natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The aid measure is envisaged to benefit mainly agricultural producers, processors and distributors as final beneficiaries.
Glavni končni prejemniki zadevnega ukrepa pomoči so proizvajalci, predelovalci in distributerji kmetijskih proizvodov.
It is provided for that certain activities can be carried out by private companies on behalf of distributors.
Določeno je, da lahko nekatere dejavnosti za račun slednjih izvajajo zasebna podjetja.
This Decision is without prejudice to the Commission’s position regarding the compatibility of the selection procedure for the service providers that Interbev has chosen to carry out its activities with public procurement rules.
Ta sklep ne vpliva na stališče Komisije v zvezi z združljivostjo postopka izbire ponudnikov storitev, ki jim je zaupano izvajanje dejavnosti združenja Interbev, s pravili o oddaji javnih naročil.
GROUNDS FOR INITIATING THE PROCEDURE [9]
RAZLOGI ZA ZAČETEK POSTOPKA [9]
Firstly, the Commission noted that these levies were made compulsory by the French government under an extension procedure for inter-branch agreements.
Komisija je najprej v zvezi z naravo prispevkov v obravnavanem primeru ugotovila, da jih je francoska vlada določila kot obvezne v okviru postopka za razširitev medpanožnih sporazumov.
The agreements are extended by means of decrees published in the French Official Journal.
Sporazumi so bili razširjeni s sprejetjem odloka, ki je bil objavljen v Uradnem listu Francoske republike.
It follows that this type of contribution therefore requires an official act in order to take full effect.
Iz tega izhaja, da je bil za te prispevke potreben akt javnega organa, da bili v celoti učinkoviti.
Consequently, when the procedure was initiated the Commission regarded the levies as parafiscal charges, i.e. public resources and therefore illegal aid as notification had not been given.
Komisija je zato ob uvedbi postopka preiskave menila, da gre v tem primeru za davku podobne dajatve, se pravi javna sredstva, in da so te pomoči nezakonite, ker niso bile priglašene.
According to point 194 of the Community’s guidelines for State aid in the agriculture and forestry sector 2007 to 2013 [10] (hereinafter: the agricultural guidelines), any unlawful aid must be evaluated in accordance with the rules and guidelines in force at the time the aid is granted.
V skladu s točko 194 Smernic Skupnosti o državni pomoči v kmetijskem in gozdarskem sektorju 2007–2013 [10] (v nadaljnjem besedilu: kmetijske smernice) je treba vsako nezakonito pomoč oceniti v skladu s pravili in smernicami, ki veljajo ob dodelitvi pomoči.
Since this is State aid funded by means of parafiscal charges, the measures funded by this aid and the funding of the aid itself must be assessed by the Commission.
Kar zadeva državne pomoči, financirane z davkom podobno dajatvijo, mora Komisija preučiti ukrepe, financirane s pomočmi, in tudi financiranje samih pomoči.
THE AID MEASURES
POMOČI
Promotion measures
Promocijski ukrepi
The Commission has recalled that the compatibility of the aid granted before 1 January 2002 must be assessed in the light of the rules on State aid for advertising of agricultural products and certain products not covered by Annex II to the EEC Treaty [12] and that the compatibility of aid granted after that date must be assessed in the light of the Community guidelines applicable to State aid for advertising of products listed in Annex I to the EC Treaty and of certain non-Annex I [13] products.
Komisija je opozorila, da je treba združljivost pomoči, dodeljenih pred 1. januarjem 2002, preveriti z vidika Okvira o nacionalni pomoči za oglaševanje kmetijskih proizvodov in nekaterih proizvodov, ki niso zajeti v Prilogi II k Pogodbi EGS [12], in da je treba združljivost pomoči, dodeljenih po tem datumu, preveriti z vidika Smernic Skupnosti o državni pomoči za oglaševanje proizvodov iz Priloge I k Pogodbi ES in nekaterih proizvodov, ki niso zajeti v Prilogi I [13].
Essentially, those two texts are based on the same principles in that they lay down negative and positive criteria to be met.
