natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Commission observes that in line with the 2013 Banking Communication burden-sharing by subordinated debtholders was applied to a large proportion of the entire banking system in Slovenia [106] and to Portugal's third-largest bank [107].
Od obravnavanih treh ukrepov nobeden ne vključuje elementa plačila za prispevek FITD ali premijo za jamstvo ali pridobitev pravic (tj. navadnih delnic) ali udeležbo v prihodnjih prihodkih.
It was also applied to a large proportion of the banking system in Spain prior to the adoption of the 2013 Banking Communication, without putting financial stability in danger or leading to disproportionate results.
Prav tako nobeden ne vključuje mehanizma za vračilo sredstev, s katerim bi se lahko od Tercas po ponovni vzpostavitvi uspešnega poslovanja izterjal del pomoči.
In view of the small scale of Tercas, the Commission cannot accept that there is such a risk in this case.
FITD trdi, da je neobstoj donosa povsem običajen, kadar se sprejemajo ukrepi za pokritje negativnega lastniškega kapitala, katerih namen je drugim stranem omogočiti nakup propadajočega podjetja.
The only cases where the Commission has accepted a deviation from normal burden-sharing on the grounds of disproportionate results are not relevant here [108].
Komisija ugotavlja, da so ukrepi pomenili nepovratna sredstva za pomoč, katerih takojšnji učinek je bil, da Tercas ni izstopila s trga, kot bi morala, če take podpore ne bi prejela.
The Commission concludes that the holders of subordinated debt instruments did not contribute to the maximum extent possible, and that the FITD's action is not in line with a fundamental aspect of the 2013 Banking Communication.
Zato jih je treba obravnavati kot ukrepe, ki pomembno izkrivljajo konkurenco.
In the comments it submitted the FITD claims that the restructuring operation involved a full recapitalisation of Tercas, executed through the intervention of BPB, which contributed to the capital increase by raising capital on the market.
Kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 189, Komisija meni, da so takšni ukrepi združljivi z notranjim trgom samo, če se pomoč dodeli za pospešitev reševanja ali podporo za pravilno likvidacijo.
On the other hand, point 34 of the 2013 Banking Communication provides that after the submission of the capital raising plan the Member State must determine the residual capital shortfall that has to be covered by State aid,.
FITD trdi, da je Komisija v preteklosti sprejela nizko stopnjo plačila ali celo dejstvo, da ga ni bilo, na primer v zadevah Banco de Valencia (BVA) [110], Banco Português de Negócios (BNP) [111] ali Banco CAM [112].
However, as is acknowledged in the submission by BPB and Tercas, the recapitalisation by BPB was conditional on the negative equity first being covered by the FITD.
Komisija navaja, da so bili vsi navedeni sklepi – kolikor odobrena pomoč ni bila pomoč za pospešitev reševanja ali podporo za pravilno likvidacijo (uvodna izjava 189) – sprejeti, preden se je začelo uporabljati sporočilo o bančništvu iz leta 2013.
BPB and Tercas claim further that the measures were limited to the minimum necessary in order to achieve the objective, i.e. the long-term profitability of Tercas.
V zvezi z vsebino Komisija ugotavlja, da so bili v vseh treh zadevah, na katere se sklicujejo zainteresirane strani, izvedeni ukrepi temeljitega prestrukturiranja v skladu z zahtevami iz sporočila o prestrukturiranju.
They give the following reasons: (1) the FITD's contribution meets the ‘least cost’ criterion in the FITD's constitution; (2) it was the only feasible option, in view of the deterioration of Tercas and the need to find a purchaser; and (3) the FITD contributed only partly to resolving the negative equity and restoring minimum capital ratios: specifically, it contributed EUR 265 million, against the EUR 495 million required.
V vseh treh zadevah je to povzročilo umik banke in znamke s trga.
In that respect, the Commission points out that the least-cost criterion in the FITD's constitution is irrelevant to an assessment of the compatibility of the measures.
