natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Moreover, the remuneration of the EEG electricity producers allegedly satisfies the criteria of the Altmark ruling [23].
Poleg tega nekatere zainteresirane strani ugotavljajo, da imajo nekateri upravičenci, ki porabijo več kot 10 GWh na leto, finančne stroške zaradi obveznih revizij energetske učinkovitosti.
Concerning EIUs, Germany argues that the BesAR does not grant an economic advantage, but rather compensates for a competitive disadvantage suffered by those undertakings in comparison with their competitors in other Member States (which have lower RES financing costs) [24] and third countries (which mostly face no comparable burdens).
Nemčija in zainteresirane strani so nasprotovale tudi ugotovitvi, da sta gospodarski prednosti selektivni ter bi lahko vplivali na konkurenco in trgovino, zlasti ker naj bi posebno pravilo o nadomestilih veljalo za vsa podjetja v proizvodnem sektorju in podjetja vseh velikosti.
Some interested parties have disputed the findings that the reduced EEG-surcharge constituted an economic advantage liable to distort competition.
Nekatere zainteresirane strani trdijo, da znižanja niso selektivna, saj položaja upravičencev ni mogoče primerjati z drugimi podjetji, ker sta glavni merili glede upravičenosti intenzivnost porabe električne energije in poraba električne energije, dodatna dajatev EEG pa precej bolj ogroža podjetja, ki so intenzivni porabniki električne energije, kot tista, ki to niso.
Rather, the measure was said to restore the competitive level-playing field in the Union, given that the industrial electricity costs were higher in Germany than elsewhere.
Poleg tega trdijo, da so znižane dajatve, tudi če so kot take selektivne, povezane z naravo in logiko podpornega sistema za električno energijo EEG: brez znižanj podpore za električno energijo EEG ne bi bilo mogoče financirati, saj bi se energetsko intenzivni uporabniki preselili iz Nemčije.
In addition, some interested parties note that beneficiaries consuming more than 10 GWh per year incur financial costs associated with mandatory energy efficiency audits.
Trditve, ki so jih predložile Nemčija in zainteresirane strani, niso prepričljive.
Germany and interested parties have also challenged the finding that the economic advantages are selective and liable to affect competition and trade, notably because the BesAR is said to apply to all undertakings in the manufacturing industry and to undertakings of all sizes.
Enaki konkurenčni pogoji za podjetja v različnih državah članicah
Some interested parties argue that the reductions are not selective as beneficiaries are not in a comparable situation to other undertakings, given that the principal eligibility criteria are electro-intensity and electricity consumption and given that electro-intensive undertakings face a much bigger threat from the EEG-surcharge than undertakings that are not.
Prvič, dejstvo, da podjetje prejme nadomestilo za stroške, ki jih je že imelo, načeloma ne izključuje obstoja gospodarske prednosti [25].
Further, they argue that even if the reduced surcharges were prima facie selective, they would be inherent to the nature and logic of the EEG electricity support system: without the reductions, EEG electricity support could not be financed as EIU would relocate outside Germany.
Obstoj prednosti tudi ni izključen zgolj zaradi dejstva, da so konkurenčna podjetja v drugih državah članicah v ugodnejšem položaju [26], saj pojem prednosti temelji na analizi finančnega položaja podjetja v lastnem pravnem in dejanskem okolju z zadevnim ukrepom in brez njega.
The arguments submitted by Germany and interested parties are unconvincing.
Če se izključijo davki in dajatve, so cene električne energije za industrijske odjemalce v Nemčiji v povprečju nižje kot v drugih državah članicah.
Level playing field between undertakings in different Member States
Splošno sodišče je pred kratkim ponovno potrdilo načelo, da je treba obstoj prednosti oceniti ne glede na konkurenčne pogoje v drugih državah članicah [27].
First, the fact that an undertaking is compensated for costs or charges it has already incurred does not in principle exclude the existence of an economic advantage [25].
