natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Commission considers that this letter is not liable to have created any justified hopes concerning the STL or the individual measures involved in STL operations.
Skrben gospodarski subjekt ne bi mogel predvideti možnega obstoja državne pomoči v skupni uporabi več ukrepov
In accordance with Article 10(1) and (2) of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999, the Commission analysed the information it had in its possession regarding alleged unlawful aid and, on 21 December 2001, requested information from the Member State.
Ker posamezni ukrepi pomenijo državno pomoč (razen pospešena amortizacija zakupljenih sredstev), je dejstvo, da gospodarski subjekti niso mogli predvideti, da bi se tudi kombinacija teh ukrepov lahko štela za državno pomoč, nepomembno in ne dokazuje obstoja legitimnih pričakovanj ali kršitve katerega koli drugega temeljnega načela prava EU.
In the first place, the Commission notes that a request for information is not a public document.
Več tretjih strani med subjekti, udeleženimi v poslih na podlagi SPN, je trdilo, da so njihova legitimna pričakovanja temeljila na odločbi iz leta 2006 v francoski zadevi GIE Fiscaux, ker je bil ukrep zelo podoben SPN.
Second, contrary to what PYMAR claims, this request shows that the Commission did not have the necessary information to identify and assess the alleged unlawful aid.
Dejstvo, da so bile vse značilnosti francoskega ukrepa zajete v enem pravnem predpisu, je zahtevalo splošno oceno.
As such, even if it had been made public, it could not have created any legitimate expectation that the scheme did not constitute aid.
V zvezi s tem dejstvo, da so bili različni elementi SPN vključeni v različne ukrepe, torej dejansko povezani in uporabljeni skupaj, da bi ustvarili podobne učinke, ne bi smelo zahtevati drugačnega pristopa in ne izključuje splošne ocene.
Third, and most importantly, by letters of 28 January 2002 and 28 May 2002 the Spanish authorities categorically denied that any tax measure was available in support of the acquisition of ships for contracts signed after 31 December 2000.
V vsakem primeru Komisija meni, da predčasna amortizacija zakupljenih sredstev in davčna oprostitev (v skladu s členom 50(3) RIS) kapitalskih dobičkov na podlagi davka na tonažo pomenita državno pomoč.
The 2004 Decision concerning the Dutch notification [119]
Ker te določbe niso bile priglašene, bi lahko imeli subjekti legitimna pričakovanja glede njihove zakonitosti samo v izjemnih okoliščinah, ki pa niso bile dokazane.
The Commission considers that the 2004 Decision could not have created justified hopes in respect of the STL or the individual measures involved in STL operations for the following reasons:
Izjave o metodah amortiziranja v obvestilu Komisije o obdavčitvi ustvarjenega dohodka [126]
First, the subject of the Commission investigation in this case was not a Spanish measure but a scheme notified by the Dutch Government intended to compensate Dutch shipyards or allow them to match offers made in 2000 [120] by Spanish shipyards which allegedly benefited from State aid granted by Spain with respect to six specific shipbuilding contracts.
Komisija ugotavlja, da besedilo obvestila ne vsebuje ničesar, kar bi lahko ustvarilo legitimna pričakovanja subjektov, da je SPN zakonit.
Consequently, the purpose of the 2004 Commission Decision was to provide an assessment of the aid notified by the Netherlands and not of any aid allegedly awarded by Spain.
Prvič, navedene določbe se nanašajo samo na metode amortiziranja, zato bi lahko legitimna pričakovanja, če bi obstajala, zadevala samo predčasno amortizacijo zakupljenih sredstev.
Second, the Spanish measure that the Netherlands intended to match was neither the STL nor any of its components.
Drugič, obvestila ni mogoče razlagati tako, da noben ukrep v zvezi z amortizacijo ne sodi v področje uporabe pravil o državni pomoči.
As mentioned in the 2003 Decision to open the formal proceedings in that case, the Dutch authorities clearly invoked aid in the form of interest subsidies on credits allegedly awarded to shipowners under Spanish Royal Decree 442/94 [121].