Poleg tega se je v vseh treh zadevah obseg poslovanja zelo zmanjšal (v primeru CAM se je število podružnic zmanjšalo za približno 50 %, število zaposlenih pa za približno 35 %; v primeru BVA se je število podružnic zmanjšalo za približno 90 %, število zaposlenih pa za približno 50 %; v primeru BPN se je bilanca stanja zmanjšala za 65 %, vsa poslovna področja razen prodaje na drobno pa so bila ukinjena).
For compatibility, the only inquiry that is relevant here asks whether the State aid provided is sufficient to restore the long-term viability of the financial institution in question and whether it is limited to the minimum necessary, with distortion of competition being sufficiently limited.
Komisija opozarja, da je v nasprotju s tem v Tercas predvideno zmanjšanje števila podružnic in zaposlenih za približno […] %, medtem ko bi se nadaljevalo delovanje na vseh poslovnih področjih.
The claim that the aid granted was less than the amount needed to meet capital requirements does not prove that aid was limited to the minimum necessary.
Blagovna znamka Tercas še naprej obstaja, podjetje pa še naprej deluje na svojem nekdanjem poslovnem področju.
As remarked in recital 194, it is not clear to the Commission from the information provided that the aid was indeed sufficient to restore viability.
Na podlagi tega Komisija ugotavlja, da v nasprotju s trditvami FITD, BPB in Tercas reorganizacija, ki jo bo izvedla Tercas, ni tako temeljita kot v primerih, na katere se navedene zainteresirane strani sklicujejo, ter ne upravičuje dejstva, da plačila za ukrepe sploh ni bilo.
Moreover, the aid was clearly not limited to the minimum, as there was no bail-in of subordinated debt.
FITD trdi še, da je učinek dejavnosti na trg sam po sebi omejen zaradi omejenega obsega in geografskega območja dejavnosti Tercas, ki deluje predvsem v deželi Abruci.
It should be added that if the FITD had acted in line with the approach set out in the 2013 Banking Communication, the cost to the FITD could have been further reduced by writing down entirely the subordinated debt of EUR 169 million (EUR 88 million for Tercas — Cassa di Risparmio della Provincia di Teramo SpA and EUR 81 million for Caripe), thereby significantly reducing the burden on the Member State.
Kot pa kažejo statistični podatki, na voljo pri Banca d'Italia ob konca leta 2014, v deželi Abruci deluje 12 bank, vključno z vsaj eno veliko evropsko finančno institucijo.
Such a write-down would have been legally possible in case of liquidation [109].
Glede na to, da Tercas deluje v finančnem sektorju in je imela leta 2011 v deželi Abruci 163 podružnic ter da konkurira več drugim evropskim finančnim institucijam s podružnicami v tej deželi, bi lahko vsaka prednost, ki bi jo pridobila, izkrivljala konkurenco.
Measures to limit distortion of competition
Ker ni bilo plačila za ukrepe FITD, zaradi razmeroma zmernega zmanjšanja obsega poslovanja Tercas in dejstva, da znamka Tercas še naprej obstaja, Komisija meni, da so zaščitni ukrepi za omejevanje morebitnega izkrivljanja konkurence nezadostni.
Finally, Section 4 of the Restructuring Communication requires that the restructuring of a financial institution should include measures to limit distortion of competition.
Sklepna ugotovitev o združljivosti
Such measures should be tailor-made to address the distortions on the markets where the beneficiary bank operates post restructuring.
Skratka, Komisija ne more opredeliti razlogov za ugotovitev, da so zadevni trije ukrepi združljivi z notranjim trgom.
Point 34 of the Restructuring Communication provides that one of the most appropriate limitations of distortion of competition is adequate remuneration of public capital, as it limits the amount of aid.