Ugotovilo je, da že sama narava ugodnejše cene, tj. dejstvo, da je družba Alcoa Transformazioni prejela povrnjeno razliko med cenami električne energije, ki jih je zaračunavala družba ENEL, in stopnjo iz uredbe iz leta 1995, zadostuje za ugotovitev, da zadevna družba ni krila vseh stroškov, ki bi morali v običajnih razmerah bremeniti njen proračun [28].
Nor is the existence of an advantage ruled out by the mere fact that competing undertakings in other Member States are in a more favourable position [26], because the notion of advantage is based on an analysis of the financial situation of an undertaking in its own legal and factual context with and without the particular measure.
Splošno sodišče je ugotovilo tudi, da obstoj prednosti izhaja iz mehanizma oblikovanja različnih cen, tj. kompenzacijskega mehanizma, ki je namenjen oprostitvi podjetja plačila dela stroškov električne energije, potrebnih za proizvodnjo proizvodov, ki se prodajajo v Uniji [29].
Nevertheless, if one excludes taxes and levies, electricity prices for industrial consumers are lower in Germany than in other Member States on average.
Poleg tega je Splošno sodišče ponovno navedlo [30] načelo, da je treba državno pomoč presojati na podlagi njenih značilnosti, ne pa glede na njene cilje, kot je reševanje nepopolne konkurenčnosti določenega trga.
The General Court has recently reconfirmed the principle that the existence of an advantage has to be assessed irrespective of the competitive playing field in other Member States [27].
Podobno znižanja dodatne dajatve EEG, dodeljene na podlagi posebnega pravila o nadomestilih, izboljšajo finančni položaj upravičencev, saj jim tako ni treba plačati stroškov, ki bi jih običajno imeli.
The General Court found that the very nature of the preferential tariff, that is to say, the fact that Alcoa Transformazioni was reimbursed the difference between the electricity prices charged by ENEL and the rate provided by the 1995 decree, is enough to conclude that the undertaking concerned was not bearing all the charges which should have normally burdened its budget [28].
Če ne bi bilo posebnega pravila o nadomestilih in odločbe organa BAFA, bi morali plačati celotno dodatno dajatev EEG kot vsi drugi odjemalci električne energije.
The General Court went further to conclude that the existence of an advantage results from the simple description of the price differentiation mechanism, that is to say, a compensation mechanism, the purpose of which is to exonerate a company from the payment of a part of the price for electricity necessary for producing goods that are sold on the territory of the Union [29].
Nemčija je poudarila pomen znižanj pri ohranjanju konkurenčnosti upravičencev v primerjavi z energetsko intenzivnimi uporabniki v drugih državah članicah in tretjih državah.
Moreover, the General Court restated [30] the principle that State aid must be assessed on its own merits and not in the light of its objectives, such as the remediation of imperfect competition on a certain market.
Nemčija s tem implicitno priznava, da upravičenci prejemajo gospodarsko ugodnejšo obravnavo.
Similarly, the reductions of the EEG-surcharge granted under the BesAR improve the beneficiaries' financial situation by relieving them from a cost burden they would have to bear under normal conditions.
Selektivnost
Indeed, if it was not for the BesAR and the decision of the BAFA, they would have to pay the full EEG-surcharge like any other electricity consumer.
Glede trditev o neselektivnosti posebnega pravila o nadomestilih je treba spomniti, da „niti veliko število podjetij, upravičenih do podpore, niti raznolikost in velikost sektorjev, v katera ta podjetja spadajo, niso razlogi za sklepanje, da pobuda države predstavlja splošen ukrep gospodarske politike“ [31], če so drugi sektorji, kot so na primer storitve, izključeni iz kroga upravičencev.
In doing so, Germany implicitly acknowledges that the beneficiaries receive an economically advantageous treatment.
Znižanja dodatne dajatve EEG torej ne veljajo za podjetja, ki so v primerljivem položaju z upravičenci.
