natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Holland Shipbuilding considers that the recipients of aid are the EIGs and their investors, as well as the shipping companies, but also the Spanish shipyards because there is a substantial difference between the price paid by the shipowner and the price received by the shipyard, which is above the market price.
V nasprotju s tem […] meni, da sheme nikakor ni mogoče šteti za združljivo pomoč, niti na podlagi smernic za pomorski promet, kot je navedeno v Odločbi C(2011) 4494 final.
According to a national shipbuilding association, the scheme was designed to benefit the shipyards.
Dejansko meni, da Španija ne bo mogla dokazati, da so bile vse zgrajene ladje upravičene do koristi na podlagi teh smernic, in da lahko pomoč zniža na nič samo znesek davčne obveznosti, ki jo mora upravičenec plačati v državi, ki je sprejela shemo.
It would be incorrect to conclude that STL is of benefit to the shipping companies.
Zato lastniki ladij, ki niso iz Španije, ne bi imeli koristi od sheme, davek, ki ga plačujejo španski lastniki ladij, pa je verjetno omejen, saj koristijo sistem davka na tonažo in znižanje prispevkov za socialno varstvo.
The reduction in the building price does not necessarily imply an advantage for the purchaser of the ship.
PRIPOMBE V ZVEZI Z VRAČILOM
Moreover, Spanish shipyards can only offer this advantage to buyers that use the STL.
Španski organi in potencialni prejemniki trdijo, da bi bilo treba vračilo pomoči izključiti, saj bi kršilo temeljna načela prava EU [46], kot so enaka obravnava, varstvo legitimnih pričakovanj in pravna varnost.
The STL constitutes unlawful aid to shipbuilding that is damaging to national shipbuilders that are in direct competition with Spanish ones.
Enaka obravnava
PYMAR considers that the Commission did not give sufficient grounds in Decision C(2011) 4494 final as to why it identifies shipyards as potential recipients of State aid.
PYMAR trdi, da so bili podobni davčni ukrepi preiskani v dveh drugih zadevah (Brittany Ferries [47] in GIE Fiscaux), v katerih vračilo ni bilo odrejeno.
It also points out that in the decisions in the GIE Fiscaux, Brittany Ferries, Air Caraïbes or Le Levant [44] cases concerning similar tax schemes, the Commission did not identify the producer of the asset as a recipient of State aid.
Če bi Komisija sklenila, da pomoč obstaja, bi bilo treba to pomoč šteti za združljivo do meje iz poglavja 11 smernic za pomorski promet, glede zneska, ki presega navedeno mejo, pa bi moralo varstvo pravne varnosti tako kot v francoski zadevi Komisiji preprečiti, da zahteva vračilo.
OBSERVATIONS RELATED TO THE CLASSIFICATION AS EXISTING OR UNLAWFUL AID
[…] trdi, da bi zaradi dejstva, da se od francoskih subjektov vračilo ni zahtevalo, izterjava pomoči od španskih subjektov v zelo podobnem primeru slednje postavila v neugoden konkurenčen položaj in kršila načelo enake obravnave.
As mentioned in Section 4.3 above, Spain and certain third parties consider that there are only two measures involved: first, the provisions of Article 115 TRLIS concerning the deduction of the cost of an asset acquired via a financial leasing contract.
Španija in PYMAR se sklicujeta na več odločb, v katerih je Komisija že opustila vračilo pomoči zaradi javnih izjav Komisije ali enega od njenih članov.
Spain adopted these provisions before it joined the EU.
Navajata odločbe o belgijskih centrih za usklajevanje, luksemburških holdinških družbah 1929 in drugih centrih za usklajevanje ter notranjih dejavnostih večnacionalnih družb [48], španskem dobrem imenu [49], italijanski zadevi o pomoči velikim podjetjem v težavah [50] in dveh zadevah v zvezi z ribištvom [51] (Shetlandski in Orkneyjski otoki).
Therefore, if this measure constitutes aid, it is existing aid as stated by the Commission in Decision C(2011) 4494 final, and Article 115(11) TRLIS, which allows the administration to set the starting point for the deduction, is only a means of implementing Article 115.