Predloženi dokumenti dokazujejo zlasti, da ukrepi ne zagotavljajo porazdelitve bremena, ki se zahteva v skladu s sporočilom o bančništvu iz leta 2013, ter ne izpolnjujejo združenih zahtev iz sporočila o prestrukturiranju za združljivost pomoči za prestrukturiranje, tj. ponovne vzpostavitve dolgoročnega uspešnega poslovanja, omejitve pomoči na najmanjšo potrebno in ukrepov za omejevanje izkrivljanja konkurence.
In all three measures there is a complete absence of any element of remuneration of the FITD's contribution, or any premium for the guarantee, or any acquisition of rights (i.e. ordinary shares) or participation in any future revenue.
VRAČILO
Nor is there any claw-back mechanism allowing recovery of part of the aid from Tercas after it returns to viability.
V skladu s Pogodbo in ustaljeno sodno prakso Sodišča je Komisija pristojna, da odloči, da mora zadevna država članica odpraviti ali spremeniti pomoč, ko Komisija ugotovi, da je nezdružljiva z notranjim trgom [113].
The FITD contends that when steps are taken to cover negative equity in order to allow a failing undertaking to be purchased by other parties, it is quite normal that there should be no return.
Prav tako je v skladu z ustaljeno sodno prakso Sodišča namen obveznosti zadevne države, da odpravi pomoč, za katero Komisija ugotovi, da ni združljiva z notranjim trgom, ponovna vzpostavitev prejšnjih razmer [114].
The Commission observes that the measures constituted grants of assistance whose immediate effect was that Tercas did not exit the market as it would have done in the absence of such support.
Sodišče je ugotovilo, da je navedeni cilj dosežen, ko prejemnik povrne zneske, dodeljene z nezakonito pomočjo, in tako izgubi prednost, ki jo je imel pred konkurenti na trgu, ter se ponovno vzpostavijo razmere pred plačilom pomoči [115].
They must therefore be considered a major distortion of competition.
V skladu s sodno prakso člen 16(1) Uredbe Sveta (EU) 2015/1589 [116] določa, da „[č]e se v primerih nezakonite pomoči sprejmejo negativni sklepi, Komisija odloči, da mora zadevna država članica sprejeti vse potrebne ukrepe, da upravičenec vrne pomoč […].
Accordingly, as stated in recital 189, the Commission considers such measures compatible with the internal market only if the aid is granted to facilitate resolution or to support an orderly wind-down.
Komisija ne zahteva vračila pomoči, če bi bilo to v nasprotju s splošnim načelom prava Unije.“
The FITD asserts that the Commission has previously accepted a low level of remuneration, or even the absence of remuneration, for example in the cases of Banco de Valencia (BVA) [110], Banco Português de Negócios (BNP) [111] or Banco CAM [112].
Niti Italija niti nobena od tretjih strani ni uradno zahtevala, naj se ne zahteva vračilo, ker bi bilo to v nasprotju s splošnim načelom prava Unije.
The Commission points out that all those decisions — in so far as the aid authorised was not aid to facilitate resolution or to support an orderly wind-down (recital 189) — were taken before the 2013 Banking Communication became applicable.
Ne glede na to Komisija ob upoštevanju izmenjave informacije, ki je potekala med Komisijo ter Italijo in tretjimi stranmi, verjame, da bi bilo ustrezno presoditi, ali bi bila zahteva za vračilo v zadevnem primeru v nasprotju s splošnim načelom prava Unije.
On the substance, the Commission observes that in all three cases invoked by the interested parties particularly deep restructuring measures were implemented in line with the requirements of the Restructuring Communication.
Ob upoštevanju sklica na posredovanje sistemov jamstva za vloge v točki 63 sporočila o bančništvu iz leta 2013 ter prakse Komisije v prejšnjih sklepih [117] ni mogla nobena banka ali država članica junija 2014 pričakovati, da se ukrepi, ki jih sprejmejo sistemi jamstva, morda ne bodo šteli za državno pomoč.
In all three cases this led to the disappearance from the market of the bank and its brand.