Selectivity
Poleg tega je zaradi različnih znižanj dodatne dajatve EEG, ki so odvisna od porabe, prisotno razlikovanje med subjekti v enakem pravnem in dejanskem položaju, tj. energetsko intenzivnimi uporabniki, zato so selektivna same po sebi.
As far as the allegations of the non-selectivity of the BesAR are concerned, it must be recalled that ‘neither the large number of eligible undertakings nor the diversity and size of the sectors to which those undertakings belong provide any grounds for concluding that a State initiative constitutes a general measure of economic policy’ [31], as long as other sectors, such as for instance services, are excluded from the scope of beneficiaries.
V zvezi s trditvijo, da posebno pravilo o nadomestilih in razlikovanje upravičujeta narava in splošna shema sistema, je treba spomniti, da „je mogoče ukrep, ki ustvarja izjemo od uporabe splošnega davčnega sistema, upravičiti, če neposredno izhaja iz temeljnih ali usmerjevalnih načel navedenega davčnega sistema.
This is already the case here as only the manufacturing sector benefits from the aid (without any need for the Commission to examine further reasons for selectivity).
Pri tem je treba razlikovati med cilji posebnega davčnega sistema, ki so zunaj njega, in mehanizmi, ki so lastni samemu davčnemu sistemu in so potrebni za uresničitev teh ciljev“ [32].
Therefore, the reductions in the EEG surcharge do not apply to undertakings that are in a comparable situation with the beneficiaries.
Vendar niti varstvo okolja niti ohranjanje konkurenčnosti industrije ne izpolnjujeta pogojev za osnovno ali vodilno načelo, povezano s sistemom dodatne dajatve.
Moreover, the different reductions in the EEG surcharge depending on the consumption result in differentiations between entities in the same legal and factual situation, that is to say, energy-intensive users, and are in themselves selective.
Nasprotno, sta zunanja cilja, pripisana navedenemu sistemu.
Concerning the argument that the scope of the BesAR and the differentiations are justified by the nature and general scheme of the system, it should be recalled that ‘a measure which creates an exception to the application of the general tax system may be justified if it results directly from the basic or guiding principles of that tax system.
Kot v drugih, predhodnih zadevah [33] cilj varstva okolja v zadevnem primeru ne more vplivati na ugotovitev, da znižanja dodatne dajatve EEG pomenijo državno pomoč.
In that context, a distinction must be made between, on the one hand, the objectives attributed to a particular tax regime and which are extrinsic to it and, on the other, the mechanisms inherent in the tax system itself which are necessary for the achievement of such objectives’ [32].
Prednost na podlagi dodatne dajatve EEG; sodna praksa iz zadeve Altmark
However, neither environmental protection, nor the preservation of the industry's competitiveness qualify as basic or guiding principles inherent to the system of the surcharge.
Komisija glede trditve Nemčije, da dodatna dajatev EEG kot taka ne pomeni prednosti za proizvajalce električne energije EEG, meni, da je finančni položaj proizvajalcev električne energije EEG zaradi podpornih ukrepov precej boljši, kot bi bil, če bi bil njihov zaslužek odvisen le od prodaje električne energije po tržni ceni.
To the contrary, they are external objectives attributed to that system.
Dodatna dajatev EEG financira navedene podporne ukrepe.
Like in other cases before [33], the objective of environmental protection cannot in the case at hand alter the finding that the reductions in the EEG-surcharge constitute State aid.
V nasprotju s trditvami Nemčije dejstvo, da stopnja dodatne dajatve EEG morda vpliva ali pa ne vpliva na zagotovljene odkupne cene, ni pomembno pri ugotavljanju, ali te cene pomenijo gospodarsko prednost.
First, the preservation of competitiveness is not even listed among the law's objectives in § 1 of the EEG-Act 2012.
Nemčija je trdila, da podpora za proizvajalce električne energije EEG pomeni ustrezno nadomestilo za izpolnjevanje obveznosti javne službe v smislu zadeve Altmark.