Legitimna pričakovanja/pravna varnost
Second, the TT system enshrined in Articles 124 to 128 TRLIS was approved by the Commission in 2002 and is therefore also existing aid.
Po navedbah Španije [52] in nekaterih tretjih strani, udeleženih v poslih na podlagi SPN, so stranke v teh poslih zaradi naslednjih elementov verjele, da davčni ukrepi, uporabljeni v teh poslih, niso pomenili državne pomoči:
The implementing provisions — in particular Article 50(3) RIS — do not alter the rules enshrined in the law and are therefore covered by the Commission authorisation.
izjava Komisije v odločbi v zadevi Brittany Ferries [53] iz leta 2001, da je francoska shema GIE Fiscaux, ki je podobna SPN, splošen ukrep;
OBSERVATIONS RELATED TO THE COMPATIBILITY OF AID
objava osnutkov ukrepov (predčasne amortizacije in sistema davka na tonažo) v Uradnem listu španskega parlamenta 10. oktobra 2001 [54];
The Spanish authorities and the alleged recipients argue that the aid is compatible on the basis of the TT system approved in 2002 because it covers ‘maritime companies registered under Spanish law [45], whose activity includes the operation of owned and chartered ships’.
dopis Komisije iz leta 2001, v katerem od Španije zahteva informacije v okviru preiskave v zvezi z več domnevnimi ukrepi pomoči, vključno s sistemom poslovnega najema v korist ladjedelništva;
As Article 50(3) RIS only implements the TT system, it is also covered by the 2002 Decision.
Odločba Komisije [55] iz leta 2004 o zavrnitvi pomoči, ki naj bi se dodelila nizozemskim ladjedelnicam kot nadomestilo zaradi pomoči, ki je bila domnevno na voljo španskim ladjedelnicam, ki tekmujejo za iste pogodbe o gradnji ladij;
The third parties also argue that any aid would be compatible with the Maritime Guidelines, which also include the operation of owned and chartered ships and this aid would remain within the aid ceiling imposed by these Guidelines.
odločba iz leta 2006 v francoski zadevi GIE Fiscaux [56];
The Asociación de Ingenieros Navales y Oceánicos de España (Spanish Association of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers) considers that the compatibility of any aid should be analysed in the global competitive context rather than focus on the internal market since shipyards in non-EU countries receive support that is not subject to competition rules, as is the case in the EU.
dopis, ki ga je komisarka Kroes [57], ki je bila takrat pristojna za konkurenco, poslala norveški ministrici za trgovino in industrijo v odgovor na pritožbo, da španska davčna shema daje prednost španskim ladjedelnicam;
By contrast, […] considers that the scheme cannot be regarded as compatible aid at all, not even — as stated in Decision C(2011) 4494 final — under the Maritime Guidelines.
skrben gospodarski subjekt ne bi mogel predvideti možnega obstoja državne pomoči v kombinaciji različnih shem, ki so bile bodisi dolgo časa prisotna značilnost nacionalnega davčnega sistema (pospešena amortizacija zakupljenih sredstev, status gospodarskih interesnih združenj) bodisi jih je Komisija predhodno odobrila (sistem davka na tonažo);
Indeed, it considers, first, that Spain will not be able to prove that all ships built were eligible to benefit from these Guidelines and, second, that the aid can only reduce to zero the amount of tax due by the beneficiary in the country that adopts the scheme.
izjave glede odsotnosti pomoči v ukrepih v zvezi z metodami amortiziranja, navedene v obvestilu Komisije o obdavčitvi ustvarjenega dohodka [58].
Therefore, non-Spanish shipowners would not benefit from the scheme and the tax paid by Spanish shipowners is likely to be limited since they benefit from the TT system and a reduction in social charges.
