natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Finally, in legal terms, such a change does not appear to comply with Article 14(3)(b)(iv) of Directive 97/67/EC, the Chronopost judgment [42] or the 2005 SGEI Framework [43], which all require commercial activities to be charged an appropriate share of common costs.
Nazadnje, s pravnega vidika se taka sprememba ne zdi skladna s členom 14(3)(b)(iv) Direktive 97/67/ES, sodbo v združenih zadevah Chronopost [42] in okvirom o SSGP iz leta 2005 [43], saj se na podlagi vseh navedenih določb zahteva, da se skupni stroški ustrezno dodelijo komercialnim dejavnostim.
Consequently, the Commission will not rely in its assessment on the modified accounts, but will instead use the cost accounting data validated, in accordance with Directive 97/67/EC, by the Belgian institute of postal and telecoms services (IBPT/BIPT, the Belgian postal regulator [44]), which were submitted previously and are based on the cost accounting method officially used by DPLP.
Komisija pri oceni torej ne bo upoštevala spremenjenih računov, temveč se bo oprla na predhodno predložene potrjene podatke stroškovnega računovodstva, ki jih je v skladu z Direktivo 97/67/ES potrdil Institut belge des services postaux et des télécommunications (regulativni organ za belgijski poštni sektor, v nadaljnjem besedilu: organ IBPT [44]) in temeljijo na metodi stroškovnega računovodstva, ki jo uradno uporablja podjetje DPLP.
ASSESSMENT OF THE PENSION RELIEF
OCENA PREVZEMA PLAČEVANJA POKOJNIN
Existence of aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU
Obstoj pomoči v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU
Article 107(1) TFEU states: ‘Save as otherwise provided in the Treaties, 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 je, „[r]azen če Pogodbi ne določata drugače, […] 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“.
In order to constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU, four cumulative conditions must be met. The measure must:
Da se ukrep šteje za državno pomoč v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU, morajo biti izpolnjeni štirje kumulativni pogoji, to je ukrep:
confer an advantage on the beneficiary;
daje prednost upravičencu;
distort or threaten to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings;
izkrivlja konkurenco ali bi jo lahko izkrivljal z dajanjem prednosti nekaterim podjetjem;
be taken by the State or involve State resources;
je državni poseg ali se financira iz državnih sredstev;
be capable of affecting trade between Member States.
lahko prizadene trgovino med državami članicami.
Advantage and selectivity
Prednost in selektivnost
Following the approach adopted in the Combus judgment [45], the Belgian authorities claim that the pension liabilities constituted an abnormal burden, which competitors were not required to finance and, therefore, the relief from the State does not constitute aid.
Belgijski organi so na podlagi pristopa iz sodbe v zadevi Combus [45] menili, da so pokojninske obveznosti izredno breme, ki naj ga konkurentom ne bi bilo treba financirati, zato dejstvo, da je njihovo plačevanje prevzela država, ni pomoč.
Their main argument is that, because of the rigidities of the status of statutory personnel, it was not possible for DPLP to reduce the share of this category of personnel among its workforce even though it was much more costly than a hypothetical workforce consisting of employees with less favourable contracts.
Pri tem so večinoma trdili, da podjetje DPLP zaradi neprožnosti statuta stalnih uslužbencev ni moglo zmanjšati deleža te kategorije zaposlenih, čeprav je zanj veliko dražja, kot bi bili hipotetični zaposleni, s katerimi bi sklenilo pogodbe z manj ugodnostmi.
In general, it should first be recalled that the Combus judgment has not been confirmed by the Court of Justice.
Najprej je treba na splošno opozoriti, da Sodišče ni potrdilo sodbe v zadevi Combus.
On the contrary, the Court’s case law contradicts the assumption that compensation for a structural disadvantage would rule out any classification as aid.
Nasprotno, sodna praksa Sodišča nasprotuje domnevi, da naj bi nadomestilo strukturne pomanjkljivosti izključilo vsako opredelitev za pomoč.
For instance, the Court has consistently ruled that the existence of aid is to be assessed in relation to the effects and not the causes or objectives of state intervention [46].
Iz ustaljene sodne prakse Sodišča torej izhaja, da je treba o obstoju pomoči presojati na podlagi učinkov in ne vzrokov ali ciljev državnega posega [46].
It has also maintained that the concept of aid covers advantages granted by the public authorities that, in various forms, mitigate the charges normally included in the budget of an undertaking [47].
Sodišče je še odločilo, da pojem pomoči vključuje prednosti, ki jih podeljujejo državni organi in zaradi katerih se v različnih oblikah zmanjšajo redna bremena za proračun podjetja [47].