Obe besedili v bistvu vsebujeta enaka načela ter med drugim določata negativna in pozitivna merila, ki jih je treba upoštevati.
As regards the ceiling on the aid, the sector must fund at least 50 % of the cost of these measures.
Kar zadeva zgornjo mejo pomoči, mora sektor te ukrepe financirati v višini najmanj 50 % stroškov.
In this case, the measures are funded entirely out of parafiscal charges and by definition the levy paid by operators in the sector reaches that level.
V obravnavanem primeru so se ukrepi v celoti financirali z davkom podobnimi dajatvami, finančni prispevek akterjev v tem sektorju pa po definiciji dosega to raven.
Therefore when the Commission initiated the procedure, it considered that the conditions had been met.
Komisija je tako ob uvedbi postopka preiskave menila, da so bili veljavni pogoji upoštevani.
Technical assistance measures
Ukrepi tehnične pomoči
The Commission has recalled that the compatibility of the aid granted before 1 January 2000 must be assessed in the light of Commission practice based on the proposal for the appropriate measures relating to aids granted by Member States in the livestock and livestock products sector [14] and, in the case of aid granted after that date, in the light of the agricultural guidelines.
Komisija je opozorila, da je treba združljivost pomoči, dodeljenih pred 1. januarjem 2000, preveriti z vidika prakse Komisije, ki temelji na predlogu primernih ukrepov v zvezi s pomočmi, ki jih države članice dodelijo v sektorju živinoreje in živinorejskih proizvodov [14], ter da je treba združljivost pomoči, dodeljenih po tem datumu, preveriti z vidika kmetijskih smernic.
Essentially, Commission practice prior to 2000 and the agricultural guidelines are based on the same principles.
Praksa Komisije, ki se je uporabljala pred letom 2000, in kmetijske smernice v bistvu vsebujejo enaka načela.
Thus, aid covering 100 % of eligible expenditure is authorised for this type of aid.
Tako so za tovrstne pomoči dovoljene pomoči, dodeljene v višini 100 % upravičenih izdatkov.
Also, the aid must be accessible to all potentially interested operators in the sector.
Poleg tega morajo biti pomoči dostopne vsem morebiti zainteresiranim akterjem v sektorju.
Therefore the Commission considered that the conditions have been met.
Komisija je tako ob uvedbi postopka preiskave menila, da so bili veljavni pogoji upoštevani.
Research and experimentation measures
Ukrepi raziskav in poizkusov
The Commission has recalled that the compatibility of this aid must be assessed in the light of the Community framework for State aid for research and development [15] and the Commission communication amending that framework [16].
Komisija je opozorila, da je treba združljivost teh pomoči preveriti z vidika Okvira Skupnosti za državno pomoč za raziskave in razvoj [15] in Sporočila Komisije o spremembi navedenega okvira [16].
Thus, aid intensities of up to 100 % are compatible with the common market provided that the four conditions laid down in the framework are met: the aid must be of general interest to the sector, the information must be published in the appropriate journals, the research findings must be made available on an equal basis in terms of both cost and time, and the aid must meet the international trade criteria to which the EU has committed itself.
Tako je s skupnim trgom združljiva stopnja pomoči, ki lahko doseže 100 %, če so izpolnjeni naslednji štirje pogoji: pomoč je v splošnem interesu sektorja; obvestilo je objavljeno v ustreznih časopisih; rezultati dela so predloženi na enaki podlagi v smislu stroškov in časa; pomoč izpolnjuje mednarodna trgovinska merila, ki se jim je EU zavezala.
Measures funded by the FNE levy
Ukrepi, financirani s prispevkom FNE
The Commission was unsure about the precise nature of the measures funded by the FNE levy, the aim of which is to provide an incentive for organisations to restructure and promote their adjustment to the future needs of livestock farmers, as well as to contribute to the continued development of genetic resources and applied research.
