natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
As acknowledged by the Italian authorities, the third and the fourth measures cover the needs of capital of SACE BT in order to cope with the effects of the financial crisis [112].
V tem okviru je treba omeniti, da so pri scenariju likvidacije delničarji upravičeni le do preostalih prihodkov, če ostanejo po kritju vseh obveznosti družbe in vseh zapadlih stroškov likvidacije.
In the document for discussion (materiale per discussione) in the SACE BT's Board of Directors of 31 March 2009 it is provided that SACE BT ‘needs a recapitalisation (ricapitalizzazione) of up to EUR 70 million in order to constitute adequate assets to cover the reserves at the end of 2009’ [113].
Izid likvidacije je odvisen od vrednosti in možnosti prodaje sredstev družbe.
The same document provides that already at the end of the first semester of 2009 the assets were insufficient to cover the reserves, i.e. an amount of EUR 23 million was needed at the end of June 2009 and EUR 68 million at the end of 2009.
Komisija zelo previdno obravnava hipotezo, da družba SACE pri scenariju likvidacije ne bi izterjala nič svoje kapitalske naložbe, ki jo je izvedla v družbo SACE BT.
The opening decision indicates that it seems that SACE BT was not in a position to cover the losses registered at the end of 2008 and its assets at the time were not sufficient to cover reserves.
Pri naslednjem koraku pri ocenjevanju relativne privlačnosti injekcije kapitala v višini 70 milijonov EUR v družbo SACE BT v primerjavi s scenarijem likvidacije je treba oceniti, kolikšna je bila vrednost družbe (tj. tržna vrednost 100-odstotnega deleža lastniškega kapitala v družbi) po tej injekciji v višini 70 milijonov EUR.
It seems that SACE BT could not have raised the capital injected into the company on the market since its expected profitability was insufficient.
Če je vrednost družbe po kapitalskih injekcijah leta 2009 znašala 70 milijonov EUR ali več, potem bi zasebni vlagatelj morda želel nadaljevati s to naložbo.
There is no evidence that SACE BT had a positive value at that time.
Taka vrednost družbe je odvisna od ocene trenutne vrednosti denarnih tokov v prihodnosti (smeri denarnih tokov) za delničarja.
In recital 108 of the opening decision, the Commission invited Italy to comment, whether the third measure was necessary to allow SACE BT to continue operating and, if so, what would be the estimated costs that could be incurred by SACE, if it were to sell or to liquidate SACE BT.
Komisija je zato sklenila, da zaradi odsotnosti pričakovane smeri denarnega toka za družbo SACE BT ni bilo znaka, da bo njena tržna vrednost po izvedbi tretjega in četrtega ukrepa znašala 70 milijonov EUR ali več.
The Commission noted that a parent company would have recapitalised its subsidiary, but only if there is a reasonable likelihood that the assisted undertaking will become profitable again [114].
Zato bi preudarni zasebni vlagatelj družbi SACE BT raje pustil, da gre v stečaj (ali jo prodal, če bi našel kupca), kot pa nadaljeval z njeno dokapitalizacijo.
A market economy investor would not have injected additional capital into SACE BT, if in economic terms this was more costly than to liquidate the respective assets (e.g. by selling the respective investment).
Tako tudi ta dodatna analiza kaže, da SACE pri odobritvi tretjega in četrtega ukrepa ni ravnala kot vlagatelj v tržnem gospodarstvu.
In recitals 111 and 117 of the opening decision, the Commission raised doubts on the compliance of the third and fourth measures with the MEIP.
Drugi argument je, da bi vlagatelj za vrednotenje družbe lahko uporabil drug kazalnik, kot je metoda vrednotenja s pomnožitvijo mnogokratnika razmerja med ceno in knjigovodsko vrednostjo delnice (P/B), izpeljanega iz primerljivih družb, katerih delnice kotirajo na borzi, s knjižno vrednostjo družbe.
