natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
According to France Télécom, there is nothing to justify the Commission departing from this principle, since it cannot be assumed from the policy declarations at the time of the debate on the draft 1996 Law that the amount of the flat-rate contribution of France Télécom was set by the French legislature so as to maintain the status quo for 10 years.
Po mnenju podjetja France Télécom ni nobenega dokaza, da bi Komisija izključevala to načelo, saj politične izjave iz časa razprave o osnutku zakona iz leta 1996 ne kažejo, da naj bi znesek pavšalnega prispevka podjetja France Télécom zakonodajalec določil tako, da se deset let ohrani obstoječe stanje.
Furthermore, the figures available in 1996 would seem to contradict the argument that the amount of EUR 5,7 billion was estimated at the time to correspond precisely with the additional cost to the State of the applying the 1996 Law by compensating, year after year, the lower annual costs paid by the public body, even taking into account the charges to compensate between retirement pension schemes from which France Télécom was discharged in 1996 [40].
Poleg tega bi bili podatki iz leta 1996 v nasprotju s trditvijo, da se je znesek 5,7 milijarde EUR takrat določil tako, da je natančno ustrezal dodatnim stroškom za državo zaradi uporabe zakona iz leta 1996 za desetletno obdobje, pri čemer bi se vsako leto nadomestili manjši letni stroški, ki jih krije podjetje, tudi ob upoštevanju stroškov nadomestil med pokojninskimi sistemi, katerih plačila je bilo podjetje France Télécom leta 1996 oproščeno [40].
The amount of the exceptional contribution was intended as overall compensation for the French State on account of the reform.
Znesek izrednega prispevka bi pomenil splošno povračilo Francoski republiki zaradi reforme.
It therefore needs to be taken into account when analysing the level playing field since its entry into force in 1997.
Zato bi ga bilo treba upoštevati pri analizi konkurenčne pravičnosti od začetka veljavnosti reforme leta 1997.
Finally, France Télécom considers that, since without the 1996 reform, it would have suffered a significant competitive handicap on the markets which the Union aimed to liberalise and that the French authorities have now complied in full with the decision on the application of business tax to France Télécom [41], the measure does not have a negative impact on competition.
Nazadnje, podjetje France Télécom ocenjuje, da ukrep ne povzroča negativnih vplivov na konkurenco, saj bi bilo brez reforme leta 1996 konkurenčno zelo omejeno na trgih, na katerih je cilj Unije liberalizacija, ter da so francoski organi od tedaj v celoti ravnali v skladu z odločbo o uporabi davka od dohodka za podjetje France Télécom [41].
The complainants
Pritožniki
The complainants consider that it is the effects of the measure, i.e. the reduction in the social security contributions normally assumed in the undertaking’s budget, and not its object, i.e. the compensation of an alleged disadvantage, that mean it is State aid.
Pritožniki menijo, da se ukrep šteje za državno pomoč zaradi njegovih učinkov, in sicer zmanjšanja stroškov za socialno varnost, ki običajno bremenijo proračun podjetja, in ne njegovega cilja, ki je nadomestilo za domnevno slabši položaj.
For that matter, there is no disadvantage in the employment of civil servants by France Télécom, since the undertaking pays unemployment contributions and wage costs which are 13 % lower than those paid by its competitors and has at its disposal a stable and flexible staff, with regard to reducing the total wage bill through early retirement and reorientation to the civil service.
Poleg tega podjetje France Télécom ni v slabšem položaju pri zaposlovanju javnih uslužbencev, saj so prispevki za primer brezposelnosti in prispevki delojemalcev, ki jih plačuje, 13 % nižji od prispevkov konkurentov, osebje pa je stalno in prilagodljivo, kar zadeva zmanjšanje plač zaradi predčasnih upokojitev in premestitev v javno upravo.
According to the complainants, State aid thus defined would be incompatible with the internal market.
Po mnenju pritožnikov bi bila takšna državna pomoč nezdružljiva z notranjim trgom.
In fact, the considerable competitive advantage procured by France Télécom was all the more detrimental as the reduction in costs was unnecessary to avoid jeopardising its financial structure: relieved of a pension debt with a net value of EUR 9,9 billion at least in 1996 and no longer having to enter this cost in its balance sheet or the notes to the accounts, France Télécom then increased its debt considerably, with a net financial debt of EUR 44 billion on average between 1997 and 2007. Then, the aid releasing France Télécom from retirement pension costs inherited from the monopoly enabled the international expansion of the undertaking to be financed, whilst strengthening its position in France, where it benefited from substantial advantages as a monopoly, of which the costs were merely fair compensation..
