of the French Republic intended to show that the 1996 reform has ended now with considerable surplus revenue for the State cannot be accepted.
Iz istih razlogov ter na podlagi pravil o upravljanju in vplačilu v proračun, ki so predvidena v finančnem zakonu od leta 1997 in se še vedno izvajajo, ni mogoče sprejeti trditev in izračunov, s katerimi je želela Francoska republika dokazati, da je reforma iz leta 1996 povzročila precejšnji presežek prihodkov države.
In fact, taking into account the terms for the management and use of France Télécom’s exceptional flat-rate contribution by the competent public body, as laid down in a Finance Act and the figures for the actual repayments since 1997 forwarded by the French Republic, described in recitals 36 and 37 and in Table 3, it has to be concluded that the revenue which the French Republic tries to claim, with an investment producing interest at the rate of 7 %, has never existed.
Dejansko je treba ob upoštevanju pogojev upravljanja in uporabe izrednega pavšalnega prispevka podjetja France Télécom s strani pristojnega javnega zavoda, ki so določeni v finančnem zakonu, ter ob upoštevanju zneskov dejanskih vplačil od leta 1997, ki jih je zagotovila Francoska republika in so opisani v uvodnih izjavah 36 in 37 ter v preglednici 3, ugotoviti, da prihodki, na katere se sklicuje Francoska republika, skupaj s 7-odstotnimi obrestmi od naložb nikoli niso obstajali.
In addition, the allegation does not reflect the actual behaviour of the French authorities.
Poleg tega ta trditev ne odraža dejanskega ravnanja francoskih organov.
In view of the management rules established in the Finance Acts passed since it was set up, this public body has not generated such revenue, which for that matter was not foreseen and did not generate interest.
Zadevni javni zavod ob upoštevanju pravil o upravljanju iz finančnih zakonov, sprejetih po njegovi ustanovitvi, ni ustvarjal takih prihodkov, pri čemer ti prihodki niti niso bili predvideni niti niso ustvarjali obresti.
Also, taking into account higher revenue from corporation tax is unlawful, as it leads to confusion of the different roles of the State.
Poleg tega je vključitev dodatnih prihodkov iz naslova davka od dobička pravnih oseb nezakonita, saj bi to povzročilo prekrivanje različnih vlog države.
The combination of these different roles proposed by the French authorities cannot be accepted and a distinction should be maintained between on the one hand the State granting aid to France Télécom by financing the payment of the retirement pensions of the civil servants, in order to develop a merit-based competition process, and on the other hand, the State as shareholder of France Télécom and, ultimately, the State as a public authority exercising its power to raise taxes.
Prekrivanje teh različnih vlog, ki ga predlagajo francoski organi, ni izvedljivo, pri čemer je treba ohraniti razlikovanje med državo, ki je dodelila pomoč podjetju France Télécom, tako da je prevzela stroške pokojnin za javne uslužbence, da bi razvila konkurenčni postopek na podlagi zaslug, državo, ki je delničar podjetja France Télécom, in državo kot javni organ, ki izvaja svojo davčno pristojnost.
In addition, it should be noted that the application made by the French Republic and France Télécom to take into consideration the exceptional contribution when examining the compatibility of the reform is in contradiction with the comments the French Republic made in its letter of 17 March 2004, according to which ‘the exceptional flat-rate contribution provided for by Article 6 of the Law of 26 July 1996 could not therefore be seen as compensation for an alleged ‘advantage’. The analysis of its amount is all the less relevant in the light of the State aid rules’ since this amount was ‘an extraordinary contribution in favour of its sole shareholder [the French State], which can be assimilated to an extraordinary dividend distributed before any opening-up of the capital to private investors’.
Poleg tega je treba opozoriti, da je zahteva Francoske republike in podjetja France Télécom glede upoštevanja izrednega prispevka pri preučitvi združljivosti reforme v nasprotju s pripombami, ki jih je Francoska republika navedla v svojem dopisu z dne 17. marca 2004, da „izrednega pavšalnega prispevka iz člena 6 zakona z dne 26. julija 1996 torej ni mogoče obravnavati kot nadomestila za domnevno ‚korist‘. Analiza višine tega prispevka je nepomembna zlasti ob upoštevanju predpisov o državni pomoči“, ker gre za „izredni pavšalni prispevek, ki je namenjen edinemu delničarju podjetja (Francoski republiki) in ga je mogoče primerjati z izredno dividendo, izplačano pred kakršnim koli odprtjem kapitala za zasebne vlagatelje“.
The reasoning underlying the argument put forward at the time by the French Republic shows a certain economic and financial logic.
Obrazložitev argumenta, ki ga je takrat navedla Francoska republika, je z ekonomskega in finančnega vidika logična.
It is reasonable, for a sole shareholder, on the eve of the opening-up of the capital to other investors, to absorb, for its benefit alone and as far as possible, the funds available in the undertaking before the opening-up of the capital, provided that this does not compromise the attractiveness of the investment.
Tik pred odprtjem kapitala za druge vlagatelje je smiselno, da edini delničar v svojo lastno korist prevzame čim več sredstev, ki so v podjetju na voljo pred odprtjem kapitala, če to ne pomeni, da bi bila ogrožena privlačnost naložb.
