natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Slovenia also highlights that the updated restructuring plan ensures the long-term viability of the company by end of 2015 even in the worst-case scenario with a return on equity (ROE) of […] % in 2014 and of […] % in 2015, higher than the levels accepted by the Commission in the Air Malta decision [18].
Denarni tok iz poslovnih dejavnosti
Slovenia is of the view that the capacity reduction (in the form of cancellation of scheduled services) of […] % and […] % in winter and summer seasons, the release of slots at certain airports, including coordinated (congested) airports, and the sale of AAT are appropriate and proportionate compensatory measures.
Adria je proračunsko leto 2011 zaključila z izgubo v višini 12 milijonov EUR [24], leta 2012 pa je izguba znašala 10,8 milijona EUR [25].
Slovenia also claims that the routes cancelled were actually profitable on the basis of the so-called ‘gross margin’ (positive C1 contribution) which the Commission had accepted in the Air Malta and Czech Airlines [19] cases.
Zdi se tudi, da je Adria leta 2013 izgubo zmanjšala na 3,1 milijona EUR [26].
In relation to aid limited to the minimum (own contribution), in line with what has been explained above, Slovenia claims that the sale of AAT is free of aid and therefore its proceeds, amounting to EUR 14,7 million, should be accepted as own contribution.
Točka 10(a) smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje določa, da je podjetje v težavah, če je bila „izgubljena več kot polovica [njegovega] osnovnega kapitala“ in „je bila v preteklih 12 mesecih izgubljena več kot četrtina tega kapitala“.
Slovenia also considers that the debt-to-equity swaps of the banks should count as own contribution for their entire amount, i.e. EUR 19,7 million.
S to določbo je izražena predpostavka, da podjetje, ki ima ogromne izgube osnovnega kapitala, ne bo moglo preprečiti izgub, ki bi kratkoročno ali srednjeročno skoraj zagotovo ogrozile obstoj družbe (kot je določeno v točki 9 smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje).
Slovenia has also submitted the values of the aircraft pledged for the loans in question, together with the relevant AVAC report [20] demonstrating the values of those aircraft.
Kot je navedeno v sklepu o začetku postopka, se osnovni kapital v obdobju 2007–junij 2011 ni zmanjšal, temveč se je povečal.
Adding to this the sale of a number of assets […] the amount of own contribution would exceed [50-54] % on the basis of the updated restructuring plan.
V predhodnih zadevah [27] je Komisija sprejela sklep, da obstaja vnaprejšnja domneva, da so merila iz točke 10(a) smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje izpolnjena, če je lastniški kapital družbe negativen, kar bi veljalo za Adrio vsaj od leta 2010.
Finally, as regards the ‘one time, last time’ principle, Slovenia is of the view that it was respected since measures 1, 2, 3 and 5 — which predated measure 4 — did not entail State aid to Adria.
Splošno sodišče je v nedavni sodbi [28] razsodilo tudi, da je podjetje z negativnim lastniškim kapitalom podjetje v težavah.
Comments from interested parties
Poleg tega je imela Adria dozdevno največje težave do konca leta 2010.
During the formal investigation procedure, the Commission only received comments from Ryanair, who supports the Commission's preliminary findings that the measures under assessment entailed aid and were incompatible with the internal market.
V zvezi s tem so mediji takrat navajali možnost, da bo Adria šla v prostovoljno poravnavo oziroma da se bo celo vložil predlog za stečajni postopek [29].
Ryanair however argued that the Commission's assessment of the MEIP was not complete in the opening decision, since the Commission should have considered whether a private investor would have opted for liquidating Adria upfront instead of providing it with additional capital.
To bi lahko pomenilo, da je vsaj takrat Adria izpolnjevala merila za uvedbo kolektivnih postopkov insolventnosti v skladu s slovensko zakonodajo v smislu točke 10(c) smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje.
Ryanair argues that the Commission should have assessed in its opening decisions whether the liquidation of Adria was more profitable for the State than the provision of additional funds.