Velika konkurenčna prednost podjetja France Télécom je bila dejansko še veliko bolj škodljiva, saj zmanjšanje stroškov ni bilo potrebno za preprečitev negativnega vpliva na njegovo finančno strukturo: ko je bilo podjetje France Télécom leta 1996 razbremenjeno diskontirane neto obveznosti iz naslova pokojnin v višini najmanj 9,9 milijarde EUR in mu tega stroška ni bilo več treba vpisovati v bilanco stanja ali njeno prilogo, se je zadolžilo za precej višji znesek, pri čemer je med letoma 1997 in 2007 njegov neto finančni dolg v povprečju znašal 44 milijard EUR. Poleg tega je pomoč, in sicer da podjetju France Télécom ni treba plačevati stroškov za pokojnine, ki izhajajo iz monopola, omogočila financiranje mednarodne širitve podjetja in okrepitev njegovega položaja v Franciji, kjer je imelo velike prednosti monopola, pri čemer so njegovi stroški le ustrezna protidajatev.
Moreover, the unlawful and incompatible aid not repaid in the past would preclude the operating aid at issue from being declared compatible, in view of their cumulative effect.
Prav tako zaradi nezakonitih in nezdružljivih pomoči, ki v preteklosti niso bile vrnjene, ter ob upoštevanju skupnih učinkov zadevne pomoči za tekoče poslovanje ni mogoče razglasiti za združljivo.
Finally, the absence of a level playing field from the 1996 reform on account of the non-payment of contributions corresponding to the risks of unemployment and non-payment of wages in the event of the firm going into receivership makes it impossible for the reform to be compatible with the rules of the Treaty.
Nazadnje, ker reforma iz leta 1996 ne zagotavlja konkurenčne pravičnosti, in sicer zaradi neplačevanja prispevkov za primer brezposelnosti in neizplačevanja plač zaposlenim v primeru stečajnega postopka podjetja, ni združljiva s pravili Pogodbe.
The pension liability of France Télécom should be calculated by an independent expert and France should undertake to ensure the financial neutrality of the arrangements, in particular by providing mechanisms for adjusting the employer’s contribution and the compensation balance of EUR 5,7 billion in the event of variation in the costs.
Ustrezno bi bilo, da obveznost podjetja France Télécom iz naslova pokojnin izračuna neodvisni strokovnjak in da se Francija zaveže k zagotovitvi finančne nevtralnosti sistema, zlasti z določitvijo mehanizmov prilagajanja prispevka delodajalca in doplačila v višini 5,7 milijarde EUR v primeru spremembe stroškov.
The telecommunications operator
Telekomunikacijski operater
The telecommunications operator endorses and supports the preliminary analysis set out in the Commission’s decision initiating the procedure, regarding as new, unlawful State aid the amendments introduced by the 1996 Law with a view to substituting the annual contributions in full discharge of liabilities by France Télécom for the payments of pensions actually made by the State, with the deduction of the contributions paid by the employees still working with the status of civil servant.
Telekomunikacijski operater se strinja s predhodno analizo iz sklepa Komisije o začetku postopka, ki spremembe, uvedene z zakonom iz leta 1996, v skladu s katerimi se letni odvezujoči prispevki podjetja France Télécom nadomestijo z izplačili pokojnin, ki bi jih dejansko krila država, pri čemer se odštejejo prispevki, ki jih plačajo zaposleni s statusom javnih uslužbencev, opredeljuje kot novo in nezakonito državno pomoč.
The same would also apply, according to this operator, to the social security contributions corresponding to the risks not common with the ordinary employees paid by France Télécom’s competitors but which France Télécom has not paid at least since 1996 for its civil service staff and for its staff governed by ordinary law.
Po mnenju tega operaterja enaka opredelitev velja tudi za prispevke za socialno varnost, ki jih plačujejo konkurenti podjetja France Télécom, in sicer za tveganja, ki niso skupna osebam, zaposlenim v skladu z zasebnim pravom, podjetje France Télécom pa jih vsaj od leta 1996 za svoje zaposlene javne uslužbence in osebe, zaposlene v skladu s splošnim pravom, ne plačuje.
Moreover, contrary to the case which was the subject of the La Poste decision [43], the calculation of the employer’s contribution from France Télécom did not, and still does not, include these contributions, which would make it impossible to declare the aid compatible.
V nasprotju s primerom iz odločbe o La Poste [43] izračun prispevka delodajalca France Télécom ni zajemal in še vedno ne zajema navedenih prispevkov, zaradi česar pomoči ni mogoče razglasiti za združljivo.