V uvodni izjavi 13 obvestila je navedeno, da amortizacijska pravila in pravila o pokrivanju izgub ne predstavljajo pomoči, če se brez razlik uporabljajo za vsa podjetja in za proizvodnjo vsega blaga.
Moreover, the Commission notes that both the early depreciation of leased assets and the Spanish TT scheme only entered into force on 1 January 2002.
SPN se ne uporablja za vsa podjetja ali za proizvodnjo vsega blaga.
A draft of those measures was only published in the Official Gazette of the Spanish Parliament on 10 October 2001.
Poleg tega je v uvodni izjavi 22 istega obvestila pojasnjeno, da stopnja diskrecije, ki jo uživa davčna uprava, in možnosti, ki jih včasih ima, podpirajo domnevo, da obstaja državna pomoč.
Therefore, they could not have been used to finance shipbuilding contracts in 2000.
Kot je pojasnjeno v oddelku 2.2.2, morajo biti za uporabo predčasne amortizacije izpolnjeni pogoji, katerih besedilo zahteva razlago, in izdano predhodno dovoljenje davčne uprave.
Third, even if the operators had imagined that the Spanish measure that was intended to be matched was the STL — which is not the case — the statements made in the 2004 Decision could not create any legitimate expectations.
Pred izdajo dovoljenja lahko davčna uprava od vložnika zahteva dodatne dokumente ali druge uprave zaprosi za informacije.
Indeed, the Commission stated that it did not have ‘sufficient proof of the alleged Spanish aid’ because Spain had indicated that the aid under Royal Decree 442/94 would no longer be available after 31 December 2000.
Dejstvo, da so bili dodatni dokumenti priloženi vsem prošnjam, ki so bile na voljo Komisiji, kaže, da jih je uprava izrecno ali posredno zahtevala ali da so vložniki vedeli, da so potrebni za pridobitev dovoljenja.
After that date, the aid would no longer be authorised under the Shipbuilding Regulation [122].
Zato je imela davčna uprava precejšnje diskrecijske pravice pri izvajanju tega ukrepa.
However, the subject of the Commission investigation was the Dutch matching aid, not the alleged Spanish aid and the main doubt raised by the Commission in the decision to open proceedings concerned the possibility under the Framework on State aid to shipbuilding [123] of matching aid — once it had been proven — awarded by another Member State, and not by a non-EU State.
Zato glede na značilnosti sheme besedilo obvestila ni moglo povzročiti negotovosti, še manj pa ustvariti legitimna pričakovanja v zvezi z značajem pomoči predčasne amortizacije.
The absence of proof of the alleged aid came as a secondary argument in the doubts expressed by the Commission.
Upravičenost prihodkov od dajanja plovila v zakup brez posadke do sheme davka na tonažo
After asking Spain for clarifications based on the information provided by the Netherlands, the Commission could only record the Spanish denial that aid was granted [124] (pursuant to Spanish Royal Decree 442/94) and conclude that the Netherlands had failed to provide sufficient proof of the Spanish aid to be matched.
Odobritev iz Odločbe Komisije C(2002) 582 final z dne 27. februarja 2002 se nanaša na „podjetja, registrirana v skladu s špansko zakonodajo, katerih dejavnost vključuje upravljanje lastnih in zakupljenih ladij“.
The lack of proof of State aid does not amount to proof of the non-existence of State aid in (any) Spanish measure.
Vendar Komisija meni, da ta stavek ne more ustvariti legitimnih pričakovanj, da so subjekti, katerih dejavnosti vključujejo izključno dajanje enega plovila v zakup brez posadke, upravičeni do sheme davka na tonažo.
On the contrary, the Commission had already clarified in the decision to open proceedings that it had ‘not been able to establish that Spain had illegally granted the alleged aid, but the Commission continues to keep the EU shipbuilding market, and potential State aid violations, under review [125].’