Komisija se je vprašala o pravi naravi ukrepov, financiranih s prispevkom FNE, katerega namen je bil spodbuditi storitvene organizacije k prestrukturiranju in podpirati njihovo prilagoditev prihodnjim potrebam živinorejcev ter prispevati k trajnosti skupnih sredstev na področju ustvarjanja genetskega napredka in aplikativnih raziskav.
This information is not sufficient to allow the Commission to conclude whether or not the measures are compatible with any Community provisions that may apply.
Ti podatki niso zadostovali, da bi Komisija lahko ugotovila združljivost teh ukrepov z morebiti veljavnimi določbami Skupnosti.
Therefore at this stage the Commission is unable to arrive at a conclusion as to whether the measures funded by the FNE levy are compatible with the EC Treaty [17].
Komisija torej ob uvedbi postopka preiskave ni mogla ugotoviti, da so ukrepi, ki se financirajo s prispevkom FNE, združljivi s pogodbo ES [17].
FUNDING OF THE AID
FINANCIRANJE POMOČI
From 1 January 1996 this levy is imposed on, inter alia, live bovine animals and sheep dispatched to other Member States and bovine meat and sheep products dispatched to other Member States, although a partial refund of the levy was introduced in 2001 for the latter.
Od 1. januarja 1996 se prispevek med drugim plačuje za žive živali iz vrst goveda in ovac, odpremljene v druge države članice, ter proizvode iz govejega in ovčjega mesa, odpremljene v druge države članice, čeprav je bilo za zadnje leta 2001 uvedeno delno povračilo tega prispevka.
According to a ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union (hereinafter: the Court of Justice) [18], a charge constitutes a breach of the prohibition of discrimination laid down by Article 110 TFEU if the advantages accrued, from the use of the revenue generated by the charge, particularly benefit the taxed national products, which are processed and marketed on the national market, by partially offsetting the burden borne by these products and placing exported national products at a disadvantage.
V skladu s sodbo Sodišča Evropske unije (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Sodišče) [18] je treba za davek šteti, da pomeni kršitev prepovedi diskriminacije, določene v členu 110 PDEU, če ugodnosti, ki jih prinese dodelitev dohodkov od obdavčenja, koristijo predvsem tistim obdavčenim nacionalnim proizvodom, ki se predelajo ali tržijo na nacionalnem trgu, tako da deloma nadomestijo breme, ki ga nosijo ti proizvodi, in s tem v manj ugoden položaj postavijo izvožene nacionalne proizvode.
At the investigation stage of the procedure, the Commission considered that the advantage accrued from imposing the charge on products and animals dispatched to other Member States to finance the promotion, technical assistance, research and experimentation measures carried out by Interbev could be incompatible with the internal market under the Treaty and particularly Article 107, and that the State aid so financed could be incompatible with the Treaty.
Komisija je v fazi postopka preiskave menila, da prihodki od dajatve za proizvode in žive živali, odpremljene v druge države članice, namenjene financiranju promocijskih ukrepov, ukrepov tehnične pomoči ter raziskav in poizkusov, ki jih izvaja združenje Interbev, lahko pomenijo financiranje pomoči, nezdružljivo z notranjim trgom glede na Pogodbo in zlasti člen 107 Pogodbe, in da so bile torej tako financirane državne pomoči nezdružljive z navedeno pogodbo.
The charge could disadvantage the production of these animals as regards their exportation to other Member States because the allocation of the revenue was, by its very nature, likely to encourage national production marketed in France to the detriment of exported national production, and the level of the charge did not take into account differences in profit generated by national products depending on whether they are marketed internally or externally.
Z dajatvijo je bila namreč lahko v slabši položaj postavljena proizvodnja teh živali za njihov izvoz v druge države članice, ker se je lahko z dodelitvijo prihodkov po njeni naravi prednost dajala nacionalni proizvodnji, trženi v Franciji, v škodo izvožene nacionalne proizvodnje in ker v višini dajatve niso bili upoštevani različni dobički, ki so bili ustvarjeni z nacionalnimi proizvodi zaradi trženja v Franciji ali zunaj nje.