As regards the aid resulting from the disappearance of the repayment to the State of the pensions granted, the operator considers that the analysis of the competitive balance carried out by the Commission in its La Poste decision should lead it to conclude, on the contrary, that it is incompatible.
Kar zadeva pomoč, ki izhaja iz odprave povračila izplačanih pokojnin državi, operater ocenjuje, da bi morala Komisija na podlagi svoje analize konkurenčnega ravnotežja, ki jo je predstavila v odločbi o La Poste, pomoč oceniti kot nezdružljivo.
This analysis should be based on the facts that have occurred since 1996 and not, as in the La Poste decision, hypothetically for the future.
Ta analiza bi morala temeljiti na dejstvih od leta 1996 in ne na hipotetičnih primerih za prihodnost kot v njeni odločbi o La Poste.
According to this operator, on several of the markets on which it operates, France Télécom holds market power which can be assimilated to a dominant position.
Po mnenju tega operaterja ima torej podjetje France Télécom na veliko trgih, na katerih posluje, tržno moč, ki je primerljiva s prevladujočim položajem.
As a result, it is subject to ex-ante regulatory obligations on the wholesale markets for high and very high speed broadband and for the origin and termination of calls on fixed lines.
Zato za podjetje veljajo obveznosti v skladu s predhodno ureditvijo na veleprodajnih trgih hitrih in zelo hitrih širokopasovnih omrežij, domačem trgu in trgu za zaključevanje klicev v fiksnih omrežjih.
In its decision of 16 July 2003 relating to proceedings under Article 82 of the EC Treaty in the case COMP-38.233, the Commission established and imposed a penalty for an infringement of Article 102 of the TFEU on the part of France Télécom via its subsidiary Wanadoo [44].
Poleg tega je Komisija v Odločbi z dne 16. julija 2003 glede postopka uporabe člena 82 Pogodbe ES (Zadeva COMP/38.233) ugotovila in sankcionirala kršitev člena 102 PDEU v podjetju France Télécom prek njene hčerinske družbe Wanadoo [44].
Since the undertaking is financially sound in particular through the acquisition of Orange, Retevisión and AMENA.
Dokler je podjetje finančno stabilno, lahko s prejeto pomočjo financira mednarodno širitev, zlasti z nakupom podjetij Orange, Retevisión in AMENA.
Finally, the operator asks the Commission to quantify precisely the amount of aid at issue and, pursuant to the Deggendorf case-law [45], to refuse to accept the compatibility of the measures in question with the internal market until the unlawful aid from the past has been repaid.
Nazadnje, operater Komisijo poziva, naj natančno količinsko opredeli zadevne zneske pomoči in naj na podlagi sodne prakse v zadevi Deggendorf [45] zadevnih ukrepov ne prizna za združljive z notranjim trgom, dokler se nezakonita pomoč iz preteklosti ne povrne.
The French Republic considers that the changes made in 1996 to the arrangements for financing the retirement pensions of civil servants of the French State working for France Télécom do not contain any elements of State aid.
Francoska republika meni, da spremembe, uvedene leta 1996, v zvezi z načinom financiranja pokojnin javnih uslužbencev Francoske republike v podjetju France Télécom ne vsebujejo nobenega elementa državne pomoči.
In any event, the 1996 reform is compatible with the internal market, in particular, through the transposition to this case of the reasoning followed by the Commission in its La Poste decision [46].
Reforma iz leta 1996 bi bila v vsakem primeru združljiva z notranjim trgom, zlasti če se upošteva obrazložitev Komisije iz odločbe o La Poste [46].
Concerning the existence of State aid
Obstoj državne pomoči
According to the French Republic, the 1990 Law placed France Télécom in an abnormal situation departing from the ordinary arrangements according to which undertakings pay an employer’s contribution in full discharge of liabilities, proportional to the total wage bill and not linked to the level of pensions granted.
Po mnenju Francoske republike je bilo podjetje France Télécom zaradi zakona iz leta 1990 v neobičajnem položaju, ki odstopa od splošnega prava, ki v zvezi s tem predvideva, da podjetja plačajo odvezujoči prispevek delodajalca, ki je sorazmeren s stroški za plače in ni vezan na višino izplačanih pokojnin.
The cost assumed by France Télécom is in this way abnormal, since the financial deficit from the arrangements for the population concerned was certain and set to become intolerable, given the inevitable reduction in the number of civil servants still working and the associated increase in the number of pensioners.