Kot je pojasnjeno v uvodnih izjavah 179 in 180, je v odločbi iz leta 2002 jasno navedeno, da je treba shemo davka na tonažo uporabljati izključno v zvezi z upravičenimi plovili in upravičenimi dejavnostmi pomorskega prevoza.
Had they considered in good faith that the Spanish aid that the Netherlands intended to match was the STL, the actual or potential recipients of the STL should have been alerted by the fact that Spain had denied its existence rather than pleaded its compatibility.
Pravna varnost
The Commission considers that neither its decision to open the formal proceedings in the French GIE Fiscaux in 2004 nor its 2006 final decision concluding that the scheme was partly incompatible aid can possibly have created any legitimate expectations, as argued by PYMAR.
Pravna varnost je temeljna zahteva evropskega prava, katere cilj je zagotoviti predvidljivost pravnih razmer in razmerij, ki jih ureja.
Indeed, aid measures must be notified to the Commission.
V skladu s sodno prakso zahteva po pravni varnosti Komisiji preprečuje, da bi lahko neomejeno zavlačevala izvajanje svojih pristojnosti, in ne pomeni ukrepanja zadevne institucije [127].
In the absence of a notification, only exceptional circumstances can lead the Member State and operators legitimately to expect that a measure does not constitute aid.
Vendar pa sta bila za kršitev navedenega načela doslej potrebna dva kumulativna elementa:
However, if the notification and approval procedure was not respected, it cannot legitimately be expected that a measure which amounts to State aid is compatible with the internal market.
obstoj skupine elementov, ki ustvarjajo negotovost glede pravilnosti ukrepa,
On the contrary, in the French GIE Fiscaux Decision of 20 December 2006, the Commission clearly expressed its position that the French tax lease scheme conferred State aid.
dolgotrajno neukrepanje Komisije kljub seznanjenosti s pomočjo.
The fact that the STL was a tax lease scheme similar to the French scheme should have alerted Spain and the recipients to the likelihood that the STL could constitute State aid.
Odločba o francoski shemi GIE Fiscaux in sodba v zadevi Salzgitter [128] sta edina primera, kjer sta Komisija in prvostopenjsko sodišče menila, da lahko kršitev načela pravne varnosti prepreči vračilo pomoči, tudi če ni legitimnih pričakovanj.
Therefore, any legitimate expectations that existed before publication in the Official Journal of the European Union on 30 April 2007 of the Decision concerning the French scheme would have ceased being legitimate from that date.
Vendar je Sodišče razveljavilo sodbo v zadevi Salzgitter zaradi razloga, povezanega prav z uporabo načela pravne varnosti v zadevi [129].
Similarly, the mere fact that the incompatible aid was not recovered in the French case is insufficient to create legitimate expectations that incompatible aid possibly identified in the Spanish case would not be recovered.
Elementi, ki so ustvarili negotovost glede pravilnosti ukrepa
Indeed, if there were any reasons to prevent the Commission from requesting the Member State to recover the aid, these would have to be found in the specific circumstances of the case.
SPN in francoska shema GIE Fiscaux imata več skupnih ključnih značilnosti in zelo podobne učinke (glej oddelek 5.6.1 Enaka obravnava).
The Commission considers that the letter sent by Commissioner Kroes could not have created any justified hopes concerning the STL or the individual measures involved in STL operations for the following reasons:
Obe shemi se uporabljata pri financiranju dolgoročnih naložbenih sredstev.
First of all, this letter is not a formal act representing the position of the Commission — i.e. the College of Commissioners — as would be a formal Commission Decision or the answer to a Parliamentary Question.
Vključujeta davčno pregledna gospodarska interesna združenja, ki amortizirajo sredstva in njihovo lastništvo prenesejo na končnega uporabnika prek neke vrste zakupne pogodbe.
In her one-page letter, Commissioner Kroes replied, in the context of a bilateral exchange, to a one-page letter sent by Ms Brustad, Norwegian Minister for Trade and Industry.
V obeh primerih je amortizacija predčasna ali pospešena, kapitalski dobički gospodarskega interesnega združenja pa so oproščeni davka.