Iz navedenih razlogov Komisija v skladu s sklepom o začetku postopka ugotavlja, da je bila Adria leta 2010 in 2011 podjetje v težavah v smislu točke 10(a) in/ali točke 10(c) smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje, tj. ob odobritvi ukrepov 3, 4 in 5.
Although Ryanair considered that it had no sufficient information to comment on the restructuring plan, it noted its doubts that Adria would return to profitability.
Poleg tega preglednica 6 kaže, da bi Adria leta 2010 in 2011 lahko bila v težavah tudi v smislu točke 11 smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje, ki določa, da se podjetje lahko šteje za podjetje v težavah „ob prisotnosti običajnih znakov podjetja v težavah, kot so naraščajoče izgube, upadanje prometa, kopičenje zalog, presežki prostih zmogljivosti, padanje denarnih tokov, naraščajoči dolgovi, naraščajoči stroški obresti ali zmanjševanje čiste vrednosti sredstev“.
Ryanair also argued that any aid to Adria would harm Ryanair's market position, since it frustrates Ryanair's efforts at developing its market and inflicts loss of revenue on Ryanair.
Vendar Komisija meni, da Adria v obdobju 2007–2009 ni kazala običajnih znakov podjetja v težavah v skladu s točko 11 smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje.
Observations from Slovenia on the comments of interested third parties
Poleg tega je bil njen osnovni kapital stabilen in je znašal 6,8 milijona EUR.
Slovenia addressed in detail the arguments raised by Ryanair in its observations.
Od leta 2010 je bil EBT+DA Adrie negativen.
In particular, Slovenia noted that not only the State had participated to the capital injections in favour of Adria, but also private investors as well as entities whose actions, according to Slovenia, cannot be imputed to the State.
Ker je bila odločitev o ukrepu 2 sprejeta januarja 2009 in so bile delnice v celoti vpisane julija 2009, Komisija ne more z gotovostjo sklepati, da je takrat obstajal jasno opredeljiv trend negativnih rezultatov, na podlagi katerega bi lahko sklenila, da je bila Adria podjetje v težavah v smislu smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje.
In addition, Slovenia considers that Ryanair misinterpreted the case-law when it claims that the State should have favoured bankruptcy over Adria's restructuring and long-term viability.
V skladu s tem Komisija meni, da Adria ni bila podjetje v težavah v obdobju 2007–2009 ob izvedbi ukrepov 1 in 2.
According to Slovenia, the test advanced by Ryanair was flawed since it would only be applicable to Adria's creditors but not investors: since Slovenia had no credits against the company, it could not ask for its liquidation.
Obstoj državne pomoči
Slovenia noted that the Commission had addressed the assumption of Adria's restructuring plan and highlighted that Ryanair's doubts whether Adria could return to viability are unfounded.
Na podlagi člena 107(1) PDEU je vsaka pomoč, ki jo dodeli država članica, ali kakršna koli vrsta pomoči iz državnih sredstev, ki izkrivlja ali bi lahko izkrivljala konkurenco z dajanjem prednosti posameznim podjetjem ali proizvodnji posameznega blaga, nezdružljiva z notranjim trgom, kolikor prizadene trgovino med državami članicami.
Finally, Slovenia argued that the alleged harm to Ryanair's market position was not substantiated.
Za sprejetje sklepa o obstoju državne pomoči mora Komisija oceniti, ali so kumulativna merila iz člena 107(1) PDEU (tj. prenos državnih sredstev, selektivna prednost, morebitno izkrivljanje konkurence in vpliv na trgovino med državami članicami) izpolnjena za vsakega izmed petih ukrepov, ki se ocenjujejo.
ASSESSMENT OF THE MEASURES
Ukrepa 1 in 2: dokapitalizaciji leta 2007 in 2009
Adria's key financial data 2007 — June 2011 (EUR million)
Komisija je po začetku formalnega postopka preiskave ocenila podatke in dokaze, ki jih je o teh poročilih predložila Slovenija.
June 2011
V zvezi z ukrepom 1 je Slovenija pojasnila, da so podatki, na katerih je temeljilo poročilo, z dne 30. septembra 2006 in da so bili v času, ko je cenilec pripravljal poročilo, to najnovejši podatki.