To the contrary, it is actually specified in § 40, second sentence, that the preservation of competitiveness is subject to the condition that it does not jeopardise the objectives set out in § 1 of the EEG-Act 2012.
Sodišče je v zadevi Altmark odločilo, da se za državno pomoč ne uporablja člen 107(1) Pogodbe, če je treba navedeni ukrep šteti „za nadomestilo, ki pomeni plačilo za storitve, ki so jih opravila podjetja, ki prejemajo nadomestilo za izpolnjevanje obveznosti javne službe, tako da ta podjetja dejansko [niso pridobila] nobene finančne koristi in da torej učinek omenjene intervencije ni [bil], da se [je] ta podjetja [postavilo] v ugodnejši konkurenčni položaj v primerjavi s konkurenčnimi podjetji“ [34].
Advantage deriving from the EEG-surcharge; Altmark case-law
Vendar je ta ugotovitev temeljila na štirih pogojih [35]:
As regards Germany's claim that the RES-surcharge in itself does not constitute an advantage to EEG electricity producers, the Commission maintains that the support measures improve the EEG electricity producers' financial situation beyond what they would be able to earn when selling their electricity at the market price.
„Prvič, podjetje, ki prejema nadomestilo, mora dejansko izpolnjevati obveznosti javne službe, te obveznosti pa morajo biti jasno opredeljene.“
The EEG-surcharge serves to finance those support measures.
„Drugič, merila, na podlagi katerih se izračuna nadomestilo, morajo biti določena vnaprej ter objektivno in pregledno, da bi se preprečila ekonomska ugodnost, ki bi prejemniku dajala prednost v primerjavi konkurenčnimi podjetji.“
Contrary to what Germany claims, the fact that the feed-in tariffs may or may not be influenced by the level of the EEG-surcharge is irrelevant for determining whether these tariffs constitute an economic advantage.
„Tretjič, nadomestilo ne sme presegati tistega, kar je potrebno za kritje vseh ali dela stroškov, ki so nastali z izpolnjevanjem obveznosti javne službe ob upoštevanju realiziranih prejemkov in razumnega dobička zaradi izpolnjevanja teh obveznosti.“
Germany has submitted that the support for EEG electricity producers constitutes adequate compensation for the discharge of public service obligations within the meaning of the Altmark case.
„Četrtič, če podjetje, ki se mu naloži izpolnjevanje obveznosti javne službe, v konkretnem primeru ni izbrano s postopkom oddaje javnega naročila, ki omogoča, da se izbere tisti ponudnik, ki lahko te storitve opravlja z najnižjimi stroški za skupnost, se mora raven potrebnega nadomestila določiti na podlagi analize stroškov, ki bi jih povprečno, dobro vodeno podjetje, ki je ustrezno opremljeno s prevoznimi sredstvi, zato da lahko zadosti zahtevam javne službe, imelo pri izpolnjevanju teh obveznosti ob upoštevanju realiziranih prejemkov in razumnega dobička zaradi izpolnjevanja teh obveznosti.“
In Altmark, the Court of Justice decided that a State measure would not be caught by Article 107(1) of the Treaty where that measure had to be regarded ‘as compensation for the services provided by the recipient undertakings in order to discharge public service obligations, so that those undertakings [did] not enjoy a real financial advantage and the measure thus [did] not have the effect of putting them in a more favourable competitive position than the undertakings competing with them’ [34].
Nemčija trdi, da podpora za proizvajalce električne energije iz obnovljivih virov izpolnjuje prvi pogoj zaradi obstoja cilja skupnega interesa iz člena 3(1) Direktive 2009/28/ES glede spodbujanja uporabe energije iz obnovljivih virov.
However, that finding was subject to four conditions [35]:
Poleg tega je po trditvah Nemčije iz člena 3(2) Direktive 2009/72/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta [36] razvidno, da je spodbujanje energije iz obnovljivih virov lahko predmet obveznosti javne službe, ki se naložijo podjetjem, ki delujejo v elektroenergetskem sektorju.