The content of this letter was not made public by the Commission.
V obeh primerih si vlagatelji v gospodarsko interesno združenje in končni uporabnik sredstva (prek cenovnega popusta) razdelijo gospodarsko prednost, ki nastane zaradi predčasne ali pospešene amortizacije in oprostitve kapitalskih dobičkov, čeprav v zvezi s tem obstajajo velike razlike glede poseganja države.
The Commission notes that the letter from the Norwegian shipowner — mentioned in recital 105 above — is addressed to a single Spanish shipyard with which the shipowner is doing business and that the testimony, dated 2012, comes from Gerencia del Sector Naval, a government body.
Ključni ukrepi, ki so del sistema SPN, so bili izvedeni med letoma 2002 [130] in 2003, tj. preden je Komisija sklenila, da francoski sistem pomeni državno pomoč.
The Commission also notes that neither the Spanish authorities — who knew that the investigation was ongoing — nor the operators considering STL operations asked the Commission to clarify the position expressed in Commissioner Kroes’s letter.
Zaradi podobnosti med SPN in GIE Fiscaux je torej možno, da so dogodki, navedeni v korist varstva pravne varnosti v zvezi s francoskim sistemom, ustvarili tudi negotovost v zvezi s pravilnostjo SPN, kot so trdili španski organi in nekatere tretje strani.
Second, and more importantly, even if that letter was made public in 2009, it did not provide specific, unconditional and concordant assurances that the STL was lawful.
Na tej točki Komisija ugotavlja, da bi njena izjava v odločbi iz leta 2001 v zvezi z Brittany Ferries [131], da so nekatere davčne ugodnosti splošni ukrepi, res lahko ustvarila to stanje negotovosti.
Indeed, the answer given by Commissioner Kroes focuses on alleged discriminations between shipyards established in different EEA countries.
Kot je pojasnjeno v uvodni izjavi 192 odločbe v zvezi z GIE Fiscaux, v tej izjavi ni navedeno, da se nanaša na predhodnico sheme GIE Fiscaux, kar bi lahko zavedlo prejemnike navedene ali podobne sheme, kot je SPN.
The conclusion of the letter that no further action was envisaged ‘at that stage’ was clearly linked to the recent publication of a statement clarifying that the STL could be used for the acquisition of ships produced in other European countries, which directly addressed the concerns expressed by Ms Brustad.
Kar zadeva druge elemente, ki so jih navedle Španija in tretje strani, je Komisija proučila, ali bi elementi, navedeni v podporo obstoju legitimnih pričakovanj (glej oddelek 5.6.1), lahko ustvarili stanje negotovosti.
In any event, the letter did not even mention, and even less took any position regarding, the presence of State aid at the level of the EIG or its investors.
Prvič, Pogodba državam članicam nalaga obveznost, da Komisijo obvestijo o svojih načrtih za dodelitev nove pomoči.
As regards shipping companies, shipyards and intermediaries, the Commission considers that they are not recipients of the aid, so that the issue of legitimate expectations does not arise.
Objave osnutkov ukrepov v Uradnem listu španskega parlamenta ni mogoče šteti za obvestilo Komisiji in neukrepanje Komisije ni moglo prispevati k nastanku stanja negotovosti.
The Commission therefore considers that the letter did not in any case provide precise, unconditional and consistent assurances liable to create legitimate expectations that the scheme did not contain State aid to the benefit of the EIG or its investors.
Drugič, zahteva iz leta 2001 za informacije v zvezi z ukrepom poslovnega najema kaže, da se je Komisija odzvala na trditve pritožnika o pomoči.
As the Commission did not identify the existence of legitimate expectations on the basis of the letter, the question whether such legitimate expectations would cover the period before the letter is of no relevance whatsoever.
Ta zahteva je bila naslovljena na Španijo, ki je v svojih odgovorih odločno zanikala obstoj takšnih ukrepov.