It has also indicated that the costs linked to employee pay naturally place a burden on the budgets of undertakings, irrespective of whether or not those costs stem from legal obligations or collective agreements [48].
Sodišče je poleg tega še navedlo, da stroški, povezani s plačilom zaposlenih, že po naravi bremenijo proračun podjetij, in sicer ne glede na to, ali ti stroški izhajajo iz zakonskih obveznosti ali kolektivnih sporazumov [48].
In this connection, it has ruled that State measures aimed at compensating for additional costs cannot exclude them from being qualified as aid [49].
V zvezi s tem je menilo, da samo dejstvo, da je namen državnih ukrepov nadomestiti dodatne stroške, še ne pomeni, da zadevnih ukrepov ni mogoče opredeliti kot pomoč [49].
In addition, it can be observed that the competitive background in which Combus was operating differed from that of DPLP.
Poleg tega lahko ugotovimo, da se konkurenčni okvir iz zadeve Combus razlikuje od konkurenčnega okvira podjetja DPLP.
Combus had to conduct its transport business on a commercial basis and operate under market conditions of competition comparable to those for private bus companies.
Podjetje Combus je moralo svojo prevozno dejavnost opravljati na komercialni podlagi in je delovalo na trgu pod konkurenčnimi pogoji, primerljivimi s tistimi, pod katerimi so delovale zasebne avtobusne družbe.
After a tendering procedure, public transport companies divest their bus transport operations to private and public undertakings.
Družbe za javni prevoz ob koncu razpisnega postopka svojo dejavnost avtobusnega prevoza prepustijo zasebnim in javnim podjetjem.
Under the tendering rules, the contracts are awarded to the ‘economically most advantageous bid’, irrespective of the private or public nature of the tenderer.
V skladu s pravili naročanja je za naročilo izbrana „ekonomsko najugodnejša ponudba“, pri čemer ni pomembno, ali je ponudnik javni ali zasebni subjekt.
For the whole period under assessment, DPLP had a wide-ranging monopoly, in which economic constraints operated completely differently.
Podjetje DPLP je imelo vse obdobje, na katero se nanaša ocena, obsežen monopol, zato so se ekonomski pritiski izvajali popolnoma drugače.
In addition, unlike in Combus, in the present case Belgium has not adopted any legislative provision aimed at abolishing or adapting the special employment arrangements for civil servants working for DPLP or the way in which they acquire pension rights.
Poleg tega Belgija v obravnavani zadevi – v nasprotju z zadevo Combus – ni sprejela nobene zakonske določbe za odpravo ali prilagoditev posebnega sistema zaposlovanja, ki se uporablja za javne uslužbence, zaposlene pri podjetju DPLP, ali načina, kako pridobijo pokojninske pravice.
Therefore, the Commission considers that the factual differences between the Combus case and the case at issue justify a different conclusion in the present case.
Zato Komisija meni, da je mogoče z razlikami v dejanskem stanju med zadevo Combus in obravnavano zadevo utemeljiti drugačen sklep v tej zadevi.
In order to ascertain whether the measures under scrutiny contain elements of State aid, it needs to be determined whether they confer an economic advantage on DPLP in that they allow it to avoid costs that would normally have had to be borne by its own financial resources and have thus prevented market forces from producing their normal effect.
Da bi presodili, ali zadevni ukrepi vsebujejo sestavine državne pomoči, je treba ugotoviti, ali ti ukrepi dajejo podjetju DPLP gospodarsko prednost s tem, da mu omogočajo izogibanje plačevanju stroškov, ki bi navadno morali bremeniti lastna finančna sredstva podjetja, in ali so tako preprečili, da bi prisotne tržne sile prišle do polnega izraza.
Aid consists in the mitigation of charges normally included in an undertaking’s budget, taking account of the nature or general scheme of the system of charges in question.
Pomoč pomeni razbremenitev stroškov, ki navadno bremenijo proračun podjetja, upoštevajoč naravo ali organizacijo zadevnega stroškovnega sistema.
Conversely, it could potentially be possible to define a concept of ‘special charge’, which would consist in an additional charge over and above those normal charges.
Nasprotno bi lahko pojem „izredno breme“ opredelili kot dodatno breme v primerjavi z rednimi bremeni.
The withdrawal of such a special charge by way of a legislative provision would not grant any advantage to the beneficiary and would not, therefore, constitute State aid.
Odprava takega izrednega bremena z zakonsko določbo naj upravičencu ne bi dajala prednosti in torej ne bi pomenila državne pomoči.