The Commission further provided that the two measures seemed to have conferred an advantage to SACE BT.
Komisija je seznanjena le z eno evropsko družbo za zavarovanje kreditov, ki kotira na borzi, in sicer Euler-Hermes, zato se lahko upošteva njen P/B.
The opening decision (recital 109) indicates that the plan available at the time of the investment plays a central role.
P/B družbe Euler-Hermes je konec prvega četrtletja znašal približno 0,60 [125].
The plan has a key significance because a private investor will provide fresh capital to a company with an earnings deficit only if he expects a return to a sufficient profitability level.
Če bi se ta mnogokratnik uporabil za pričakovano vrednost družbe SACE BT konec leta 2009 v višini 94,2 milijona EUR, bi vrednost družbe znašala 56,52 milijona EUR, če bi bila profila tveganja primerljiva.
Otherwise, the invested capital would only go towards repayment of the company's existing debt, without ensuring that it will begin to earn a profit again in the future [115].
Vendar Komisija opaža, da SACE BT pred krizo ni bila donosna (v nasprotju z navedbami iz njenega poslovnega načrta), poleg tega pa ni bilo poslovnega načrta, ki bi kazal možnost, da bo ponovno donosna.
Without a compelling ‘restructuring’ plan, a rational private investor would not invest [116].
Posledično se lahko šteje za takrat bistveno bolj tvegano družbo kot Euler-Hermes, zato bi vrednost družbe ob odobritvi ukrepov znašala bistveno manj kot 56,52 milijona EUR.
SACE BT expected to increase its market share in the credit insurance and surety business market up to a target level of 15 % in 2011 and to become the second market player in the credit insurance by 2011.
Na koncu bi zaradi uporabe vrednosti razmerja med ceno in knjigovodsko vrednostjo delnice, podobno kot pri uporabi vrednosti na podlagi denarnih tokov v prihodnosti, zasebni vlagatelj sklenil, da je odvisno družbo bolje pustiti, da gre v stečaj, kot vanjo vložiti dodatnih 70 milijonov EUR.
For 2009, SACE BT estimated that it would rank third or fourth in the credit insurance and surety business market.
Zato se lahko tudi na podlagi zgornje analize sklene, da je bila SACE v slabšem položaju po odobritvi tretjega in četrtega ukrepa, kot bi bila v primeru scenarija likvidacije.
As for SACE BT's distribution network, the plan provides, inter alia, the assessment of possible opportunities for further acquisitions.
Komisija nadalje ugotavlja, da je v odvisno družbo za zavarovanje izvoznih kreditov dodaten kapital v času krize vložilo več vlagateljev v tržnem gospodarstvu, kot to poudarja družba SACE.
Moreover, the business plan relies, inter alia, on exogenous factors like the improvement of the economic and market scenario and a progressive opening of the reinsurance market starting with 2011 rather than on internal changes.
Zaradi visoke negotovosti in nujnosti tem vlagateljem dokončne napovedi v času njihovih naložb morda niso bile nemudoma na voljo.
The elements submitted by Italy and SACE during the formal investigation procedure have not changed the Commission's initial assessment laid down in the opening decision.
Vendar so bile družbe za zavarovanja izvoznih kreditov, ki so jih njihovi delničarji dokapitalizirali, pred krizo donosne, tako da je bila njihova ponovna donosnost verjetnejša.
The Commission's position regarding the qualification of the third and the fourth measures as a capital increase (‘aumenti di capitale’) has not changed.
Toda SACE BT je dosegala izgube.
Even though according to Italy the operation did not increase the amount of the share capital (‘capitale sociale’), the Commission notes that it influenced positively the shareholders' equity (‘patrimonio netto’), being a wider category than the share capital (‘capitale sociale’), by means of transfer from the parent company SACE to SACE BT's capital [117].
