natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The BDO Binder report gives several future oriented recommendations and suggests strengthening RTP’s internal controls to ensure compliance with internal regulations, but does not include any finding that RTP had received too much compensation in relation to the public service tasks carried out by it or that the figures used in the public service report drawn up by RTP and used by the Commission in Decision of 15 October 2003 could not be relied upon.
Poročilo revizorja BDO Binder navaja več priporočil za prihodnost in predlaga okrepitev notranjega nadzora javne televizije RTP zaradi zagotavljanja skladnosti z notranjimi predpisi, vendar ne vključuje nobene ugotovitve, da je javna televizija RTP prejela previsoko nadomestilo za naloge javne službe, ki jih je izvajala, oziroma, da se na številke, uporabljene v poročilu o izvajanju javne službe, ki jih je pripravila javna televizija RTP, Komisija pa uporabila v svoji odločbi z dne 15. oktobra 2003, ni mogoče zanesti.
When the BDO Binder report addresses concrete figures, it refers to a failure in drawing up an inventory for certain assets.
Kadar so v poročilu revizorja BDO Binder navedene konkretne številke, se nanašajo na pomanjkanje evidence za določeno premoženje.
However, the BDO Binder Report appears more to criticise the absence of an asset inventory [96], rather than concluding that the respective investments had not been made and that the investment values have wrongly been accounted for.
Vendar pa se zdi, da poročilo revizorja BDO Binder bolj kritizira pomanjkanje evidence premoženja [96], namesto da bi bilo v njem ugotovljeno, da zadevne naložbe niso bile izvedene in da so bile vrednosti naložb napačno knjižene.
However, as stressed by Portugal, figures for the respective investments were, in any event, not included in the compensation calculation, which excluded that depreciation costs for fixed assets could be reimbursed.
Vendar pa, kot je poudarila Portugalska, številke za zadevne naložbe v nobenem primeru niso bile vključene v izračun nadomestila, kar je izključilo možnost povračila stroškov amortizacije za osnovna sredstva.
As regarding the excess of advertising times the BDO Binder report found that all advertising income had been taken into account for the calculation of the public service financing need.
Glede preseganja omejitve oglaševanja je bilo v poročilu revizorja BDO Binder ugotovljeno, da so bili pri izračunu potrebe po financiranju javne službe upoštevani vsi prihodki od oglaševanja.
Again, none of these factors lead the auditor to give a negative opinion on the fulfilment — by RTP of its public service obligations nor does it point to any overcompensation.
Vendar pa nobeno od teh dejstev ni vplivalo na to, da bi revizor izdal negativno mnenje o izpolnjevanju obveznosti javne službe s strani javne televizije RTP, prav tako pa ni bilo navedb o morebitnem prekomernem nadomestilu.
But most importantly for the analysis in this Decision is the conclusion in the BDO Binder Report (which is not disputed by SIC), that RTP could have claimed PTE 25 billion for the fulfilment of its public service obligations, but instead only received PTE 14 billion.
Za analizo v tem sklepu pa je najpomembnejša sklepna ugotovitev iz poročila revizorja BDO Binder (komercialna televizija SIC mu ni oporekala), da bi lahko javna televizija RTP za izpolnjevanje svojih obveznosti javne službe zahtevala nadomestilo v višini 25 milijard PTE, vendar je namesto tega prejela samo 14 milijard PTE.
In other words, the BDO Binder report does not point to any overcompensation but instead comes to the opposite conclusion.
To pomeni, da v poročilu revizorja BDO Binder ni nobenih navedb o prekomernem nadomestilu, ampak je ugotovitev ravno nasprotna.
The PWC audit
Revizija s strani podjetja PwC
As stated in Decision NN 31/06 regarding the restructuring of RTP, an external audit by PriceWaterhouse Coopers has scrutinised whether the financial information provided by the Portuguese authorities was in accordance with the RTP’s financial accounts in the period 1991 to 2003, with the amounts included in the public service audit reports and with other sources of information which were considered relevant to ensure the conformity of the reported audits (see recital 38 of Decision NN 31/06).