In line with the Court’s case law on selectivity analysis, which involves a comparison with a reference framework in order to determine whether or not differential treatment of certain undertakings and products is in conformity with the ‘nature or general scheme of the system’, the question as to whether a charge is ‘normal’ or ‘special’ in what is, from a structural viewpoint, a normal market situation has to be based on a reference framework or comparator with a view to identifying undertakings which would be in a legal and factual situation that is comparable in the light of the objective pursued by the measures in question.
Po zgledu sodne prakse Sodišča pri analizi selektivnosti, ki vključuje primerjavo z referenčnim okvirom za ugotovitev skladnosti ali neskladnosti z „naravo in organizacijo sistema“ različnega obravnavanja nekaterih podjetij ali proizvodenj, pri običajnem položaju na trgu v strukturnem pogledu opredelitev „rednega“ ali „izrednega“ bremena vključuje opredelitev referenčnega okvira ali primerjave s ciljem, da se odkrijejo podjetja v primerljivem pravnem in dejanskem položaju z vidika cilja, ki naj bi ga dosegli z zadevnimi ukrepi.
However, it does not appear possible to identify an exogenous comparator that would make it possible to define a ‘normal’ contribution for undertakings in a legal and factual situation comparable to that of DPLP in the light of the objective pursued by the measure under review.
Vendar se zdi, da ni mogoče opredeliti nobene zunanje primerjave, na podlagi katere bi lahko določili „redni“ prispevek, ki ga nosijo podjetja v pravnem in dejanskem položaju, ki je z vidika cilja, zastavljenega z zadevnim ukrepom, primerljiv s položajem podjetja DPLP.
In particular DPLP’s competitors are private-law companies operating on competitive markets, whereas DPLP benefited from a statutory monopoly during the period under assessment before full liberalisation in 2011.
Konkurenti podjetja DPLP so zlasti podjetja zasebnega prava, ki svoje dejavnosti opravljajo na konkurenčnih trgih, medtem ko je bil podjetju DPLP v obdobju, na katero se nanaša ocena, z zakonom zagotovljen monopol, saj je bila liberalizacija končana šele leta 2011.
In determining the existence of an advantage within the meaning of Article 107(1) of the Treaty, the Commission should, therefore, examine DPLP’s situation and compare social security contributions before and after the pension relief.
Da bi Komisija ugotovila, ali obstaja prednost v smislu člena 107(1) Pogodbe, mora preučiti položaj podjetja DPLP in primerjati prispevke za socialno varnost pred prevzemom plačevanja pokojnin in po njem.
Following the law of 6 July 1971 and until the pension reform of 1997, DPLP bore all pension costs and social liabilities for its civil servant employees.
Podjetje DPLP je od sprejetja zakona z dne 6. julija 1971 do pokojninske reforme leta 1997 nosilo vse stroške pokojnin in prispevkov za socialno varnost svojih javnih uslužbencev.
In these circumstances, the Commission takes the view that these costs are part of the normal costs DPLP had to meet from its own resources, taking into consideration its legal and factual position in the Belgian postal market.
Komisija glede na to meni, da so ti stroški redni izdatki, ki jih je moralo podjetje DPLP glede na svoj pravni in dejanski položaj na belgijskem poštnem trgu financirati iz lastnih sredstev.
Since the 1997 pension relief under review relieved DPLP of costs that would normally have had to be financed from its own financial resources, the measures in question confer on the operator an advantage within the meaning of Article 107(1) of the Treaty.
Ker je bilo podjetju DPLP s prevzemom plačevanja pokojnin leta 1997, ki se preiskuje, omogočeno, da ni več nosilo stroškov, ki bi jih običajno moralo financirati iz lastnih sredstev, je ta operater z zadevnimi ukrepi pridobil prednost v smislu člena 107(1) Pogodbe.
The advantage in question is selective since it concerns only DPLP.
Obravnavana prednost je selektivna, saj je bila podeljena samo podjetju DPLP.
The pension relief was financed by the State, which took over DPLP’s pension responsibilities.
Prevzem plačevanja pokojnin je financirala država, ki je prevzela pristojnosti podjetja DPLP v zvezi s pokojninami.
Since the State pays the pension of DPLP retired personnel directly from the State budget, State resources are clearly involved.
Ker država pokojnine upokojenih uslužbencev podjetja DPLP plačuje neposredno iz lastnega proračuna, je očitno, da se za to porabljajo državna sredstva.
Distortion of competition and effect on trade between Member States
Izkrivljanje konkurence in prizadetost trgovine med državami članicami
The measures described above are capable of affecting trade between Member States, given that DPLP operates in markets that are open to competition, such as parcel services, and where there is significant cross-border trading.