Pri odvisni družbi, ki je že imela izgubo oziroma je v letih pred krizo komaj dosegala finančno rentabilnost (pri čemer je njen poslovni načrt predvideval stalno rast donosnosti), bi se zasebni vlagatelj pri veliki naložbi kapitala obotavljal.
According to SACE, the decisions to recapitalise SACE BT were taken in view of the expected return to profitability in 2011.
Preveril bi, ali je mogoče, da bo družba nekoč dosegala ustrezno raven donosnosti.
However, the Commission recalls that, when it granted the third measure, SACE did not dispose of updated financial projections or a business plan taking into account the capital injection and the latest financial data.
Komisija opaža, da leta 2009 ni bilo finančnih napovedi, ki bi kazale ponovno doseganje donosnosti.
Therefore, SACE had no basis to expect SACE BT's return to profitability.
Preudarni vlagatelj v takih okoliščinah v družbo ne bi vložil veliko dodatnega kapitala.
The main document considered by SACE when granting the fourth measure consists of the business plan for 2010-2011.
SACE trdi, da je bila družba SACE BT še vedno v zagonski fazi, zato se je težje spopadala z učinki finančne krize.
The Commission notes that this business plan was a very short document, which merely set out the negative outlook in the market and, with specific regard to SACE BT, only provided few main financial ratios and figures for 2010 and 2011.
Komisija najprej opaža, da je SACE BT ob začetku krize leta 2008 poslovala že štiri leta.
In particular, the business plan provided data illustrating that the market situation was worsening (the loss ratio was progressively deteriorating, increased by 71,4 % in 2008 as compared to 2007) and the losses amounted to approximately half of the turnover of the sector.
V skladu s prakso Komisije podjetje načeloma velja za novoustanovljeno prva tri leta po začetku poslovanja na zadevnem področju [127].
In that context, the plan projected a significant improvement in SACE BT's credit insurance ratios so as to reach zero profitability in 2011 (see Table 5).
Tudi če bi bila trditev, da je bila SACE BT še vedno v zagonski fazi, resnična, ni jasno, kakšen učinek bi imela na uporabo načela vlagatelja pod tržnimi pogoji.
However, it did not detail the changes to the pricing or how the reduction of costs would be achieved to that end.
Zasebni vlagatelj bi namreč še vedno primerjal pričakovano tržno vrednost družbe po dokapitalizaciji (na podlagi njene pričakovane donosnosti) z možnostjo propada ali prodaje družbe.
It also appears from the minutes of the Board of Directors of SACE approving the third and fourth measures that it agreed to the capitalisation measures so as to cover the losses and to satisfy the regulatory requirements, thus allowing the company to continue the business.
Odgovornost in državni viri
No consideration of the future profitability of the company was provided in those minutes.
V uvodnih izjavah 73 do 78 sklepa o začetku postopka je Komisija uporabila kazalnike iz zadeve „Stardust Marine“ [128], da je dokazala pripis ukrepa, pri čemer je upoštevala, da je SACE v celoti v lasti države.
The Board did not take into consideration a potential liquidation of SACE BT, comparing a liquidation scenario with the chosen path to inject further capital into the company in difficulty.
V skladu z ustaljeno sodno prakso (glej zlasti sodbo v zadevi Stardust Marine) se, tudi če država lahko nadzoruje javno podjetje in izvaja dominantni vpliv nad njenim poslovanjem, dejansko izvajanje navedenega nadzora v zadevnem primeru ne more samodejno predpostavljati.
Hence, it did not require nor consider any estimation of liquidation costs and, therefore, was not in a position to conclude that the injection of capital would have led to a better economic outcome than the liquidation of the company.
Zato je treba ugotoviti, ali je treba organe oblasti obravnavati, kot da so na en ali drug način vpleteni v sprejemanje teh ukrepov.
As a result, the Commission concludes that, when adopting those measures, SACE did not assess whether providing the additional capital was a more economically beneficial scenario for it as a shareholder than the liquidation of the subsidiary.