Kot je navedeno v Odločbi št. NN 31/06 glede prestrukturiranja javne televizije RTP, je podjetje PriceWaterhouse Coopers v svoji zunanji reviziji ugotavljalo, ali so bili finančni podatki, ki so jih predložili portugalski organi, v skladu s finančnimi poročili za obdobje 1991–2003, zneski iz revizijskih poročil o izvajanju javne službe in drugimi viri informacij, ki so bile pomembne za zagotavljanje skladnosti sporočenih revizij (glej uvodno izjavo 38 Odločbe št. NN 31/06).
The PWC audit report validated the data without any significant remark (recital 52 of Decision NN 31/06).
Revizijsko poročilo podjetja PwC je podatke ocenilo brez posebnih pripomb (glej uvodno izjavo 52 Odločbe št. NN 31/06).
The PWC audit report expressly confirmed that the amounts received by RTP as public service compensation corresponded to the amounts indicated in the resolutions from the Council of Ministers (see recital 41 and table 39 of Decision NN 31/06).
Revizija podjetja PwC je izrecno potrdila, da so bili zneski, ki jih je javna televizija RTP prejela kot nadomestilo za izvajanje javne službe, v skladu z zneski, navedenimi v resolucijah Sveta ministrov (glej uvodno izjavo 41 in preglednico 39 Odločbe št. NN 31/06).
The PWC audit report remarked on the global under-financing of RTP.
V poročilu podjetja PwC o reviziji je bilo ugotovljeno, da je javna televizija RTP prejela odločno premalo sredstev.
It pointed out that in addition to the public service tasks which were reimbursable under public service contracts there were public service tasks which were carried out RTP, but for which no reimbursement from the State could be demanded.
Poudarjeno je bilo, da je javna televizija RTP poleg nalog javne službe, za katere je prejela nadomestilo na podlagi pogodb o izvajanju javne službe, opravljala tudi druge naloge javne službe, za katere ni mogla zahtevati povračila od države.
The Commission concluded in Decision NN 31/06 that the PWC audit report could therefore correctly base itself on RTP’s financial accounts and found that RTP was indeed chronically underfinanced.
Komisija je v Odločbi št. NN 31/06 ugotovila, da je zato poročilo podjetja PwC o reviziji ustrezno temeljilo na finančnih poročilih javne televizije RTP in da je bila javna televizija vseskozi premalo financirana.
Therefore, for the purposes of this Decision, the PWC audit report can be taken as another element, in addition to the external audits on the public service reports, that the data used by the Commission in Decision 2005/403/EC were correct.
Zato se lahko za namene tega sklepa poročilo podjetja PwC o reviziji upošteva kot še en element, ki poleg zunanjih revizij poročil o izvajanju javne službe potrjuje, da so bili podatki, ki jih je Komisija uporabila v Odločbi 2005/403/ES, pravilni.
The findings of the Tribunal de Contas
Ugotovitve državnega revizorja Tribunal de Contas
Regarding the complainant’s argument that the report No 8/2002 of the State auditor, the Tribunal de Contas, should be taken into account, the Commission has indeed considered that report in its assessment in this Decision.
Glede trditve pritožnika, da bi bilo treba upoštevati poročilo št. 8/2002 državnega revizorja, Tribunal de Contas, je Komisija to poročilo dejansko upoštevala v svoji oceni v tem sklepu.
Most importantly, report No 8/2002 does not point to any irregularity in RTP’s financing or to any overcompensation for the years 1997-2000 (or for any of the other years).
Najpomembnejše je dejstvo, da poročilo št. 8/2002 ne navaja nobenih nepravilnosti pri financiranju javne televizije RTP ali morebitnih prekomernih nadomestil za obdobje 1997–2000 (ali katero koli drugo leto).