‘First, the recipient undertaking must actually have public service obligations to discharge, and the obligations must be clearly defined.’
Po mnenju Nemčije je izpolnjeno tudi drugo merilo iz sodbe v zadevi Altmark.
‘Second, the parameters on the basis of which the compensation is calculated must be established in advance in an objective and transparent manner, to avoid it conferring an economic advantage which may favour the recipient undertaking over competing undertakings.’
Parametri za nadomestilo proizvajalcem električne energije EEG naj bi bili namreč določeni vnaprej na objektiven in pregleden način v zakonu EEG iz leta 2012.
‘Third, the compensation cannot exceed what is necessary to cover all or part of the costs incurred in the discharge of public service obligations, taking into account the relevant receipts and a reasonable profit for discharging those obligations.’
Nemčija meni, da je tretje merilo izpolnjeno, saj je Komisija v sklepu o začetku postopka ugotovila, da proizvajalci električne energije EEG ne bodo prejeli previsokega nadomestila.
‘Fourth, where the undertaking which is to discharge public service obligations, in a specific case, is not chosen pursuant to a public procurement procedure which would allow for the selection of the tenderer capable of providing those services at the least cost to the community, the level of compensation needed must be determined on the basis of an analysis of the costs which a typical undertaking, well run and adequately provided with means of transport so as to be able to meet the necessary public service requirements, would have incurred in discharging those obligations, taking into account the relevant receipts and a reasonable profit for discharging the obligations.’
Nazadnje Nemčija trdi, da je bila stopnja podpore proizvajalcem električne energije EEG določena na podlagi analize stroškov, ki bi jih imelo povprečno, dobro vodeno in ustrezno opremljeno podjetje pri izpolnjevanju svojih obveznosti.
Germany argues that the support of RES producers fulfils the first condition due to the existence of an objective of common interest, laid down in Article 3(1) of Directive 2009/28/EC of promoting the use of renewable energy.
Glede tega navaja sklepno ugotovitev Komisije glede ocene združljivosti v sklepu o začetku postopka, da imajo ukrepi podpore za proizvajalce električne energije EEG spodbujevalen učinek in so sorazmerni.
In addition, according to Germany, Article 3(2) of Directive 2009/72/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council [36] shows that the promotion of renewable energy can be the subject-matter of public service obligations imposed on undertakings operating in the electricity sector.
Obe dejstvi naj bi dokazovali, da so upravičenci do zagotovljenih odkupnih cen dobro vodeni.
Germany also considers the second Altmark criterion to be met.
Po mnenju Komisije navedene trditve niso prepričljive.
According to Germany, the parameters for the compensation of EEG electricity producers have been established in advance in an objective and transparent manner in the EEG-Act 2012.
V skladu s prvim merilom iz sodbe v zadevi Altmark mora biti ponudniku javne storitve naložena obveznost javne službe.
Germany considers the third criterion to be fulfilled since the Commission has concluded in its Opening Decision that EEG electricity producers will not be overcompensated.
V skladu z zakonom EEG iz leta 2012 proizvajalcem ni treba proizvajati, ampak se odzivajo na gospodarsko pobudo nemške države.
Finally, Germany contends that the level of support to EEG electricity producers has been determined on the basis of an analysis of the costs which a typical, well run and adequately endowed undertaking would have incurred in discharging its obligations.
Komisija zato ugotavlja, da prvo merilo iz sodbe v zadevi Altmark ni izpolnjeno.
In that respect, Germany refers to the Commission's conclusion in the compatibility assessment of the Opening Decision that the support measures to EEG electricity producers have an incentive effect and are proportionate.
Merila iz sodbe v zadevi Altmark so kumulativna in Komisiji ni treba proučiti, ali so izpolnjena ostala tri merila, zato ugotavlja, da trditev Nemčije, da zagotovljene odkupne cene za proizvajalce električne energije iz obnovljivih virov pomenijo ustrezno nadomestilo za izpolnjevanje obveznosti javne službe v smislu zadeve Altmark, ni mogoče sprejeti.