On the basis of the information available at this stage, the Commission did not have reason to believe that this levy had been imposed on animals imported from or dispatched to other Member States.
Na podlagi informacij, ki so bile na voljo ob uvedbi postopka preiskave, Komisija v fazi postopka preiskave ni imela podatkov, iz katerih bi bilo razvidno, da se je ta prispevek plačeval za uvožene živali ali živali, odpremljene v druge države članice.
COMPATIBILITY OF COMPULSORY LEVIES WITH THE SYSTEM OF COMMON ORGANISATION OF MARKETS
ZDRUŽLJIVOST OBVEZNIH PROSTOVOLJNIH PRISPEVKOV S SISTEMOM SKUPNE UREDITVE TRGA
With regard to the compatibility of compulsory levies with the system of common organisation of markets (hereinafter: CMO), the Commission considered that in this case, based on the Case C-355/00 Freskot [2003] ECR I-5263 [19], compulsory levies did not interfere, directly or indirectly, with the price of the end products concerned as the contributions did not influence product prices, which were determined by the free market.
Komisija je v zvezi z združljivostjo obveznih prostovoljnih prispevkov s sistemom skupne ureditve trga (v nadaljnjem besedilu: SUT) na podlagi sodbe z dne 22. maja 2003 v zadevi Freskot [19] menila, da v obravnavanem primeru obvezni prostovoljni prispevki niso neposredno ali posredno posegali v cene zadevnih končnih proizvodov, ker dajatve ne vplivajo na ceno proizvodov, saj se ta določa na prostem trgu.
Therefore, the burden on meat products and livestock is neutralised by the advantage accrued from the funded activities.
Tako je breme, ki ga nosijo mesni proizvodi in rejene živali, nevtralizirano s prednostjo, ki jo pomenijo financirane dejavnosti.
Consequently, the effects of the contribution on prices can be considered to be very limited or inexistent.
Zato je mogoče ugotoviti, da so učinki dajatev na ceno zelo omejeni ali da jih sploh ni.
By letters of 8 and 10 October 2003, the French authorities submitted their comments on the Commission’s decision to initiate the procedure provided for in Article 108(2) TFEU in respect of the aid measure in question.
Francoski organi so z dopisoma z dne 8. in 10. oktobra 2003 predložili pripombe k odločitvi Komisije o začetku postopka iz člena 108(2) PDEU zoper obravnavani ukrep pomoči.
By letters of 13 September and 29 November 2005, the French authorities submitted other comments in response to the Commission’s requests for additional information.
Z dopisoma z dne 13. septembra in 29. novembra 2005 so predložili še druge pripombe v odgovor na zahteve za dodatne informacije, ki jih je poslala Komisija.
Following the Commission’s request for additional information sent on 25 February 2011 and the meeting on 29 March 2011, the French authorities submitted other comments by letter of 24 May 2011.
Francoski organi so po zahtevi za dodatne informacije, ki jo je Komisija poslala 25. februarja 2011 in izrazila na sestanku 29. marca 2011, z dopisom z dne 24. maja 2011 predložili še druge pripombe.
The French authorities note that the Commission regards the revenue from these compulsory voluntary inter-branch levies as comparable to parafiscal charges that could lead to distortions of competition in the internal market.
Francoski organi ugotavljajo, da je po mnenju Komisije sredstva, izhajajoča iz takih medpanožnih prispevkov, ki so bili določeni za obvezne, mogoče enačiti z davkom podobnimi dajatvami, ki lahko izkrivijo konkurenco na notranjem trgu.
The French authorities also stated that the measures should have been notified.
Ugotavljajo tudi, da bi morali biti ukrepi priglašeni.