On the contrary, the report No 8/2002 points a number of times to RTP’s structural financial difficulties.
Nasprotno, poročilo št. 8/2002 večkrat opozarja na strukturne finančne težave javne televizije RTP.
Accordingly, the Commission is not in a position, on the basis of the report No 8/2002 report to single out certain payments as constituting overcompensation and illegal State aid.
Komisija v skladu s tem na podlagi poročila št. 8/2002 ne more izpostaviti določenih plačil kot nadomestila, ki so prekomerna in pomenijo nezakonito državno pomoč.
On the contrary, the report No 8/2002 report explicitly confirms that from 1993 until late 1999, RTP’s survival was achieved using a continuous and increasing indebtedness of the company.
Ravno nasprotno, poročilo št. 8/2002 izrecno potrjuje, da je v obdobju od leta 1993 do konec leta 1999 javna televizija RTP preživela zaradi nenehnega in vedno večjega zadolževanja podjetja.
As mentioned by the complainant, the report No 8/2002 report criticises, the management of the company a number of times and points to inefficiencies which could have been avoided.
Kot je navedel pritožnik, poročilo št. 8/2002 večkrat kritizira upravljanje podjetja in opozarja na pomanjkljivosti, ki se jim bi bilo mogoče izogniti.
The objective of the report No 8/2002 report is defined as a general review of RTP’s management and the provision of public service television, in terms of efficiency, effectiveness and economy.
Cilj poročila št. 8/2002 je opredeljen kot splošni pregled upravljanja javne televizije RTP ter učinkovitosti, uspešnosti in gospodarnosti pri zagotavljanju javne radiotelevizije.
As pointed out by the complainant, the report No 8/2002 report indicated that RTP had inflexible structures and excessive staff levels and was providing a public service in an inefficient manner.
Kot je opozoril pritožnik, je poročilo št. 8/2002 navajalo, da je imela javna televizija RTP neprožne strukture in preveliko število osebja, javno službo pa je izvajala na neučinkovit način.
The report No 8/2002 report also criticise the excessively vague and generic concept of the public service remit and the public service contracts which invite, according to the State auditor, managerial inefficiency.
Poročilo št. 8/2002 kritizira tudi precej nejasen in splošen koncept nalog javne službe in pogodbi o izvajanju javne službe, ki po mnenju državnega revizorja spodbujata neučinkovito upravljanje.
However, the concept of RTP’s public service remit was investigated by the Commission in the decision of 15 November 2003.
Vendar pa je koncept nalog javne službe, ki jih je imela javna televizija RTP, Komisija preučila v odločbi z dne 15. novembra 2003.
In Case T-442/03, the Court upheld that the wide definition of RTP’s remit was acceptable [97].
V zadevi T-442/03 je Sodišče menilo, da je obširna opredelitev nalog javne televizije RTP sprejemljiva [97].
As to the alleged inefficiencies, the Commission would like to point out that this is not an aspect which needs to be considered in the application of the Broadcasting Communication.
Glede domnevnih pomanjkljivosti Komisija poudarja, da to ni vidik, ki ga je treba upoštevati pri uporabi Sporočila o radiodifuziji.
The third criterion the Commission should assess is whether the financing is proportionate to the net cost of the public service.
Tretje merilo, ki ga mora Komisija oceniti, je, ali je financiranje sorazmerno z neto stroški javne službe.
The Broadcasting Communication describes the criteria on the basis of which the Commission assesses the proportionality of state funding.
Sporočilo o radiodifuziji opisuje merila, na podlagi katerih Komisija ocenjuje sorazmernost državnega financiranja.
It requires that the State aid should not exceed the net costs of the public service mission and that no market distortions should occur that were not necessary for the fulfilment of the public service mission [98].