A diligent economic operator could not have foreseen the possible existence of State aid in the joint application of several measures
Komisija ni objavila zahteve, vendar, če bi prihodnji prejemniki SPN v času, ko so nameravali sodelovati v shemi, zaradi kakršnega koli razloga izvedeli za to zahtevo za informacije, bi jih morala opozoriti na dejstvo, da je Komisija prejela pritožbo in da meni, da bi ukrepi te sheme lahko pomenili državno pomoč.
As the individual measures constitute State aid (except for the accelerated depreciation of leased assets), the fact that economic operators could not foresee that their combination could also be regarded as State aid is irrelevant and does not justify the existence of legitimate expectations or the breach of any other fundamental principle of EU law.
Zahteva za informacije bi kazala tudi na to, da Komisija ni dovolj seznanjena z ukrepom, da bi ga lahko ocenila, in na podlagi te zahteve ne bi bilo mogoče sklepati, da je Komisija ukrep odobrila.
On the contrary, several third parties among the operators involved in STL operations have argued that the 2006 Decision in the French GIE Fiscaux case had given them legitimate expectations because the measure was very similar to the STL.
Poleg tega bi lahko Španija priglasila vse elemente sheme, da bi zagotovila pravno varnost, saj je bila zahteva za informacije poslana pred začetkom veljavnosti ukrepov, ki sestavljajo SPN.
The fact that all the features of the French measure were included in one legal provision necessarily implies a global assessment.
Prejemniki pa bi morali Španijo ali Komisijo vprašati, ali je Španija priglasila shemo oziroma ali jo je Komisija odobrila.
In that respect, the fact that the different elements of the STL were included in different measures — de facto linked and used together — to produce similar effects should not guarantee a different approach and does not rule out a global assessment.
Zato Španija in subjekti ne morejo trditi, da je ta zahteva ali odsotnost nadaljnjega ukrepanja Komisije v zvezi s podanim odgovorom prispevala k nastanku stanja negotovosti.
In any case, the Commission considers that both the early depreciation of leased assets and the tax exemption — pursuant to Article 50(3) RIS — of the capital gains realised under the TT constitute State aid in each case.
Tretjič, Komisija v zvezi z odločbo iz leta 2004 o nizozemskem ukrepu izenačitve poudarja, da nadomestilo za ukrep, ki ni SPN, ni moglo ustvariti stanja negotovosti v zvezi s SPN.
In the absence of any notification of these provisions, operators could only have legitimate expectations that they were lawful in exceptional circumstances that have not been demonstrated.
Dejstvo, da je bil natančen opis domnevne španske pomoči v javnih dokumentih naveden samo v nizozemski različici odločbe o začetku formalnega postopka preiskave, ne zadostuje za ugotovitev, da bi lahko bralci domnevali, da se opis nanaša na SPN.
The statements concerning depreciation methods in the Commission Notice on direct business taxation [126]
Prevod nizozemske odločbe ali vprašanje Komisiji bi zlahka razjasnilo, da je domnevna španska pomoč vključevala subvencionirane obrestne mere na podlagi kraljeve uredbe 442/1994.
The Commission notes that the wording of the Notice did not provide any grounds for operators to harbour legitimate expectations that the STL was lawful.
Poleg tega je Komisija zgolj omenila dejstvo, da je Španija zanikala obstoj domnevne španske pomoči in da Nizozemska ni zagotovila zadostnih dokazov.
First, the provisions invoked refer only to depreciation methods so that legitimate expectations, if any, could only cover the early depreciation of leased assets.
Kot je omenjeno v navedeni odločbi, lahko Komisija zgolj zaupa državi članici in ne more biti odgovorna za morebitno negotovost, ki bi jo lahko ustvarila odsotnost njenega nadaljnjega ukrepanja.
Second, the Notice cannot be interpreted in such a way that any measure related to depreciation falls outside the scope of State aid rules.
Komisija zato ugotavlja, da odločba iz leta 2004 ni mogla prispevati k stanju negotovosti v zvezi z zakonitostjo SPN.