They went on to make the following remarks:
Nato so navedli naslednje:
SCOPE OF THE COMMISSION’S INVESTIGATION ACCORDING TO THE FRENCH AUTHORITIES
OBSEG PREISKAVE KOMISIJE PO MNENJU FRANCOSKIH ORGANOV
With regard to the contributions levied pursuant to the inter-branch agreements of 15 June 1994 for the National Livestock Fund and of 18 December 1995 for Interbev, the French authorities considered that the Commission opened its investigation by letters of 16 January 1995 (aid NN 34/95) and 18 March 1996 and closed it by letter (SG(96) D/6396) of 15 July 1996, concluding that ‘the measures under investigation fall exclusively within the scope of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2328/91 and must be investigated on the basis of that Regulation. Article 35(2) of that Regulation excludes the application of Articles 92 and 93 TFEU’.
Francoski organi so v zvezi s prispevki, ki so se pobirali na podlagi medpanožnih sporazumov z dne 15. junija 1994 v korist sklada za živinorejo in z dne 18. decembra 1995 v korist združenja Interbev, menili, da je Komisija njihovo preiskavo začela z dopisoma z dne 16. januarja 1995 (pomoč NN 34/95) in z dne 18. marca 1996 ter končala z dopisom (SG (96) D/6396) z dne 15. julija 1996 in ugotovila, da „obravnavani ukrepi spadajo izključno na področje uporabe Uredbe (EGS) št. 2328/91 in jih je treba preučiti na podlagi navedene uredbe. Člen 35(2) te uredbe namreč izključuje uporabo členov 92 in 93 Pogodbe“.
In reply to the Commission, which pointed out that at the time it had not expressed its views on the other Interbev measures (as aid NN 34/95 only covered investments to restructure the production of suckler cows), the French authorities stated that their reply to a Commission letter of 18 March 1996 was as follows: ‘the National Livestock Fund is intended […] to improve livestock selection and to support research, particularly genetic research […]’ (letter of 13 September 2005).
V odgovor Komisiji, ki je trdila, da se takrat ni izrekla o drugih ukrepih, ki jih je izvajalo združenje Interbev (kajti zadeva NN 34/95 se je nanašala samo na naložbe za prestrukturiranje reje krav dojilj), so zatrdili, da so v odgovor na dopis Komisije z dne 18. marca 1996 navedli: „nacionalni sklad za živinorejo je dejansko namenjen […] izboljšanju selekcije v živinoreji in podpori raziskavam, zlasti genetskim. […]“ (dopis z dne 13. septembra 2005).
The French authorities therefore consider that the Commission was fully informed of the existence of communication, promotion, research and experimentation measures funded by Interbev and that it could have requested additional information from the French authorities in connection with this case.
Francoski organi torej menijo, da je bila Komisija povsem seznanjena z obstojem ukrepov komunikacije, promocije, raziskav in poizkusov, ki jih je financiralo združenje Interbev, in bi lahko v okviru te zadeve francoskim organom poslala zahteve za dodatne informacije.
Since the Commission took no further action in response to this letter, the French authorities concluded that the Commission was satisfied with the information it had received.
Ker se Komisija na to sporočilo ni odzvala, so sklepali, da je bila Komisija zadovoljna s sporočenimi informacijami.
In a subsequent letter to the Commission, which referred to a request for additional information sent (30 May 1996) following the above-mentioned letter, the French authorities stated that they had never received a request for additional information and that the failure of the Commission to act between 30 May 1996 and 2 October 2001 constituted implicit acceptance of the compatibility of the measures of which it had been notified.
Francoski organi so v poznejšem odgovoru Komisiji, ki je trdila, da je poslala zahtevo za dodatne informacije (30. maja 1996) v zvezi z zgoraj navedenim dopisom, po eni strani trdili, da niso nikoli prejeli zahtev za dodatne informacije, in po drugi strani menili, da je neukrepanje Komisije med 30. majem 1996 in 2. oktobrom 2001 pomenilo implicitno sprejetje združljivosti ukrepov, s katerimi je bila seznanjena.
Moreover, the French authorities state that the Commission was aware of Interbev’s communication measures as a result of Case C18/95 on measures for the sheep sector.
Francoski organi še trdijo, da je bila Komisija obveščena o ukrepih komunikacije, ki jih je izvajalo združenje Interbev v okviru zadeve C-18/95 v zvezi z ukrepi za ovčerejski sektor.