Zgoraj navedeni ukrepi lahko prizadenejo trgovino med državami članicami, saj podjetje DPLP deluje na trgih, odprtih za konkurenco, kot so storitve dostave paketov, za katere je značilna obsežna čezmejna trgovina.
In the parcel market DPLP faces competition from undertakings with activities in other Member States, such as UPS, FedEx and TNT Express.
Na trgu paketov se srečuje s konkurenco podjetij, ki opravljajo dejavnosti v drugih državah članicah, kot so podjetja UPS, FedEx ali TNT Express.
DPLP also operates in the press distribution market, a market in which companies from other Member States are active or can become active.
Podjetje DPLP opravlja tudi dejavnosti na trgu dostave tiska, na katerem delujejo ali bi lahko delovala podjetja iz drugih držav članic.
Parcel distribution has never been entirely reserved for DPLP, and other undertakings already provided some parcel delivery services [50] and other specific postal services at the beginning of the 1990s [51].
Dostava paketov ni bila nikoli v izključni pristojnosti podjetja DPLP, saj so v začetku 90. let prejšnjega stoletja tudi druga podjetja že ponujala nekatere storitve dostave paketov [50] ali drugih posebnih poštnih storitev [51].
DPLP is also active in the financial services sector (post office current and savings accounts and payment services), where it competes with operators offering financial products, such as banks and financial operators.
Podjetje DPLP je poleg tega navzoče tudi na trgu finančnih sektorjev (poštni tekoči računi, varčevalni računi in plačilne storitve), na katerih se srečuje s konkurenco operaterjev, kot so banke in finančni operaterji, ki ponujajo finančne produkte.
The post office current and savings accounts, which are used for both payment and savings purposes, are in competition with bank current accounts and savings products.
Poštni tekoči in varčevalni računi, ki se uporabljajo za plačevanje in varčevanje, konkurirajo bančnim tekočim in varčevalnim računom.
The banking sector was already open to competition before 1992 and has been characterised by extensive trade between Member States.
Bančni sektor je bil za konkurenco odprt že pred letom 1992, zanj pa je bila značilna obsežna trgovina med državami članicami.
Banks from different Member States were already operating in Belgium before 1992, when there were more than 70 foreign financial institutions in the country [52].
Banke iz različnih držav članic so v Belgiji odprle poslovalnice že pred letom 1992: takrat je bilo namreč na ozemlju te države več kot 70 tujih finančnih ustanov [52].
In the light of the foregoing it is clear that any State measure conferring on DPLP an economic advantage may affect trade between Member States.
Na podlagi navedenega je očitno, da bi lahko kakršen koli državni ukrep, s katerim bi podjetje DPLP pridobilo gospodarsko prednost, prizadel trgovino med državami članicami.
For the reasons explained in recitals 141 to 157, the Commission considers that the pension relief constitutes aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU.
Komisija iz razlogov, navedenih v uvodnih izjavah od 141 do 157, meni, da je prevzem plačevanja pokojnin pomoč v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU.
Assessment of the compatibility of pension relief with the internal market within the meaning of Article 107(3)(c)
Ocena združljivosti prevzema plačevanja pokojnin z notranjim trgom v smislu člena 107(3)(c)
Under the 1997 pension reform DPLP’s refund to the State of annual net pension costs was replaced by a contribution in full discharge of liabilities aligning the pension costs borne by DPLP with those of its competitors.
Odvezujoči prispevek, s katerim so bili stroški za pokojnine, ki jih je plačevalo podjetje DPLP, usklajeni s stroški, ki jih za to plačujejo njegovi konkurenti, je v okviru pokojninske reforme iz leta 1997 nadomestil vračilo letnih neto stroškov za pokojnine, ki ga je podjetje DPLP izplačevalo državi.
Without this reform, the level of these pension costs would, in the subsequent years, have continued to rise significantly, notably as a result of the deterioration in the ratio of civil servants in work (contributors) to those not in work (recipients) following DPLP’s decision to halt recruitment of civil servants.
Brez te reforme bi se raven stroškov za pokojnine v naslednjih letih še naprej občutno višala, zlasti zaradi vse neugodnejšega razmerja med aktivnimi (plačniki) in neaktivnimi javnimi uslužbenci (upravičenci), potem ko se je podjetje DPLP odločilo, da ne bo več zaposlovalo te kategorije uslužbencev.