Poleg tega prejemnik nezakonite pomoči ne more legitimno pričakovati, da je pomoč zakonita, dokler Komisija ne sprejme dokončnega sklepa v skladu s členom 108(3) Pogodbe.
In addition, the reduction in the scale of business was particularly significant in each of those cases (in CAM, a reduction of about 50 % in number of branches and about 35 % in staff; in BVA, a reduction of about 90 % in number of branches and about 50 % in staff; and in BPN, a reduction of 65 % in the balance sheet and closure of all lines of business but retail).
Načeloma Komisija oceni združljivost ukrepa pomoči na podlagi meril, ki se uporabljajo na datum, ko sprejme sklep.
The Commission points out that in Tercas's case, by contrast, branches and staff are to be reduced by roughly […] % each, while all business lines will continue to operate.
Merila združljivosti, določena v sporočilu o bančništvu iz leta 2013, se uporabljajo od 1. avgusta 2013, torej so pred sprejetjem ukrepov veljala več kot enajst mesecev.
The brand name of Tercas continues to exist, and the business continues to operate in its former business area.
Zaradi novosti sporočila o bančništvu iz leta 2013 ne bi smelo biti težave v zvezi s pravno varnostjo.
On that basis, the Commission concludes that, contrary to the claims of the FITD, BPB and Tercas, the reorganisation to be implemented by Tercas does not go as far as in the examples they have cited, and does not warrant a complete absence of remuneration for the measures.
Vračilo je običajna posledica negativnega sklepa v primeru nezakonite pomoči in se kot tako ne more šteti za nesorazmeren rezultat.
The FITD further asserts that the impact of the operation on the market is of itself limited on account of the limited size and geographical scope of the activities of Tercas, which operates mainly in the Abruzzo region.
Sodna praksa sodišč Unije je strogo opredelila obseg primerov, v katerih je absolutno nemogoče, da bi država članica izpolnila zahtevo za vračilo.
However, according to statistics available from the Banca d'Italia at the end of 2014, there are 12 banks active in the Abruzzo region, including at least one large European financial institution.
Zlasti finančne težave, ki bi jih upravičenec do pomoči imel, če bi jo moral vrniti, ne pomenijo, da je vračilo nemogoče.
Given that Tercas operates in the financial sector, with 163 branches in the Abruzzo region in 2011, and competes with a number of other European financial institutions with branches in the same region, any advantage conferred on it would have the potential to distort competition.
Komisija ugotavlja, da se v zadevnem primeru ni mogoče sklicevati na absolutno nezmožnost vračila pomoči.
Given the lack of remuneration for the FITD measures, and the relatively moderate reduction in the business of Tercas, coupled with the continuation of the Tercas brand, the Commission considers that there are insufficient safeguards to limit potential distortion of competition.
Ker so bili zadevni ukrepi izvedeni v nasprotju s členom 108(3) Pogodbe ter jih je treba šteti za nezakonito in nezdružljivo pomoč in ker vračilo ne bi bilo v nasprotju s splošnim načelom prava Unije, jih je treba vrniti, da se na trgu ponovno vzpostavijo razmere, kakršne so bile pred njihovo izvedbo.
Conclusion on compatibility
Obdobje, za katero je treba vrniti pomoč, traja od takrat, ko je upravičenec prvič pridobil prednost, tj. ko mu je bila pomoč dana na voljo, do datuma njenega dejanskega vračila, zneskom, ki jih je treba vrniti, pa bi bilo treba prišteti obresti do datuma dejanskega vračila.
In summary, the Commission cannot identify any grounds for finding that the three measures are compatible with the internal market.
V zadevnem primeru je datum, ko je bila pomoč dana na voljo podjetju, za ukrep 1 datum plačila prispevka, za ukrepa 2 in 3 pa datum zagotovitve jamstva.
In particular, the documents submitted demonstrate that the measures do not provide for the burden-sharing sought in accordance with the 2013 Banking Communication and do not meet the combined requirements of the Restructuring Communication for the compatibility of restructuring aid, i.e. the restoration of long-term viability, the limitation of the aid to the minimum necessary, and measures to limit distortion of competition.