The validity of this reasoning put forward at the time by the French Republic, which called for the analysis of the amount of the balance compensation of EUR 5,7 billion not to be taken into account in any way for the assessment of the reform in the light of the State aid rules, is also corroborated by its comments during the procedure.
Zdi se, da to obrazložitev Francoske republike, ki je zahtevala, da se analiza zneska doplačila v višini 5,7 milijarde EUR ne upošteva pri presoji reforme glede na pravila o državnih pomočeh, podpirajo tudi pripombe, ki jih je predložila v okviru postopka.
In fact, by declaring that the gauging of the amount of the balance compensation was undertaken in terms not of the estimated cost of the reform for the State or the advantages which France Télécom would draw, but of the contributive capacity of the undertaking, the French Republic points out that the imposition of a balance compensation would result more from the behaviour of a prudent single shareholder than that of a regulatory State concerned about the balance of the retirement pension costs it was assuming under the reform.
Francoska republika z navedbo, da znesek doplačila ni bil določen glede na ocenjeni strošek reforme za državo ali koristi, ki jih je pridobilo podjetje France Télécom, ampak glede na davčno sposobnost podjetja, dejansko izraža, da je uvedba doplačila posledica ravnanja edinega preudarnega delničarja, tj. države kot regulatorja, ki ga skrbi uravnoteženost stroškov pokojnin, prevzetih v skladu z reformo.
If such reasoning were to be accepted, the Commission should not, as requested at the time by the French Republic, take into account the exceptional flat-rate contribution in the analysis of the compatibility of the reform with the State aid rules.
Če bi bilo treba upoštevati tako obrazložitev, Komisija v skladu z zahtevami Francoske republike pri analizi združljivosti reforme s predpisi o državni pomoči ne bi smela upoštevati izrednega pavšalnega prispevka.
As a result, only the reduction in the annual contributions of France Télécom to below the level of those of the competitors, called for by the reform since 1997, should be taken into account.
Iz tega sledi, da bi bilo treba upoštevati samo znižanje letnih prispevkov podjetja France Télécom pod raven prispevkov njegovih konkurentov, kar je bil cilj reforme od leta 1997.
For the same reasons, the Commission cannot accept the complainants’ comments calling for the introduction of mechanisms to adjust the exceptional flat-rate contribution paid in 1997 and the annual employer’s contribution from France Télécom to ensure the financial neutrality of the reform.
Iz istih razlogov Komisija ne more upoštevati pripomb pritožnikov, ki so zahtevali vzpostavitev mehanizmov za prilagoditev izrednega pavšalnega prispevka, plačanega v letu 1997, in letnega prispevka delodajalca France Télécom, da se zagotovi finančna nevtralnost reforme.
On the other hand, it is worth examining whether the payment of the exceptional contribution can be taken into account in the assessment of the compatibility of the aid measure with the internal market by retaining the justification of this payment as established by the 1996 Law.
Nasprotno, preučiti je treba, ali bi bilo mogoče plačilo izrednega prispevka upoštevati pri ocenjevanju združljivosti ukrepa pomoči z notranjim trgom, pri čemer bi se ohranila upravičenost tega plačila, kot je določeno z zakonom iz leta 1996.
It is justified not to require from France Télécom the payment of an additional contribution ensuring a competitively fair rate for the period 1997-2010
Od podjetja France Télécom se upravičeno ne zahteva plačilo dodatnega prispevka, s katerim bi se zagotovila enakovredna in konkurenčna stopnja za obdobje 1997–2010:
Under the 1996 Law, the exceptional flat-rate contribution in 1997 was paid in return for the financing of the pensions by the French State.
V skladu z zakonom iz leta 1996 je bil izredni pavšalni prispevek v letu 1997 plačan kot protidajatev zaradi prevzema stroškov za pokojne s strani Francoske republike.
Under these conditions, the effects of its imposition on the overall financial equilibrium of the reform introduced by the 1996 Law as applied so far must be taken into consideration.
Pod temi pogoji je treba upoštevati učinek uvedbe tega prispevka na finančni rezultat celotne reforme, uvedene z zakonom iz leta 1996, ki se je uporabljala do zdaj.
It is appropriate to take into account the time during which the cost of the retirement pensions was covered by the exceptional flat-rate contribution.
Upoštevati je treba, koliko časa so se stroški pokojnin krili z izrednim pavšalnim prispevkom.
Since it is a matter of comparing financial flows for France Télécom spread over a period of time, i.e. the payment of the exceptional contribution in 1997 and the reduced annual charges resulting from the 1996 Law since then, discounting to present value is necessary.
Pri primerjavi finančnih tokov podjetja France Télécom v zadevnem obdobju, in sicer plačilo izrednega prispevka v letu 1997 in nižjih letnih stroškov, ki izhajajo iz zakona iz leta 1996, je treba zneske diskontirati.
During 1997, several exceptional contribution payments were staggered up to October 1997, even though the financing of this by the loan in fact postponed the financial burden for France Télécom.
V letu 1997 je bilo več plačil izrednega prispevka razporejenih do oktobra 1997, čeprav je bilo zaradi financiranja tega prispevka s posojili finančno breme za podjetje France Télécom dejansko preloženo na poznejše obdobje.