3,2
Čeprav je […] mesečna vrzel med cenitvijo delnic družbe in dokapitalizacijo resnično obstajala, Komisija ni našla dokazov, da bi ta vrzel dejansko vplivala na ocenjeno vrednost delnic Adrie.
2,2
Zlasti v poročilu o vrednotenju za dokapitalizacijo leta 2007 (ukrep 1) sta napovedani povprečni stopnji rasti prihodkov in donosnosti v okviru stopenj, zabeleženih v preteklosti.
Registered capital
Tudi ostale predpostavke iz poročil se zdijo realistične.
Own equity
Poleg tega Komisija ugotavlja, da je bila KAD večinska delničarka Adrie že pred dokapitalizacijama [31] ter da je bil cilj dokapitalizacij financiranje obstoječe (in donosne) naložbe za KAD.
35,4
Na podlagi zgoraj navedenega Komisija ugotavlja, da se dokapitalizaciji leta 2007 in 2009 lahko štejeta za skladni s trgom in da nista pomenili neupravičene prednosti za Adrio.
35,9
Zato Komisija ugotavlja, da sta bila ukrepa 1 in 2 naložbi, ki bi jih vlagatelj v tržnem gospodarstvu izvedel v primerljivih okoliščinah [32], in zato ne vsebujeta državne pomoči, pri čemer ni treba nadalje oceniti, ali so bili ostali kumulativni pogoji iz člena 107(1) PDEU izpolnjeni.
Debt/Equity (ratio)
Kot je navedeno v uvodi izjavi (73), je eden od nujnih pogojev za državno pomoč dejstvo, da ukrep dodeljuje neupravičeno selektivno prednost upravičencu.
3,6
Komisija je v sklepu o začetku postopka ugotovila, da je cena 12 EUR na delnico, ki so jo PDP in zasebni turistični agenciji plačale za delnice Adrie, nižja od cene […] EUR na delnico iz poročila o vrednotenju.
Cash flow from operating activities
Kakor pri ukrepih 1 in 2, je Komisija tudi tu izrazila pomisleke o zanesljivosti tega poročila, zlasti zaradi precejšnje […] mesečne časovne vrzeli med dokapitalizacijo (septembra 2010) in vrednotenjem delnic v poročilu ([…]).
21,6 [23]
Informacije, ki so jih predložili slovenski organi, so nekoliko zmanjšale dvome Komisije v tem smislu.
Adria closed the financial year 2011 with losses of EUR 12 million [24] while in 2012 the losses reached EUR 10,8 million [25].
Vendar ne glede na to Komisija ponovno navaja, da sta na podlagi istih informacij in vrednotenja pri dokapitalizaciji leta 2010 sodelovali dve zasebni turistični agenciji (Kompas d.d. in Palma d.o.o.), ki sta zagotovili 20 % sredstev, PDP pa je zagotovila preostalih 80 % kapitala.
It also appears that in 2013 Adria narrowed the losses to EUR 3,1 million [26].
Zasebni turistični agenciji in PDP so sodelovale pod enakimi pogoji in vpisale delnice na isti dan.
Point 10(a) of the R&R Guidelines stipulates that a company is in difficulty when ‘more than half of registered capital has disappeared and more than one quarter of that capital has been lost over the preceding 12 months’.
Poleg tega sta bila prispevek zasebnih turističnih agencij in prispevek PDP opravljena z vložitvijo denarnih sredstev.
This provision reflects the assumption that a company experiencing a massive loss in its registered capital will be unable to stem losses that will almost certainly condemn it to go out of business in the short or medium term (as stipulated in point 9 of the R&R Guidelines).
Komisija je v sklepu o začetku postopka poudarila, da bi sodelovanje zasebnih turističnih agencij, ki sta zagotovili 20 % sredstev, načeloma lahko pomenilo, da je obravnavano naložbo podpiral trg, čeprav je treba ukrep obravnavati v širšem kontekstu takratnega položaja Adrie in dejstva, da je bil ukrep 3 tretja dokapitalizacija v času približno treh let in pol.
As indicated in the opening decision, between 2007 and June 2011, the registered capital was not lost but it actually increased.