Odločba Komisije v zadevi Brittany Ferries (BAI) iz leta 2001
OBSERVATIONS RELATED TO RECOVERY
Komisija je v uvodni izjavi 193 navedene odločbe navedla: „… Komisija v zvezi z gospodarskimi interesnimi združenji in davčnimi ugodnostmi, ki jih morda prinašajo, meni, da pomenijo splošen ukrep, glede na to, da so v Franciji pogosta, da jih je mogoče ustanoviti v vseh sektorjih gospodarske dejavnosti in da se zanje uporablja običajno pravo“.
Both the Spanish authorities and the potential recipients maintain that recovery should be ruled out because that would breach fundamental principles of EU law [46] such as equal treatment, the protection of legitimate expectations or legal certainty.
Španija [59] in nekatere tretje strani so trdile, da je ta izjava bodisi ustvarila pravno negotovost glede zakonitosti SPN, katerega sestava in učinki so zelo podobni, ali pa povzročila legitimna pričakovanja, da SPN ni državna pomoč.
Equal treatment
Objava osnutkov ukrepov v Uradnem listu španskega parlamenta
PYMAR argues that similar fiscal measures were investigated in two other cases (Brittany Ferries [47], and GIE Fiscaux) where no recovery was ordered.
Zahteva iz leta 2001 za informacije o španskemu sistemu poslovnega najema
If the Commission concluded that aid existed, this aid should be deemed compatible up to the limit set in Chapter 11 of the Maritime Guidelines and, for the amount in excess of that limit, the protection of legal certainty should, as in the French case, prevent the Commission from requiring the recovery.
PYMAR se sklicuje na dopis, ki ga je Komisija poslala 21. decembra 2001 po pritožbi glede več državnih ukrepov, ki naj bi zmanjšali nabavno vrednost ladij, kupljenih od španskih ladjedelnic.
Spain and PYMAR invoke a number of decisions where the Commission has already decided to refrain from recovery because of public statements by the Commission or one of its members.
„Komisija je bila obveščena, da obstaja več ukrepov, ki zmanjšajo stroške nakupa ladij od španskih ladjedelnic.
Reference is made to the decisions on Belgian coordination centres, Luxembourg 1929 holding companies and other coordination centres and intragroup activities of multinational companies [48], Spanish Goodwill [49], an Italian case of aid to large firms in difficulty [50] and two fisheries cases [51] (Shetland and Orkney Islands).
Zlasti je Komisija prejela informacije, da so na voljo naslednji ukrepi:
Legitimate expectations/legal certainty
sistem poslovnega najema, s katerim se lahko ladje, zgrajene v Španiji, uporabijo za zmanjšanje davkov prek uporabe vozil za posebne namene.
According to Spain [52] and certain third parties involved in STL operations, the following elements led the parties to these operations to believe that the tax measures used in them did not constitute State aid:
Zdi se, da se korist, ki izhaja iz te kombinacije, prenese na lastnika ladje prek znižane cene ali znižanih stroškov zakupa.
the publication of the draft measures (early depreciation and TT system) in the Official Gazette of the Spanish Parliament on 10 October 2001 [54];
PYMAR meni, da ta dopis kaže, da je imela Komisija podatke in je bila seznanjena z obstojem sistema poslovnega najema ter je zadevo preiskala že v letu 2001, vendar ni ukrepala, kar je ustvarilo legitimna pričakovanja, da španski ukrep ni pomenil pomoči.
a 2001 Commission letter requesting information from Spain in the context of an investigation about several alleged aid measures, including a tax leasing system, in favour of shipbuilding;
Odločba iz leta 2004 v zvezi z nizozemsko priglasitvijo
the 2006 Decision in the French GIE Fiscaux [56] case;
Ob koncu formalne preiskave [61] je Komisija v svoji končni odločbi [62] sklenila, da glede na to, „da so španski organi jasno zanikali, da bo pomoč kdaj koli na voljo“, ni imela zadostnih dokazov, da „je bila pomoč Španije dejansko ponujena“ [63], in je priglašeno pomoč razglasila za nezdružljivo z notranjim trgom.
a 2009 letter from Commissioner Kroes [57] — at the time in charge of competition — to the Norwegian Minister for Trade and Industry in response to a complaint that the Spanish tax lease scheme would favour Spanish shipyards;
PYMAR trdi, da bi odločba Komisije iz leta 2004 zaradi dejstva, da se je SPN uporabljal že leta 2002, preden je Nizozemska priglasila pomoč, ustvarila legitimna pričakovanja, da sistem SPN ni pomenil pomoči.
the time that elapsed between the publication of the draft measures in 2001, the start of the scheme in 2002 or the first complaints received by the Commission in 2006 and the opening of the proceedings in June 2011.