Kljub temu glede na sodbo v zadevi Stardust Marine:
Given the market circumstances and the absence of any profitability forecasts for SACE BT at the time, a prudent private market operator would not have proceeded with the investment without such consideration.
V zvezi s tem ni mogoče zahtevati, da je treba na podlagi podrobnih navodil dokazati, da so javni organi v posameznem primeru vzpodbudili javno podjetje, da sprejme ukrepe zadevne pomoči.
For this reason alone, one can therefore conclude that SACE did not behave like a prudent private market operator and, therefore, the capital injections made with the third and fourth measure should be qualified as state aid.
Po eni strani zaradi tesnih odnosov med državo in javnim podjetjem obstaja resna nevarnost, da se bodo prek njih državne pomoči odobrile nepregledno in ob neupoštevanju ureditve državnih pomoči, ki jo predvideva Pogodba.
To answer Member States' claims that these capital injections cannot be considered as aid as they are merely fulfilling a legal obligation, the MEIP Communication provides that private investors faced with such a situation would consider all other options — including the liquidation or run-down [119] — and choose the one which is financially the most advantageous.
Zato je Sodišče določilo naslednje kazalnike, ki omogočajo pripis ukrepa, ki ga sprejme javno podjetje, državi:
In the present case, the Commission considers that SACE could have let SACE BT go bankrupt, as it was a limited liability company.
Komisija je v uvodni izjavi 79 sklepa o začetku postopka poleg tega sklenila, da ni zelo verjetno, da so bili preiskovani ukrepi sprejeti brez kakršnega koli sodelovanja države.
SACE would not have to cover the liabilities of SACE BT.
V odgovoru na sklep o začetku postopka sta Italija in SACE vztrajali, da se nobeden od štirih ukrepov ne pripiše državi, saj je SACE odločitve sprejela popolnoma neodvisno od države.
SACE is correct to argue that other considerations like public image [120] may be taken into account by private investors.
Italija je predložila dodatne podatke in utemeljitev, v kateri je trdila, da se ukrepi ne pripišejo državi.
The Court of Justice ruled in ENI/Lanerossi that a parent company's temporary absorption of losses generated by a subsidiary ‘which is experiencing temporary difficulties but is capable of becoming profitable again, possibly after a reorganization’, could be justified not only by the prospect of an indirect material benefit, but also by other considerations, i.e. the protection of public image of the group and the reorientation of its operations [121].
Za ocenjevanje sodne prakse, na katero se sklicuje Italija, je treba omeniti, da je odločitev Komisije v zadevi Olympic Airways omenjala merila iz zadeve „Stardust Marine“, a jih ni dejansko uporabila.
Consequently, as upheld by the case-law, the arguments have limited significance in connection with the application of the private investor test in the absence of any prediction, at the time of the capital injections, that SACE BT could produce profits after 2011, not even in the longer term.
Sodišče je zato ugotovilo, da je sklepanje Komisije nezadostno za ugotovitev odgovornosti v zadevi, in ne, da se ukrep ne pripiše državi.
In addition, Italy and SACE did not provide any element to show and quantify the negative economic effects that the alleged deterioration of SACE's public image would produce for this company.
V zvezi s sodbo SIC-RTP [130], na katero se sklicujejo italijanski organi, Komisija opaža, da je v navedeni sodbi Splošno sodišče potrdilo oceno Komisije, da se nekatere izpodbijane odločbe družbe Portugal Telecom (sestavljene iz odobritve zamudnih plačil pristojbin javnega izdajatelja televizijskega programa RTP), ki je bila nekoč v lasti države, ne pripišejo državi.
The Commission also observes that the insurance activities of SACE are operated under a state guarantee.
Vendar je sodba Splošnega sodišča temeljila na posebnih okoliščinah navedenega primera.
Consequently, the insured parties know that the state will ensure that they are paid any indemnification they are entitled to under those insurances.