Komisija najprej ugotavlja, da je Slovenija predložila dokaze o tem, da sta Kompas d.d. in Palma d.o.o. v celoti zasebni podjetji, nad katerima država nima nobenega nadzora ali vpliva.
In earlier cases [27], the Commission concluded that, where a company has negative equity, there is an a priori assumption that the criteria of point 10(a) of the R&R Guidelines are met, which would be the case for Adria since at least 2010.
Komisija prav tako ugotavlja, da sta zasebni turistični agenciji vpisali delnice Adrie istega dne kot PDP, plačali isto ceno, njuna naložba je potekala pod istimi pogoji, naložba kapitala PDP in zasebnih turističnih agencij pa je potekala v denarju.
The press at that time mentioned the possibility of Adria's going into receivership or even filing for bankruptcy [29].
Dejstvo, da je Adria leta 2010 veljala za podjetje v težavah (glej oddelek 7.1), tega ne spremeni.
This could be seen as a sign that, at least at that time, Adria fulfilled the criteria for being the subject of collective insolvency proceedings under Slovenian law in the sense of point 10(c) of the R&R Guidelines.
Poleg tega na podlagi dokazov, ki jih je predložila Slovenija, ni razvidno, da bi imeli zasebni turistični agenciji razen ustvarjanja dobička še kakšne druge razloge za vlaganje v Adrio.
For the reasons above, in line with the opening decision, the Commission concludes that Adria was a firm in difficulty in the sense of point 10(a) and/or point 10(c) of the R&R Guidelines in 2010 and 2011, i.e. at the time when measures 3, 4 and 5 were granted.
V tem smislu Komisija izpostavlja poročilo, ki ga je predložila Slovenija v zvezi s strateškimi usmeritvami Adrie za obdobje 2009–2014, ki je bilo očitno na voljo vlagateljem v času, ko so sprejemali svoje odločitve o naložbi, v skladu s tem poročilom pa naj bi Adria poslovala z dobičkom med letoma 2010 in 2014 na podlagi dokapitalizacije v višini približno 2,5 milijona EUR ter s sprejetjem nekaterih ukrepov s strani Adrie, vključno z višjim povprečnim dohodkom na potnika in zmanjšanjem stroškov.
In addition, Table 6 in recital 61 suggests that in 2010 and 2011 Adria could also be deemed to be in difficulty in the sense of point 11 of the R&R Guidelines, which states that a firm may be considered to be in difficulty ‘where the usual signs […] are present, such as increasing losses, diminishing turnover, growing stock inventories, excess capacity, declining cash flow, mounting debt, rising interest charges and falling or nil net asset value’.
To poročilo je dodaten znak, da sta bili zasebni turistični agenciji dejansko prepričani o donosnosti svoje naložbe.
However, the Commission is of the view that Adria did not show the usual signs of firms in difficulty as per point 11 of the R&R Guidelines between 2007 and 2009.
Zato Komisija meni, da je bila odločitev zasebnih turističnih agencij o naložbi v Adrio enakovredna odločitvi PDP ter da je bila njuna naložba precejšna.
With regard to 2008, Adria incurred losses of EUR 3,2 million for the first time in the period under consideration.
Poleg tega Komisija nima nobenih razlogov za dvom, da sta se zasebni turistični agenciji za naložbo v Adrio odločili zaradi namena ustvarjanja dobička.
As Slovenia correctly points out, in 2008 Adria's revenues and cash flow increased when compared to the previous year (from EUR 179,2 million to EUR 205,4 million and from EUR 16,9 million to EUR 18,5 million, respectively).
Na podlagi tega je Komisija sklenila, da ukrep 3 ni vključeval neupravičene prednosti za Adrio in zato ne vsebuje državne pomoči, pri čemer ni treba nadalje oceniti, ali so bili ostali kumulativni pogoji iz člena 107(1) PDEU izpolnjeni.
In addition, its registered capital remained stable at EUR 6,8 million.
Slovenija je 30. septembra 2011 v denarju vpisala 70 % (49,5 milijona EUR) dokapitalizacije Adrie leta 2011.
The Commission also observes that in 2008 and 2009, Adria had net EBT of EUR 3,2 million and EUR 14 million.