As the derogations provided for in Articles 107(2) and 107(3)(a)(b) TFEU clearly do not apply and as Belgium has not invoked Article 106(2) TFEU as justification for the compatibility of the pension relief granted to DPLP, the Commission will examine whether the pension relief can be declared compatible pursuant to Article 107(3)(c) TFEU, which states that aid to facilitate the development of certain economic activities or of certain economic areas may be declared compatible with the common market where it does not adversely affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest.
Ker je očitno, da se odstopanja iz člena 107(2) ter člena 107(3)(a) in (b) PDEU ne uporabljajo, in ker se Belgija v zvezi z združljivostjo prevzema plačevanja pokojnin podjetja DPLP ni sklicevala na člen 106(2) PDEU, bo Komisija preučila, ali je mogoče ta prevzem obravnavati kot združljiv na podlagi člena 107(3)(c) PDEU, ki določa, da se lahko pomoč za pospeševanje razvoja določenih gospodarskih dejavnosti ali določenih gospodarskih območij šteje za združljivo z notranjim trgom, kadar taka pomoč ne spreminja trgovinskih pogojev v obsegu, ki bi bil v nasprotju s skupnimi interesi.
The Commission will first analyse the extent to which the relief of the full pension cost fulfils an objective of common interest and is necessary to that end before investigating its proportionality and carrying out a balancing test of the positive and negative effects of the measure.
Komisija bo najprej preučila, v kakšnem obsegu prevzem plačevanja vseh stroškov, povezanih s pokojninami, izpolnjuje cilj v skupnem interesu in v kakšnem obsegu je za to potreben, nato pa bo preučila še sorazmernost tega ukrepa ter pretehtala pozitivne in negativne učinke pomoči.
Liberalisation of the postal sector as an objective of common interest
Liberalizacija poštnega sektorja je cilj v skupnem interesu
EU law has promoted even greater liberalisation of the postal sector since 1992 with the adoption of the green paper, which later led to the adoption of the three directives: (i) Directive 97/67/EC, (ii) Directive 2002/39/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 June 2002 amending Directive 97/67/EC with regard to the further opening to competition of Community postal services [53], and (iii) Directive 2008/6/EC.
Pravo Unije je od leta 1992 spodbujalo vse obsežnejšo liberalizacijo poštnega sektorja, in sicer s sprejetjem zelene knjige, na podlagi katere so bile nato sprejete tri direktive: (i) Direktiva 97/67/ES, (ii) Direktiva Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta 2002/39/ES z dne 10. junija 2002 o spremembah Direktive 97/67/ES glede nadaljnjega odpiranja trgov poštnih storitev v Skupnosti konkurenci [53] in (iii) Direktiva 2008/6/ES.
It is also acknowledged that the liberalisation of postal markets at EU level has an important role to play in the Lisbon strategy for growth and employment.
Priznava se tudi, da ima liberalizacija poštnih trgov na ravni EU pomembno vlogo v okviru lizbonske strategije za rast in zaposlovanje.
Therefore, it is important, besides safeguarding the provision of basic postal services as reflected in the concept of the universal service obligation, to create a level playing field between the incumbent, existing competitors and new entrants.
Torej je treba poleg zagotavljanja osnovnih poštnih storitev, kot izhajajo iz pojma obveznosti univerzalne storitve, vzpostaviti tudi enotne konkurenčne pogoje za tradicionalnega operaterja, obstoječe konkurente in nove udeležence na trgu.
In the La Poste (France) Decision, the Commission already recognised that creating a level playing field between the incumbent and its competitors with regard to social contributions is a key condition for fair competition in the postal sector.
Komisija je že v odločbi v zvezi s francoskim podjetjem La Poste priznala, da je vzpostavitev enakih pogojev, kar zadeva prispevke za socialno varnost, za tradicionalnega operaterja in njegove konkurente ključni pogoj za zagotovitev enakih konkurenčnih pogojev v poštnem sektorju.
The Commission declared the relief of the obligations imposed on La Poste to finance its civil servants’ pensions compatible with the internal market because the public subsidies guaranteed an equal rate of social contributions by La Poste and its competitors.
Menila je, da je bil prevzem plačevanja obveznosti financiranja pokojnin francoskega podjetja La Poste združljiv z notranjim trgom, saj je bila z državnimi subvencijami zagotovljena enaka stopnja prispevkov za socialno varnost za francosko podjetje La Poste in njegove konkurente.
The Commission intends to apply the same logic in the present case as it applied in chapter 6.3 of that Decision, which must be considered applicable in the present case in so far as it is relevant.
Komisija bo v obravnavani zadevi uporabila enak pristop kot v poglavju 6.3 navedene odločbe, ki jo je treba – če je to primerno – upoštevati v tej zadevi.