Zlasti je Splošno sodišče v zadevi SIC-RTP med drugim opozorilo, da tožeča stranka ni nasprotovala presoji Komisije, da je izvorna podlaga za olajšave pri plačilu pristojbin razlika v cenah med RTP in Portugal Telekom [131].
So the Commission fails to see why insured customers of SACE would be worried that a subsidiary of SACE which is not state guaranteed and has the form of a liability company is liquidated.
Poleg tega je Splošno sodišče opozorilo, da je Komisija ugotovila, da se ravnanje družbe Portugal Telecom po njeni privatizaciji ni spremenilo, čemur tožeča stranka ni nasprotovala [132].
Italy and SACE did not provide justification why these activities of SACE operated under the state guarantee would be affected.
Zato je jasno, da je ocena Splošnega sodišča zadevala določeno situacijo, ki se je od situacije v tem sklepu zelo razlikovala.
Moreover, the Commission considers that, since SACE operates its insurance activities with a state guarantee, they do not constitute market activities which a private operator could carry out (precisely, the guarantee on the insurance activities of SACE does not constitute aid because these activities are considered not to be offered by the market and therefore there is no distortion of competition).
Komisija je našla dodatne dokaze o odgovornosti za ukrepe v dodatnih dokumentih, ki sta jih predložili Italija in SACE.
The Commission considers that, when assessing whether a private investor in the position of SACE would have let a subsidiary like SACE BT go bankrupt or recapitalise it, one cannot take into account the possible negative effect of the liquidation of SACE BT on these non-market activities carried out by SACE, since a private investor would never be in the position of carrying out such activities.
Podobno kot v sklepu o začetku postopka se v tem sklepu uporabljajo kazalniki iz zadeve „Stardust Marine“, da se dokaže odgovornost za drugi, tretji in četrti ukrep.
As indicated, at the time when it took the third and the fourth measure SACE did not compare a liquidation scenario with the chosen path to inject further capital into SACE BT despite its difficulties.
Čeprav SACE ni vključena v javno upravo in ne izvaja uradne oblasti, Komisija meni, da naslednji splošni kazalniki prikazujejo, da je za ukrepe, ki jih je odobrila SACE, odgovorna država [133]:
For the sake of completeness, in the paragraphs below the Commission will in any event show that, if SACE had made such a comparison, it would have realised that the liquidation of SACE BT would have been more convenient than injecting further 70 million of capital in SACE BT despite its difficulties.
vsi člani upravnega odbora SACE („Consiglio di Amministrazione“) so imenovani na predlog italijanske države v skladu s členom 6(2) Zakonodajnega odloka št. 269/2003 [134].
To determine whether SACE, as the only shareholder of SACE BT, was better off investing additional capital of EUR 70 million rather than liquidating SACE BT (running down its activities), one has to compare the expected cash flows, if any, to SACE as a shareholder in the liquidation (running down) scenario with those expected in the capital injection scenario.
SACE svojih dejavnosti ne izvaja „na trgu v običajnih razmerah konkurence z zasebnimi gospodarskimi subjekti“:
Based on the information submitted, Italy and SACE have not made at the time (nor ex post) the valuation of the equity stake in SACE BT in pre-injection or post-injection scenarios.
Misija družbe SACE leta 2004 je bila (in je še) ohranjanje in spodbujanje konkurenčnosti italijanskega gospodarstva ter v bistvu krije netržna tveganja v smislu sporočila o izvoznih kreditih (tj. poslovala je na terenu, za katerega se šteje, da zanj ne veljajo običajni pogoji konkurence na trgu).
The Commission observes that at the end of May 2009 and early July 2009, when the Board of SACE BT decided to grant the third and fourth measures, it was already expected that, on top of the large losses recorded in 2008 (EUR 29,5 million), SACE BT was estimated to generate further significant losses in 2009 (of EUR 53,4 million [123]), such that the remaining capital at the end of 2009 was expected to amount to EUR 24,2 million.