Zahteva, da državna pomoč ne sme presegati čistih stroškov poslanstva javne službe in da na trgu ne sme prihajati do izkrivljanj, ki niso nujno potrebna za izpolnjevanje nalog javne službe [98].
Firstly, in order to determine the cost of the public service activities correctly, the Broadcasting Communication requires a proper allocation of costs and revenue between the public service and commercial activities.
Prvič, Sporočilo o radiodifuziji zahteva ustrezno razporeditev stroškov in dohodkov med javno službo in poslovnimi dejavnostmi, da se lahko pravilno določijo stroški dejavnosti javne službe.
As referred to in recitals 61-67 of this Decision, the public service contracts define the method of cost and revenue allocation that RTP must apply.
Kot je navedeno v uvodnih izjavah 61–67 tega sklepa, pogodbi o izvajanju javne službe določata metodo razporeditve stroškov in dohodkov, ki jo mora uporabiti javna televizija RTP.
In this case, the Commission’s task is, in principle, made easier by the fact that RTP has implemented an analytical accounting system which permits quantification of the eligible costs incurred by it to fulfil each of the reimbursable public service obligations.
V tem primeru je bila naloga Komisije načeloma lažja zaradi tega, ker je RTP uvedel analitičen računovodski sistem, ki omogoča količinsko opredelitev stroškov, upravičenih do nadomestila, ki jih je imelo podjetje pri izpolnjevanju vsake povračljive obveznosti javne službe.
By means of that system, each item of eligible expenditure is allocated to an activity and subsequently divided between the different reimbursable public service tasks of RTP, on the basis of objective accounting principles.
S tem sistemom je na podlagi objektivnih računovodskih načel vsaka postavka upravičenega odhodka dodeljena dejavnosti in nato razdeljena med različne povračljive naloge javne službe, ki jih ima javna televizija RTP.
As the revenues derived from each reimbursable public service task are deducted from the operating costs of the public service, the system guarantees that the annual compensation payments are limited to the net cost of each public service obligation (see recital 65 of this Decision).
Ker so prihodki, ustvarjeni z vsako povračljivo nalogo javne službe, odbiti od stroškov poslovanja, sistem zagotavlja, da so letna izplačila nadomestil omejena na neto stroške vsake obveznosti javne službe (glej uvodno izjavo 65 tega sklepa).
The Commission has, therefore, come to the conclusion that the parameters for determining the cost are established in an objective and transparent manner.
Komisija je zato sklenila, da so parametri za določanje stroškov določeni na objektiven in pregleden način.
However, the rules of cost compensation might underestimate the real net cost of RTP’s public service and could lead to structural under-financing of the real funding needs.
Vendar pa bi lahko pravila glede nadomestila stroškov podcenila dejanske neto stroške javne službe, ki jih je imela javna televizija RTP, zaradi česar bi lahko prišlo do prenizkega financiranja dejanskih potreb po financiranju.
As referred to in recital 65, under the cost calculation method laid down in the public service contracts, certain public service costs were excluded from payment by means of annual compensation [99].
Kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 65, so bili na podlagi metode izračuna stroškov iz pogodb o izvajanju javne službe določeni stroški javne službe izključeni iz plačila letnega nadomestila [99].
Moreover, Portugal informed the Commission that, although RTP had to pay VAT on the annual compensation payments received, the resulting costs could not be taken into account under the accounting rules (see recital 94) Finally, in its public service reports, RTP did not include all the investments made in public service equipment, although these were accounted for in its financial accounts (see recital 67).
Poleg tega je Portugalska Komisijo obvestila, da kljub temu, da je morala javna televizija RTP za prejeto letno izplačilo nadomestila plačevati DDV, nastalih stroškov na podlagi računovodskih pravil ni bilo mogoče upoštevati (glej uvodno izjavo 94). Javna televizija RTP v svoja poročila o izvajanju javne službe ni vključila vseh naložb v opremo za izvajanje javne službe, čeprav so bile knjižene v njenih finančnih poročilih (glej uvodno izjavo 67).