SKLEPNE UGOTOVITVE
RECOVERY
Komisija ugotavlja, da je Italija nezakonito izvedla ukrep 1 – nepovratni prispevek v višini 265 milijonov EUR, ukrep 2 – jamstvo za kreditni izpostavljenosti v vrednosti 35 milijonov EUR do […], pri katerem element pomoči znaša 0,14 milijona EUR, in ukrep 3 – še en nepovratni prispevek v višini 30 milijonov EUR, ki skupaj znašajo 295,14 milijona EUR državne pomoči, dodeljene 7. julija 2014 v nasprotju s členom 108(3) Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije.
According to the Treaty and the settled case-law of the Court of Justice, the Commission is competent to decide that the Member State concerned must abolish or alter aid when it has found that it is incompatible with the internal market [113].
Zato mora upravičenec, tj. Tercas vrniti nezakonito in nezdružljivo pomoč skupaj z obrestmi –
The Court has also consistently held that the aim of obliging the State concerned to abolish aid found by the Commission to be incompatible with the internal market is to restore the previous situation [114].
SPREJELA NASLEDNJI SKLEP:
The Court has established that that objective is achieved once the recipient has repaid the amounts granted by way of unlawful aid, thus forfeiting the advantage which it had enjoyed over its competitors on the market, and the situation prior to the payment of the aid is restored [115].
Člen 1
In line with the case-law, Article 16(1) of Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 [116] provides that ‘where negative decisions are taken in cases of unlawful aid, the Commission shall decide that the Member State concerned shall take all necessary measures to recover the aid from the beneficiary … The Commission shall not require recovery of the aid if this would be contrary to a general principle of Union law.’
Državna pomoč, ki jo je Italija 7. julija 2014 nezakonito in v nasprotju s členom 108(3) Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije dodelila Tercas z ukrepom 1 – nepovratnim prispevkom v višini 265 milijonov EUR, ukrepom 2 – jamstvom za kreditni izpostavljenosti v vrednosti 35 milijonov EUR do […], pri katerem element pomoči znaša 0,14 milijona EUR, in ukrepom 3 – še enim nepovratnim prispevkom v višini 30 milijonov EUR, ki skupaj znašajo 295,14 milijona EUR, je nezdružljiva z notranjim trgom.
Neither Italy nor any of the third parties has formally requested that recovery should not be ordered on the grounds that it would be contrary to a general principle of Union law.
Člen 2
Nevertheless, in the light of the exchanges it has had with Italy and the third parties, the Commission believes that it would be appropriate to assess whether in the case at issue a recovery order would be contrary to any general principle of Union law.
Upravičenec povrne Italiji pomoč iz člena 1.
In the light of the reference to action by deposit guarantee schemes in point 63 of the 2013 Banking Communication, and the Commission's practice in previous decisions [117], no bank or Member State could in June 2014 have had an expectation that measures taken by guarantee schemes might not be considered State aid.
Zneskom, ki jih je treba vrniti, se prištejejo obresti od datuma, ko so bili dani na voljo upravičencu, do datuma njihovega dejanskega vračila.
Moreover, a recipient of unlawful aid cannot have a legitimate expectation that the aid is lawful before the Commission has taken a final decision pursuant to Article 108(3) of the Treaty.
Obresti se v skladu s poglavjem V Uredbe Komisije (ES) št. 794/2004 [118] in v skladu z Uredbo Komisije (ES) št. 271/2008 [119] o spremembi Uredbe (ES) št. 794/2004 izračunajo z obrestnoobrestnim računom.
In principle the Commission assesses the compatibility of an aid measure on the basis of the criteria applicable at the date on which it takes its decision.
Člen 3
The compatibility criteria set forth in the 2013 Banking Communication applied with effect from 1 August 2013, and hence were applicable more than 11 months before the measures were taken.