Odločba iz leta 2006 v francoski zadevi GIE Fiscaux
Such a long time period allegedly corroborated the belief that there were not enough elements to proceed;
Po navedbah združenja PYMAR je francoska shema GIE Fiscaux zelo podobna sistemu SPN.
a diligent economic operator could not have foreseen the possible existence of State aid in the combination of different schemes that were either a long-established feature of national taxation (accelerated depreciation of leased assets, EIG status) or had been previously approved by the Commission (TT system);
Zato je odločba iz leta 2006 v francoski zadevi povzročila legitimna pričakovanja subjektov, (1) da bi se SPN sistem štel za združljivega z notranjim trgom v okviru meja iz poglavja 11 smernic za pomorski promet in (2) da se vračilo državne pomoči, ki presega zgornje meje iz poglavja 11 smernic, zaradi postopkovnih podobnosti med obema zadevama ne bi zahtevalo.
the statements concerning the absence of aid in measures concerning depreciation methods in the Commission notice on business taxation [58].
Poleg tega se PYMAR sklicuje na več odločb Komisije, v katerih je bila podobnost ukrepa z ukrepom, ki ga je predhodno odobrila Komisija, dejavnik, ki je upravičil legitimna pričakovanja gospodarskih subjektov.
The 2001 Commission Decision in the Brittany Ferries case (BAI)
PYMAR zlasti opozarja, da v zadevah [64], kot so tiste o dohodkih, ustvarjenih v tujini (Irska), dejavnostih mednarodnega financiranja (Nizozemska), centrih za usklajevanje in finančnih družbah (Luksemburg), centrih za usklajevanje v provinci Vizcaya (Španija), nadzornih centrih in centrih za usklajevanje (Nemčija), centralnih zakladništvih družb ter centralnih sedežih in logističnih centrih (Francija), sistemu odločanja glede davkov za podjetja s prodajo v tujino (US Foreign Sales Corporations) (Belgija) in o gibraltarskih ustreznih družbah (Združeno kraljestvo), vračilo ni bilo odrejeno, saj so bile zadevne sheme zelo podobne shemam za belgijske centre za usklajevanje, ki jih je Komisija predhodno odobrila.
In recital 193 of that Decision, the Commission stated that: ‘… with regard to economic interest groupings and the tax advantages they may confer, the Commission considers that they constitute a general measure, given that they are common in France, can be set up in all sectors of economic activity and come under common law.’
Dopis komisarke Kroes iz leta 2009
The Decision was published in the Official Journal on 15 January 2002.
Komisarka Kroes je v odgovor na dopis norveških organov, v katerem so se pritožili glede domnevne diskriminacije norveških ladjedelnic v zvezi s španskim sistemom poslovnega najema, navedla, da je GD za konkurenco „zadevo že preiskal“ in da je Španija na njegovo zahtevo izdala izjavo za javnost v obliki odgovora davčne uprave na vprašanje davkoplačevalca [65] (odločitev glede obdavčitve), ki potrjuje, da ukrep ni bil omejen na španske ladjedelnice in ga je bilo mogoče uporabiti tudi za pridobitev ladij, zgrajenih v drugih državah članicah.
In the 2006 Decision on the French GIE Fiscaux, the Commission considered that: ‘While it is true that the scheme at issue in that case was that in force before 1998, it must nevertheless be observed that that fact was not made clear in the grounds for the Decision and that that circumstance may have helped to mislead recipients under the scheme here at issue.’
V dopisu je bil podan zaključek, da zaradi navedenega pojasnila nadaljnji ukrepi niso bili potrebni.