However, under the Amsterdam Protocol, it is for the Member State to provide for the funding of the public service broadcasters.
Vendar pa morajo države članice v skladu s Protokolom Amsterdamske pogodbe zagotoviti financiranje javne radiotelevizije.
In this case, the Portugal decided not to reimburse some of the costs incurred by the service provider in fulfilling its tasks.
V tem primeru se je Portugalska odločila, da nekaterih stroškov, ki jih je imel ponudnik storitev zaradi izvajanja svojih nalog, ne bo povrnila.
In this case, the State granted not only annual compensation payments to RTP but also additional financing in the form of share capital increases, loans and an agreement with body responsible for the social security scheme.
V tem primeru država javni televiziji RTP ni dodelila samo letnih izplačil nadomestil, ampak tudi dodatno financiranje v obliki povečanja kapitala, posojil in pogodbe z organom, pristojnim za shemo socialne varnosti.
In accordance with paragraph 57 of the Broadcasting Communication, the Commission must analyse whether all measures are proportionate to the net public service costs.
Komisija mora v skladu z odstavkom 57 Sporočila o radiodifuziji preučiti, ali so vsi ukrepi sorazmerni z neto stroški javne službe.
Only then can the financing of RTP be considered to be compatible with Article 106(2) TFEU.
Samo tako se lahko financiranje javne televizije RTP šteje za skladno s členom 106(2) PDEU.
The Commission also considers that the public service obligations imposed on RTP which were not eligible for compensation under the public service contracts may be considered as legitimate and clearly defined public service obligations formally imposed by the State on the service provider.
Komisija tudi meni, da se lahko obveznosti javne službe, ki jih je imela javna televizija RTP in ki na podlagi pogodb o izvajanju javne službe niso bile upravičene do nadomestila, štejejo za upravičene in jasno določene obveznosti javne službe, ki jih je država uradno naložila ponudniku storitev.
Therefore, under the State aid rules, Portugal may finance all the net public service costs of RTP.
Zato na podlagi pravil o državni pomoči Portugalska lahko financira vse neto stroške javne službe, ki jih ima javna televizija RTP.
Table 6 in recital 207 gives an overview of RTP’s public service costs (both investment costs and net operating costs), as calculated under the cost accounting rules applicable, and of the compensation received for investment and operating costs.
Preglednica 6 v uvodni izjavi 207 podaja pregled stroškov javne službe, ki jih je imela javna televizija RTP (tako stroškov naložb kot tudi neto stroškov poslovanja), izračunanih v skladu z veljavnimi pravili stroškovnega računovodstva, in nadomestil, ki jih je prejela za stroške naložb in poslovanja.
Firstly, the investments in public service equipment (Table 5) and compensation provided for to finance investments (Table 2) are presented.
Prvič, predstavljene so naložbe v opremo javne službe (preglednica 5) in nadomestilo, zagotovljeno za finančne naložbe (preglednica 2).
Secondly, the net operating costs of RTP (Table 4) and the compensation payments for these costs (Table 1) are presented.
Drugič, predstavljeni so neto stroški poslovanja RTP (preglednica 4) in plačila nadomestila teh stroškov (preglednica 1).
Lastly, the table shows the advantage gained from ad hoc aid resulting from the agreement with the social security scheme and the loan of 1998.
Tretjič, preglednica prikazuje korist, pridobljeno na podlagi začasne pomoči, ki izhaja iz dogovora s shemo socialne varnosti in posojila iz leta 1998.
Summary of funding needs and compensation for the public service net operating cost under the accounting rules
Povzetek potreb po financiranju in nadomestil za neto stroške poslovanja javne službe v skladu z računovodskimi pravili
Source: Financial report and public service reports.
Vir: Finančno poročilo in poročila o izvajanju javne službe.