Strošek, ki ga krije podjetje France Télécom, bi tako bil nenormalno visok, saj bi zagotovo prišlo do finančnega primanjkljaja v podsistemu za zadevne uslužbence, ki bi postal nevzdržen glede na neizogibno zmanjšanje števila zaposlenih javnih uslužbencev in hkratno povečanje števila upokojencev.
The 1996 reform is claimed to have aligned the financing of the pensions with ordinary law, without having the effect of placing the undertaking in a more favourable competitive situation, since the contribution of France Télécom is calculated annually so as to align the level of social security contributions and tax payments with those of its competitors in the telecommunications sector.
Z reformo iz leta 1996 se je financiranje pokojnin uskladilo s splošnim pravom, vendar to ni povzročilo konkurenčne prednosti podjetja, saj se prispevek podjetja France Télécom izračuna vsako leto tako, da se višina obveznih prispevkov za socialno varnost in davkov prilagodi višini teh prispevkov in davkov, ki jih plačujejo konkurenti v sektorju telekomunikacij.
However, not taking into account contributions corresponding to the risks not common to ordinary employees and civil servants in the calculation of the contribution in accordance with the competitively fair rate is justified on account of the status of the latter, which rules out, for example the risk of unemployment apart from in exceptional cases of dismissal or removal from post.
Kljub temu bi bilo neupoštevanje prispevkov za tveganja, ki niso skupna zaposlenim v skladu z zasebnim pravom in javnim uslužbencem, pri izračunu prispevka na podlagi uporabe pravične in konkurenčne stopnje upravičeno zaradi statusa javnih uslužbencev, ki na primer ne vključuje tveganja za brezposelnost, razen za nekatere izredne primere odpuščanja ali odstavitve.
The French Republic considers that the situation of the competitors of the undertaking in France must constitute the reference framework for determining whether the costs payable by France Télécom are normal or abnormal.
Francoska republika meni, da mora biti referenčni okvir za določitev običajnega ali neobičajnega značaja stroškov, ki bremenijo podjetje France Télécom, položaj konkurentov podjetja v Franciji.
In the present case, taking account of the exorbitant, derogating from ordinary law, inequitable and unsustainable burden imposed on France Télécom by the 1990 Law, its abolition and the alignment with the situation of competitors provided for in the 1996 reform simply re-established the normal conditions of competition.
Ker so bili v tem primeru stroški podjetja France Télécom, ki izhajajo iz zakona iz leta 1990, pretirano visoki, so odstopali od splošnega prava, bili nepravični in niso zagotavljali dolgoročnega preživetja, se z njihovo ukinitvijo in prilagoditvijo glede na položaj konkurentov iz reforme iz leta 1996 zgolj vzpostavljajo normalni konkurenčni pogoji.
For that matter, France Télécom has not been compensated for the disadvantages suffered under these arrangements, whereas, as emphasised in its comments, it still has to cope with structural disadvantages, additional costs and inflexibilities on account of the status applicable to the civil servants it employs as regards financial measures associated with departure or return to the public administration, vocational training measures or higher wage cost.
Podjetje France Télécom tudi ni prejelo nadomestila zaradi slabšega položaja v okviru tega sistema, poleg tega pa ima, kot poudarja v svojih pripombah, še težave s strukturnimi pomanjkljivostmi in dodatnimi stroški, zaradi kadrovskih predpisov, ki veljajo za njegove zaposlene javne uslužbence, pa tudi z nezmožnostjo uporabe različnih možnosti, kar zadeva finančne mehanizme ob upokojitvi ali vrnitvi v javno upravo, prizadevanju za poklicno usposabljanje ali višjih stroških za plače.
Consequently, the current arrangements resulting from the reform confer no advantage on France Télécom and therefore contain no element of State aid within the meaning of the Treaty.
Sedanji sistem, ki izhaja iz reforme, podjetju France Télécom torej ne zagotavlja nikakršne prednosti in zato ne vsebuje nobenega elementa državne pomoči v smislu Pogodbe.
This interpretation is based on the general principles derived by the Union courts according to which, since only measures which lighten the burdens normally assumed in an undertaking’s budget constitute State aid, a law which makes it possible to prevent an undertaking’s budget being burdened by a cost which, under normal circumstances, would not have existed, does not constitute State aid [47].
Ta razlaga izhaja iz splošnih načel sodišč Unije, v skladu s katerimi zakon, na podlagi katerega se prepreči bremenitev proračuna podjetja s stroški, ki jih v običajnih razmerah ne bi bilo, ne pomeni državne pomoči, saj se za državne pomoči štejejo le ukrepi, s katerimi se zmanjšajo stroški, ki v normalnem obsegu bremenijo proračun podjetja [47].