Spain [59] and some third parties argued that this statement had either created a situation of legal uncertainty as to the lawfulness of the STL — which is very similar in its construction and effects — or had given rise to legitimate expectations that the STL did not constitute State aid.
Po navedbah združenja PYMAR je 2. aprila 2009 norveški lastnik ladij vsebino dopisa komisarke Kroes posredoval španski ladjedelnici, s katero je sodeloval v poslih na podlagi SPN.
The publication of the draft measures in the Official Gazette of the Spanish Parliament
PYMAR je poleg tega predložil dopis podjetja Gerencia del Sector de la Construcción Naval [66] (GSN) z dne 13. septembra 2012, ki dokazuje, da je bilo podjetje leta 2009 seznanjeno z vsebino dopisa komisarke Kroes in da je to vsebino posredovalo subjektom, udeleženim v poslih na podlagi SPN, in združenju PYMAR na njihovih rednih sestankih.
According to PYMAR, the Commission became aware of the existence of the STL system when its constituent measures (discretionary application of early depreciation of leased assets and the TT system) were published as part of the same draft law in the Official Gazette of the Spanish Parliament on 10 October 2001.
Čas, ki je pretekel med pritožbo in začetkom postopka
Following this, shipyards started to include the benefits of these measures in their bids for new shipbuilding projects, without awaiting the entry into force of the measures, in order to move forward in the negotiation and implementation of the first STL structures.
Skrben gospodarski subjekt ne bi mogel predvideti možnega obstoja državne pomoči v kombinaciji več ukrepov
The 2001 request for information about the Spanish tax leasing scheme
PYMAR in druge tretje strani trdijo, da je to prvič, da je Komisija menila, da skupna uporaba več ukrepov pomeni državno pomoč, in menijo, da tega preudarni subjekti običajno ne bi mogli predvideti.
PYMAR refers to a letter sent by the Commission on 21 December 2001 following a complaint about several state measures that allegedly reduced the cost of ships bought from Spanish shipyards.
Izjave o metodah amortiziranja v obvestilu Komisije o obdavčitvi ustvarjenega dohodka
In that letter, the Commission notably requested information about a tax leasing system:
PYMAR trdi, da v skladu s členom 13 obvestila Komisije o obdavčitvi ustvarjenega dohodka ukrepi izključno tehnične narave, kot so pravila o amortizaciji, ne pomenijo državne pomoči.
‘It has come to the attention of the Commission that a number of measures seem to exist that reduce the cost of buying ships from Spanish shipyards.
Na podlagi tega so subjekti upravičeno menili, da ukrep predčasne amortizacije ni pomenil državne pomoči.
In particular the Commission has been provided information that the following measures are available:
Posledice vračila
A tax-leasing system, whereby ships built in Spain can be used to reduce taxes through the use of SPVs (special purpose vehicles).
Od trenutka, ko je Komisija izvedela za obstoj sistema SPN, so njeni ukrepi in tudi pretečeni čas ustvarili legitimna pričakovanja, da ne gre za pomoč in da zaradi tega pomoči, dodeljene za posle, ki so bili izvedeni v preteklosti, ne bo treba vrniti.
The gain from this combination appears to be transferred to the shipowner through a lower price or through reduced leasing costs.
Zato bi morala Komisija opustiti odreditev vračila pomoči v zvezi z vsemi posli.
Could Spain please provide all relevant information that allows it to evaluate this issue’.
Poleg tega dopis komisarke Kroes iz leta 2009 potrjuje, da je Komisija proučila shemo.
According to PYMAR, this letter indicates that the Commission had information and was aware of the existence of the tax lease system and that it has investigated the matter in 2001 already without taking any action, which created the legitimate expectation that the Spanish measure did not constitute aid.
Vse strani, ki so sodelovale v poslih poslovnega najema (podjetja za pomorske prevoze, gospodarska interesna združenja, banke in posredniki itd.), bi lahko upravičeno pričakovale, da bi Komisija odkrila vsako pomoč v sistemu in da ni odkrila pomoči, saj ni načrtovala nobenih nadaljnjih preiskav.