Difference between investment costs and compensation
Razlika med stroški naložb in nadomestilom
Compensation payments
Plačila nadomestila
Difference between operating costs and compensation
Razlika med stroški poslovanja in nadomestilom
As emphasised in recital 201 and 202, the system of annual compensation payments chosen by Portugal had the effect of underestimating the actual costs of the public service tasks performed by RTP.
Kot je poudarjeno v uvodnih izjavah 201 in 202, je sistem letnih plačil nadomestil, ki ga je izbrala Portugalska, podcenil dejanske stroške nalog javne službe, ki jih je izvajala javna televizija RTP.
The system led to an accumulation of debt.
Zaradi tega sistema je prišlo do kopičenja dolga.
At a second stage, in order to maintain RTP’s financial equilibrium, Portugal used ad hoc measures to finance RTP’s public service costs.
V drugi fazi je Portugalska, da bi ohranila finančno ravnotežje javne televizije RTP, za financiranje stroškov javne službe, ki jih je imela javna televizija RTP, uporabila začasne ukrepe.
As Table 6 in recital 207 shows, the capital injection overcompensated for public service investments by PTE 26736,8 million, whereas the operating costs were underfinanced by the compensation payments and the other ad hoc measures to the tune of PTE 28755,1 million.
Kot prikazuje preglednica 6 v uvodni izjavi 207, je javna televizija RTP za naložbe v javno službo s kapitalskimi injekcijami prejela prekomerno nadomestilo, in sicer za 26736,8 milijona PTE, za stroške poslovanja pa je z nadomestilom in drugimi začasnimi ukrepi prejela premalo sredstev v znesku 28755,1 milijona PTE.
Although the capital injections were basically meant to finance investments in equipment, they were also used to repay accumulated debt.
Čeprav so bile kapitalske injekcije v bistvu namenjene financiranju naložb v opremo, so bile uporabljene tudi za odplačilo nakopičenega dolga.
As Table 6 in recital 207 also shows, the total compensation was PTE 2018,3 million less than the net public service costs (PTE 28755,1 minus PTE 26736,8 million).
Kot prikazuje preglednica 6 v uvodni izjavi 207, je bilo skupno nadomestilo v višini 2018,3 milijona PTE nižje od neto stroškov javne službe (28755,1 milijona PTE minus 26736,8 milijona PTE).
The Commission concludes, therefore, that under the Union rules total State funding is proportionate to the net operating public service costs of RTP for the period under investigation.
Komisija zato ugotavlja, da je na podlagi pravil Unije v obdobju preiskave skupna državna podpora sorazmerna z neto stroški poslovanja javne službe RTP.
That finding does not change if it is considered that the PTE 11000000 resulting from the exemption from registration charges also to be State aid (see recitals 119 and 120 of this Decision), contrary to the Commission’s original assumption.
Ta ugotovitev se ne spremeni, če se upošteva, da je v nasprotju s prvotno predpostavko Komisije 11000000 PTE zaradi oprostitve plačila registracijskih taks prav tako državna pomoč (glej uvodni izjavi 119 in 120 tega sklepa).
Taken into account that amount, there would still be an under-financing of RTP of PTE 2007,3 million.
Ob upoštevanju tega zneska bi javna televizija RTP še vedno prejela premalo sredstev, in sicer 2007,3 milijona PTE.
The Commission considers that the funds received by RTP were even lower than the total net costs incurred in fulfilling the obligations imposed on it by the State owing to the fact that Table 6 in recital 207 does not take into account all the public service costs of RTP in the period from 1992 to 1998.
Komisija meni, da so bila sredstva, ki jih je prejela javna televizija RTP, še nižja od skupnih neto stroškov, nastalih pri izpolnjevanju obveznosti, ki jih je javni televiziji RTP naložila država, saj v preglednici 6 iz uvodne izjave 207 niso upoštevani vsi stroški javne službe, ki jih je imela javna televizija RTP v obdobju 1992–1998.