Both facts allegedly demonstrate that the beneficiaries of the feed-in tariffs are well run.
Zadeve Van der Kooy, Danske Busvognmænd in Hotel Cipriani
The Commission finds those arguments unconvincing.
Glede znižanj dodatne dajatve EEG na podlagi posebnega pravila o nadomestilih so Nemčija in nekatere zainteresirane strani navedle sodbo Sodišča v zadevi Van der Kooy in sodbi Splošnega sodišča v zadevah Danske Busvognmænd in Hotel Cipriani ter trdile, da znižanja ne pomenijo gospodarske prednosti [37].
The first Altmark criterion requires that the provider of the public service must be entrusted with a public service obligation.
V zadevi Van der Kooy je Sodišče razsodilo, da preferencialna tarifa za zemeljski plin, dodeljena podjetjem, ki se ukvarjajo s steklenimi rastlinjaki, ne bi pomenila pomoči, če bi bila „v okviru zadevnega trga objektivno upravičena z ekonomskimi razlogi, kot je potreba po upiranju konkurenci na istem trgu, ki se je ukvarjala z drugimi viri energije, njihova cena pa je bila konkurenčna“ [38].
Under the EEG-Act 2012 producers are not under an obligation to produce, but are reacting to an economic incentive provided by the German State.
V nasprotju s trditvami Nemčije in drugih zainteresiranih strani sta bila predmet razprave, ki ga je Sodišče navajalo, konkurenca na istem trgu med različnimi gorivi in vprašanje, kako lahko podjetje, ki taka goriva prodaja, v skladu s tem določi tarife, tj. uporaba preizkusa zasebnega vlagatelja v tržnem gospodarstvu.
Therefore, the Commission concludes that the first Altmark criterion is not met.
Vprašanje je bilo, ali bi podjetja, ki proizvajajo rastlinjake, zaradi višjih cen plina začela uporabljati premog in ali bi lahko zato preferenčne tarife pomenile razumno gospodarsko ravnanje plinarne.
As the Altmark criteria are cumulative, without having to examine if the second, third and fourth criteria are met, the Commission concludes that, Germany's arguments that the feed-in tariffs for RES producers constitute an adequate compensation for the discharge of public service obligations within the meaning of the Altmark case cannot be accepted.
V tem primeru nič ne kaže na to, da je Nemčija ravnala kot zasebni vlagatelj, in Nemčija dejansko nikoli ni trdila, da bi bilo treba znižanja dodatne dajatve EEG, dodeljene energetsko intenzivnim uporabnikom, šteti za izpolnitev preizkusa zasebnega vlagatelja.
Van der Kooy, Danske Busvognmænd and Hotel Cipriani
Poleg tega sta Sodišče in v novejših sodbah tudi Splošno sodišče razveljavili postranske razloge v sodbah Splošnega sodišča v zadevah Danske Busvognmænd [39] in Hotel Cipriani [40].
Concerning the reductions from the EEG-surcharge under the BesAR, Germany as well as some interested parties have quoted the Court judgment in Van der Kooy and the General Court judgments in Danske Busvognmænd and Hotel Cipriani to argue that the reductions do not constitute an economic advantage [37].
V zadevi Comitato „Venezia vuole vivere“ [41] je Sodišče pojasnilo, da ukrep ne pomeni prednosti le, kadar državni ukrep predstavlja nadomestilo za storitve, ki so jih opravila podjetja, ki jim je bilo naloženo opravljanje storitev v splošnem javnem interesu, za opravljanje obveznosti javnih služb, če taka podjetja v resnici ne uživajo finančne koristi in ta ukrep ne učinkuje tako, da ta podjetja postavi v ugodnejši konkurenčni položaj glede na konkurenčna podjetja [42].