Indeed, recital 13 of the Notice states that depreciation rules and rules on loss carry-overs do not constitute aid provided that they apply without distinction to all firms and to the production of all goods.
Četrtič, Komisija meni, da se je stanje negotovosti, ki je nastalo v zvezi z zakonitostjo SPN zaradi izjave iz odločbe Komisije iz leta 2001 v zvezi z Brittany Ferries, končalo na dan objave odločbe Komisije o francoski shemi GIE Fiscaux.
The STL is not applicable to all firms or to the production of all goods.
Iz slednje odločbe je bilo razvidno, da je Komisija francosko shemo poslovnega najema štela za državno pomoč, kar bi moralo Španijo in prejemnike SPN opozoriti na dejstvo, da bi shema lahko pomenila državno pomoč.
Moreover, recital 22 of the same Notice clarifies that the level of discretion enjoyed by the tax administration and the room for manoeuvre which it enjoys support the presumption that there is State aid involved.
Zato nikakor ni mogla ustvariti stanja negotovosti v zvezi s tem ali prispevati k njegovemu nastanku.
As explained in Section 2.2.2 above, the application of early depreciation is subject to conditions — the wording of which requires interpretation — and prior authorisation by the tax administration.
Petič, zaradi razlogov, navedenih v oddelku 5.6.2.6, Komisija meni, da dopis, ki ga je komisarka Kroes poslala leta 2009, ni ustvaril stanja negotovosti ali prispeval k njegovemu nastanku.
Before granting the authorisation the administration can request additional documents from the applicant or information from other administrations.
Komisija meni, da je treba čas, ki je v preiskavi SPN pretekel pred začetkom formalnega postopka preiskave, šteti od leta 2006, ko je Komisija prejela pritožbe evropskih ladjedelnic.
The fact that additional documents were present in all the application files available to the Commission suggests that they were — explicitly or implicitly — requested by the administration or that the applicants knew that they were necessary to obtain the authorisation.
Zaradi zgoraj navedenih razlogov niti objava osnutkov ukrepov v španskem Uradnem listu niti obtožbe, ki jih je Komisija prejela leta 2001, Španija pa izrecno zanikala leta 2002, ne podpirajo stališča, da je Komisija neupravičeno zavlačevala izvajanje svojih preiskovalnih pristojnosti.
As a consequence, the administration enjoyed wide discretionary powers in the application of this measure.
Tega mnenja ne podpira niti končna odločba iz leta 2004 v zadevi C-66/2003, ki se nanaša na izenačitev drugega domnevnega ukrepa državne pomoči.
Consequently, in view of the characteristics of the scheme, the wording of the Notice could not give rise to uncertainty, even less to legitimate expectations as far as the aid character of the early depreciation is concerned.
Čas, ki je pretekel med prvo pritožbo iz leta 2006 in začetkom formalnega postopka leta 2011, se ne zdi pretirano dolg glede na število zadevnih davčnih ukrepov, zapletenost poslovnega najema in premajhno preglednost v zvezi s temi posli najema.
Eligibility of the revenues from bareboat chartering for the tonnage tax scheme
Poleg tega je Komisija med septembrom 2006 in majem 2010 [132] poslala osem uradnih zahtev za informacije in bila redno v stiku s španskimi organi.
The authorisation granted by Commission Decision C(2002) 582 final of 27 February 2002 refers to ‘companies registered under Spanish law, whose activity includes the operation of owned and chartered ships’.
Poleg tega je Komisija šele oktobra 2010 prejela novo pritožbo, ki je vsebovala ključen element za oceno sheme, in sicer izčrpno študijo davčnih strokovnjakov, ki opisuje delovanje sheme in njene učinke.
However, the Commission considers that this sentence cannot create any legitimate expectations that entities whose activities exclusively consist of chartering out one vessel on a bareboat basis would be eligible for the TT scheme.
Zato se čas, ki je pretekel v preiskavi SPN, ne zdi zadosten za sklicevanje na pravno varnost.