This would also be the case of measures relieving a public competitor from a structural disadvantage in relation to its private competitors [48].
To velja tudi za ukrepe, na podlagi katerih je odpravljena strukturna pomanjkljivost konkurenta iz javnega sektorja glede na njegove konkurente iz zasebnega sektorja [48].
This interpretation is also regarded as being in conformity with the Commission’s practice [49].
Ta razlaga bi bila tudi v skladu s prakso Komisije [49].
Finally, more generally, the French Republic does not consider it relevant to include in the present procedure the compensation and over-compensation mechanisms under which France Télécom paid the costs between 1991 and 1996 (see Table 1) to determine the existence of aid or the date on which an advantage resulting from the reform introduced by the 1996 Law, which contains no provision to this effect, arose.
Nazadnje, Francoski republiki se na splošno ne zdi primerno, da bi se v ta postopek vključili mehanizmi nadomestil in čezmernih nadomestil, na podlagi katerih je podjetje France Télécom plačevalo stroške med letoma 1992 in 1996 (glej preglednico 1), da bi se ugotovil obstoj pomoči ali določil datum nastanka prednosti, ki izhaja iz reforme, uvedene z zakonom iz leta 1996, ki v zvezi s tem ne vsebuje nobene določbe.
The payment of such costs also resulted from a scheme departing from the ordinary arrangements in which the pensions scheme applicable to France Télécom was considered as an autonomous scheme, which was no longer the case from 1997.
Plačilo takih stroškov je temeljilo tudi na sistemu, ki odstopa od splošnega prava, glede na katerega je bil pokojninski sistem podjetja France Télécom obravnavan kot avtonomni sistem, kar pa od leta 1997 ne velja več.
Concerning the compatibility of possible State aid with the internal market
Združljivost morebitne državne pomoči z notranjim trgom
In any event, the French Republic considers that if the 1996 reform relating to France Télécom were to constitute State aid, this should be declared compatible with the internal market, in accordance with the analysis followed by the Commission in its La Poste decision [50].
Če bi reforma iz leta 1996 v zvezi s podjetjem France Télécom pomenila državno pomoč, Francoska republika ocenjuje, da bi bilo treba to pomoč v skladu z analizo, ki jo je Komisija upoštevala v odločbi o La Poste [50], v vsakem primeru razglasiti za združljivo z notranjim trgom.
The 1996 reform releases France Télécom from a structural burden which was affecting its competitiveness in a market in the process of liberalisation and its contributions are henceforth calculated on the basis of a competitively fair rate for the common risks.
Na podlagi reforme iz leta 1996 je bilo odpravljeno strukturno breme podjetja France Télécom, ki je vplivalo na njegovo konkurenčnost na trgu v fazi liberalizacije, njegovi prispevki pa se odslej izračunajo na podlagi enakovredne in konkurenčne stopnje glede na skupna tveganja.
The fact that the contribution paid by France Télécom since 1997 does not include the risks not common to private sector employees would not preclude compatibility with the internal market.
Dejstvo, da prispevek, ki ga podjetje France Télécom plačuje od leta 1997, ne zajema tveganj, ki niso skupna osebam, zaposlenim v skladu z zasebnim pravom, ni ovira za združljivost z notranjim trgom.
In this regard, Table 4, derived from information provided by the French Republic, illustrates the difference between the contribution paid by France Télécom and what it would have paid if the non-common risks had been included in the calculation, minus the benefits self-insured by France Télécom and other levies that put more of a strain on it than its competitors.
V zvezi s tem je v preglednici 4, ki povzema informacije, ki jih je predložila Francoska republika, prikazana razlika med prispevkom, ki ga je plačalo podjetje France Télécom, in prispevkom, ki bi ga plačalo, če bi bila v izračun zajeta tveganja, ki niso skupna, pri čemer se odštejejo dajatve, za katere poskrbi samo podjetje France Télécom, in druge dajatve, ki bremenijo podjetje v primerjavi s konkurenti.
Employer’s contribution from France Télécom between 1997 and 2010 calculated on the basis of the competitively fair rate applied (TEC) and a competitively fair rate adjusted to integrate the non-common risks (TEC*)
Prispevek delodajalca France Télécom v obdobju 1997–2010, izračunan na podlagi uporabljene pravične in konkurenčne stopnje (TEC) ter spremenjene pravične in konkurenčne stopnje (TEC*) z namenom vključitve tveganj, ki niso skupna
TEC-TEC*
TEC – TEC*