Consequently, as the Commission did not continue with its investigation of these agreements, the French authorities believed that they had legitimate grounds for considering that the Commission did not oppose their implementation.
Ker Komisija od tedaj ni nadaljevala preiskave teh sporazumov, francoski organi menijo, da so upravičeno menili, da Komisija ne nasprotuje njihovi uporabi.
In view of this, the French authorities believed that this procedure only covered the inter-branch agreement of 12 June 2001.
V teh okoliščinah so francoski organi menili, da se ta postopek nanaša samo na medpanožni sporazum z dne 12. junija 2001.
In their letter of 24 May 2011 and at the meeting of 29 March 2011, the French authorities finally submitted information on the entire period to the Commission.
Francoski organi so v dopisu z dne 24. maja 2011 in na sestanku 29. marca 2011 Komisiji končno predložili podatke o celotnem zadevnem obdobju.
GROUNDS JUSTIFYING THE NON-NOTIFICATION OF THE AID ACCORDING TO THE FRENCH AUTHORITIES
RAZLOG, IZ KATEREGA PO MNENJU FRANCOSKIH ORGANOV POMOČI NI BILO TREBA PRIGLASITI
As regards the measures carried out using the revenue from levies from the new inter-branch agreements dating from 12 June 2001, for the benefit of Interbev and the FNE, the French authorities did not believe it was necessary to notify them because they were funded solely from the private contributions of the sector concerned.
Francoskim organom se ni zdelo potrebno priglasiti ukrepov, ki so se izvajali na podlagi sredstev iz prispevkov, pobranih na podlagi novih medpanožnih sporazumov z dne 12. junija 2001 v korist združenja Interbev in sklada FNE, ker se ti ukrepi financirajo zgolj na podlagi zasebnih sredstev, zbranih v zadevni panogi.
INTERBEV MEASURES
UKREPI, KI JIH JE IZVAJALO ZDRUŽENJE INTERBEV
With respect to the measures carried out by Interbev, the French authorities note that the Commission considers that they are compatible with the Community guidelines on State aid in agriculture (2000-2006) and the Community guidelines on State aid for advertising of agricultural products and certain products not covered by Annex I, based on the analysis of the information submitted to it by letter of 9 November 2001. They confirm that during, the period covered by this Decision, Interbev funded its measures on advertising, technical assistance, research and experimentation in the same way as set out in the letter of 9 November 2001.
Francoski organi v zvezi z ukrepi, ki jih je izvajalo združenje Interbev, ugotavljajo, da jih Komisija po opravljeni analizi informacij, ki so ji jih poslali z dopisom z dne 9. novembra 2001, ocenjuje za združljive s Smernicami Skupnosti o državni pomoči v kmetijskem sektorju (2000–2006) in Smernicami Skupnosti o državni pomoči za oglaševanje kmetijskih proizvodov in nekaterih proizvodov, ki niso zajeti v Prilogi I. Potrjujejo, da je v obdobju, na katero se nanaša ta sklep, združenje Interbev financiralo te ukrepe oglaševanja, tehnične pomoči, raziskav in poizkusov pod enakimi pogoji kot tiste, ki so bili predhodno navedeni v dopisu z dne 9. novembra 2001.
FNE RESEARCH AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE MEASURES
UKREPI RAZISKAV IN TEHNIČNE POMOČI, KI SO SE IZVAJALI PREK SKLADA FNE
As regards the FNE, the French authorities submitted the following explanations by letter in reply to the decision to initiate the procedure (8 and 10 October 2003).
Francoski organi so v zvezi s skladom FNE z dopisom v odgovor na odločitev o uvedbi postopka (8. in 10. oktober 2003) predložili naslednja pojasnila.
The revenue from the FNE levy is used to fund technical assistance and applied research.
Ukrepi, ki so se izvajali na podlagi sredstev sklada FNE, so ukrepi tehnične pomoči in aplikativnih raziskav.