Dejavnost družbe SACE je vedno imela jamstvo države, kar v skladu s pravili o državni pomoči ni dovoljeno drugim javnim podjetjem, ki so konkurenčna z zasebnimi udeleženci na trgu.
In particular, at the end of first quarter 2009 (1Q2009) SACE BT's book value of equity (taking into account the losses recorded in that period of EUR 22,6 million) was of EUR 55 million and the expected losses for the whole year 2009 were of EUR 53,4 million.
Računovodske izkaze družbe SACE nadzoruje Računsko sodišče, ministrstvo za gospodarstvo in finance pa mora italijanskemu parlamentu predstaviti letna poročila o njeni dejavnosti.
Hence, in a pre-injection scenario the expected book value of equity at the end of 2009 would amount to the difference between book value at 1Q2009, EUR 55 million, and the remainder of the expected losses for the year, i.e. EUR 30,8 million (EUR 53,4 million minus EUR 22,6 million), equalling EUR 24,2 million.
V zvezi z vplivom države na dodeljevanje sredstev družbe SACE se mora CIPE vsako leto najpozneje do 30. junija posvetovati o finančnih napovedih in finančnih potrebah, povezanih z določenimi tveganji, ter opredeliti svetovne omejitve za netržna tveganja, ki jih prevzame SACE, zlasti za jamstva, ki trajajo manj ali več kot 24 mesecev [135].
In the post-injection scenario, the book value of the equity would be expected to be increased by the amount of the recapitalisations (EUR 70 million) and to amount to EUR 94,2 million.
Statuti družbe SACE BT določajo, da poleg pravnih določb, ki običajno veljajo za zasebne zavarovalnice, za družbo SACE BT velja tudi zakonodajni predpis [136], ki določa, da v primeru ustanovitve novega pravnega subjekta za kritje tržnih tveganj SACE ne bi smela imeti v lasti več kot 30 % njenega kapitala.
In that context, it has to be noted that in the liquidation scenario, shareholders are only entitled to the residual proceeds, if any remain after covering all liabilities of the company and all due costs of liquidation.
Zato se zdi, da je tudi po ustanovitvi družbe SACE BT na njeno redno podporo (drugi, tretji in četrti ukrep) vplivala italijanska država do te mere, da je zgoraj omenjena zakonodajna določba izključevala, da se taka tveganja opustijo in/ali v celoti prodajo udeležencu na trgu [137].
The outcome of the liquidation depends on the value and saleability of the assets of the company.
Poleg splošnih kazalnikov iz uvodne izjave 177 se lahko opredelijo drugi kazalniki, povezanimi s pogoji odobritve drugega, tretjega in četrtega ukrepa:
To make a very conservative assessment, the Commission considers the hypothesis that in the liquidation scenario SACE would not have recovered any of its capital investment in SACE BT.
dva od štirih članov („Consiglieri“) upravnega odbora družbe SACE („Consiglio di Amministrazione“) sta imela ob odobritvi drugega, tretjega in četrtega ukrepa vodilna položaja v italijanski upravi [138], in sicer na nekdanjem ministrstvu za zunanjo trgovino (sedaj ministrstvo za gospodarski razvoj) in ministrstvu za zunanje zadeve.
As a next step, in order to assess the relative attractiveness of the injection of EUR 70 million of capital in SACE BT compared to a liquidation scenario, it has to be assessed what was the value of the company (i.e. market value of a 100 % equity stake in the company) after this EUR 70 million injection.
S tega stališča je član upravnega odbora družbe SACE, ki je imel tudi vodilni položaj na ministrstvu za zunanje zadeve (minister pooblaščenec, generalni direktor za večstransko gospodarsko in finančno sodelovanje, italijansko ministrstvo za zunanje zadeve), na sestanku upravnega odbora SACE 1. aprila 2009 dejal, da se zmogljivost zavarovanja ne sme zmanjšati „ne v netržnem sektorju in ne za tržna tveganja“ [139].