The 2004 Decision concerning the Dutch notification
PYMAR navaja tudi odločbe, v katerih je Komisija priznala, da bi lahko ukrepi institucij EU (Sodišča, Komisije itd.) ustvarili legitimna pričakovanja, da pomoči, dodeljene v preteklosti, ne bi bilo treba vrniti, to pa bi Komisiji preprečilo, da odredi vračilo, tudi če je bila pomoč odobrena pred ukrepom, ki je ustvaril legitimna pričakovanja.
At the end of a formal investigation [61], the Commission concluded in its final Decision [62] that ‘the Spanish authorities hav[ing] clearly denied that the aid would ever be available’ it did not have ‘sufficient proof of the alleged Spanish aid’ [63] and declared the notified aid incompatible with the internal market.
Pogodbene klavzule
According to PYMAR, because the STL was in force in 2002, before the Netherlands notified the aid, the 2004 Commission decision would have created the legitimate expectation that the STL system did not constitute aid.
Španski organi in PYMAR navajajo, da bi kakršna koli pomoč v korist podjetij za pomorske prevoze ali gospodarskih interesnih združenj in vlagateljev, ki bi jo ugotovila Komisija, v vsakem primeru vplivala na ladjedelnice, ki bi prejele zahtevke za povračilo gospodarskim interesnim združenjem ali njihovim vlagateljem ali investicijskim družbam na podlagi pogodbenih razmerij med različnimi udeleženci poslov na podlagi SPN.
The 2006 Decision in the French GIE Fiscaux case
Kot navaja PYMAR, nekatere klavzule v pogodbah res zahtevajo, da ladjedelnice vlagateljem in podjetjem za pomorske prevoze plačajo odškodnino, zlasti v primeru spremembe zakonodaje, ki vpliva na posel, vključno z davčno zakonodajo.
According to PYMAR, the French scheme GIE Fiscaux is very similar to the STL system.
OCENA
As a result, the 2006 Decision in the French case gave rise to legitimate expectations on the part of operators that: (1) the STL system would be considered compatible with the internal market within the limits of Chapter 11 of the Maritime Guidelines and (2) the recovery of the State aid exceeding the ceilings of Chapter 11 of the Guidelines would not be required, given the procedural similarities of both cases.
Komisija meni, da uporabljeni postopek ni kršil niti pravic Španije do obrambe niti pravice katere koli tretje strani do zaslišanja.
In addition, PYMAR invokes a number of Commission decisions where the similarity of a measure with a measure previously approved by the Commission was a factor that justified the legitimate expectations of operators.
Poleg tega Komisija ni začela formalnega postopka preiskave v zvezi s pospešeno amortizacijo zakupljenih sredstev (člen 115(6) TRLIS), saj je navedla, da če bi ukrep pomenil državno pomoč, bi se v vsakem primeru štel za veljavno pomoč.
In particular, PYMAR recalls that no recovery was ordered in cases [64] such as Foreign Income (Ireland), International Financing Activities (the Netherlands), Coordination Centres and Finance Companies (Luxembourg), Coordination Centres in Vizcaya (Spain), Control and Coordination Centres (Germany), Central Corporate Treasuries and Headquarters and Logistics Centres (France), Tax Ruling for US Foreign Sales Corporations (Belgium) and Gibraltar Qualifying Companies (UK), because those schemes were very similar to the Belgian Coordination Centres schemes which had been previously approved by the Commission.
Ni izrazila dvoma o sistemu davka na tonažo, vsaj ne v obsegu, v kakršnem je bil priglašen in ga je Komisija odobrila (členi 124 do 128 TRLIS), ker se je ta ukrep prav tako štel za veljavno pomoč.
The 2009 letter sent by Commissioner Kroes
Ta dva ukrepa sta v Odločbi C(2011) 4494 final omenjena in opisana samo zato, ker sta pomembna elementa SPN in sta povezana z ukrepi, ki so predmet formalne preiskave (člena 115(11) in 48(4) TRLIS, člen 49 in člen 50(3) RIS ter uporaba sistema davka na tonažo za neprevozne dejavnosti).