Vračilo pomoči iz člena 1 se izvede takoj in učinkovito.
There could be no problem of legal certainty on grounds of the novelty of the 2013 Banking Communication.
Italija zagotovi, da se ta sklep izvede v štirih mesecih od datuma uradnega obvestila o tem sklepu.
Recovery is the normal consequence of a negative decision in a case of unlawful aid, and as such it cannot be considered a disproportionate result.
Člen 4
The case-law of the Union courts has strictly circumscribed the scope of the cases in which it is absolute impossible for a Member State to comply with a recovery order.
Italija v dveh mesecih po uradnem obvestilu o tem sklepu Komisiji predloži naslednje informacije:
In particular, the financial difficulties which would be faced by an aid beneficiary if the aid were to be recovered do not render recovery impossible.
skupni znesek (glavnica in obresti), ki ga mora vrniti upravičenec;
The Commission concludes that in the case at issue it is not possible to invoke absolute impossibility to recover the aid.
podroben opis že sprejetih in načrtovanih ukrepov za uskladitev s tem sklepom;
Thus, given that the measures in question were implemented in violation of Article 108(3) of the Treaty, and are to be considered unlawful and incompatible aid, and given that recovery would not be contrary to a general principle of Union law, they must be recovered in order to re-establish the situation that existed on the market beforehand.
dokumente, ki dokazujejo, da se je od upravičenca zahtevalo vračilo pomoči.
The period in respect of which aid is to be recovered is the period from when the beneficiary first enjoyed the advantage, that is to say when the aid was put at the beneficiary's disposal, until the date of effective recovery, and the sums to be recovered should bear interest until the date of effective recovery.
Italija obvešča Komisijo o napredku glede sprejetih nacionalnih ukrepov za izvajanje tega sklepa, dokler se vračanje pomoči iz člena 1 ne konča.
In the case at issue the date on which the aid was put at the disposal of the company is the date of the payment of the contribution, for measure 1, and the date of provision of the guarantee, for measures 2 and 3.
Na zahtevo Komisije takoj predloži informacije o že sprejetih in načrtovanih ukrepih za uskladitev s tem sklepom.
CONCLUSION
Prav tako zagotovi podrobne informacije v zvezi z zneski pomoči in obrestmi vračila, ki jih je upravičenec že vrnil.
The Commission finds that Italy has unlawfully implemented measure 1, which is a non-repayable contribution of EUR 265 million, measure 2, which is a guarantee for EUR 35 million of credit exposures to […] with an aid element of EUR 0,14 million, and measure 3, which is a further non-repayable contribution of EUR 30 million, in total EUR 295,14 million in State aid, granted on 7 July 2014 in breach of Article 108(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Člen 5
As a consequence, the illegal and incompatible aid should be recovered from the beneficiary, Tercas, together with the recovery interest,
Ta sklep je naslovljen na Italijansko republiko.
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
V Bruslju, 23. decembra 2015
The State aid implemented through measure 1, which is a non-repayable contribution of EUR 265 million, measure 2, which is a guarantee for EUR 35 million of credit exposures to […] with an aid element of EUR 0,14 million, and measure 3, which is a further non-repayable contribution of EUR 30 million, in total EUR 295,14 million, unlawfully granted to Tercas by Italy on 7 July 2014 in breach of Article 108(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, is incompatible with the internal market.
Članica Komisije
Article 2
UL C 136, 24.4.2015, str. 17.
Italy shall recover the aid referred to in Article 1 from the beneficiary.
Glej sprotno opombo 1.
The sums to be recovered shall bear interest from the date on which they were put at the disposal of the beneficiary until their actual recovery.
Zaradi resnih upravnih nepravilnosti in hudih kršitev zakonodaje.
The interest shall be calculated on a compound basis in accordance with Chapter V of Commission Regulation (EC) No 794/2004 [118] and Commission Regulation (EC) No 271/2008 [119] amending Regulation (EC) No 794/2004.
Glej uvodno izjavo 38.