Slovenija je izvedla naložbo prek Agencije za upravljanje kapitalskih naložb Republike Slovenije (v nadaljnjem besedilu: AUKN).
In the same years, when excluding depreciation, the company's economic result was positive, reaching EBT+DA of EUR 10,9 million and EUR 1,6 million, respectively (see Table 6 in recital 61).
Poleg tega je PDP vpisala dodaten 1 % (0,5 milijona EUR) v denarju.
From 2010 onwards, Adria's EBT+DA turned negative.
Preostali del dokapitalizacije (tj. 19,7 milijona EUR) je potekal v obliki pretvorbe dolga v lastniški delež, ki so jo izvedle številne banke: 20 % NLB, 5 % Abanka Vipa d.d., 2 % UniCredit Banka Slovenije d.d. in 2 % Hypo Alpe-Adria Bank d.d..
Since measure 2 was decided in January 2009 and the shares were fully subscribed in July 2009, the Commission cannot conclude with certainty that at the time there was a clearly identifiable trend of negative results allowing it to conclude that Adria was a firm in difficulty in the sense of the R&R Guidelines.
AUKN je bila ustanovljena z Zakonom o upravljanju kapitalskih naložb Republike Slovenije [34], njen upravni odbor je imenoval Državni zbor, neposredno je bila financirana iz proračuna Republike Slovenije, njeni zaposleni pa so bili javni uslužbenci [35].
Accordingly, the Commission is of the view that Adria would not qualify as a firm in difficulty in 2007-2009, i.e. when measures 1 and 2 were provided.
Zato je jasno, da se ukrepi AUKN lahko pripišejo državi in da so vključevali državna sredstva, čemur Slovenija ne ugovarja.
Existence of State aid
Komisija poleg tega izpostavlja tudi sporočilo za medije z dne 23. junija 2011, ki ga je pripravil Urad predsednika vlade Republike Slovenije: „Vlada […] je na današnji seji […] sklenila […], da [AUKN] v osnovni kapital [Adrie Airways d.d.] vplača 49,5 milijona evrov, [500000] evrov pa vplača Posebna družba za podjetniško svetovanje (PDP, d.d.). […] Cilj Republike Slovenije je z aktivnim sodelovanjem v navedenem postopku zagotoviti nadaljnje zadovoljevanje interesov Republike Slovenije na področju dejavnosti rednega zračnega prevoza, ki ga opravlja letalski prevoznik s sedežem v Republiki Sloveniji.“ [36]
By virtue of Article 107(1) TFEU, any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, in so far as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the internal market.
V zvezi s PDP Komisija meni, da obstajajo številni kazalniki v smislu sodne prakse v zadevi Stardust Marine [37], na podlagi česar lahko sklepa, da je bila PDP ustanovljena za izvajanje politik slovenskih javnih organov ter da se njena odločitev o naložbi v ukrep 4 pripiše državi in vsebuje državna sredstva.
In order to conclude whether State aid is present, the Commission must assess whether the cumulative criteria of Article 107(1) TFEU (i.e. transfer of State resources, selective advantage, potential distortion of competition and affectation of intra-EU trade) are met for each of the five measures under assessment.
Komisija najprej ugotavlja, da je Slovenija posredni lastnik 100 % PDP (prek KAD, SOD in DSU).
Measures 1 and 2: the 2007 and 2009 capital increases
Ob upoštevanju tega Komisija opozarja na svoj sklep v zadevi ELAN [38], v katerem je ugotovila, da se ukrepa KAD in DSU, dveh lastnikov PDP, pripišeta državi.
The Commission will first analyse whether measures 1 and 2 conferred a selective undue advantage to Adria.
Poleg tega ima država vse glasove v odboru delničarjev, ki imenuje upravni odbor družbe.
In its opening decision, the Commission noted in this respect that the price of the shares paid by KAD was below the value determined by two valuation reports.
V skladu s členom 19 statuta PDP mora upravni odbor dati soglasje za nakup vrednostih papirjev, če je vrednost posameznega posla višja od 500000 EUR.
KAD acquired the new shares of Adria in February 2007 at a price of EUR 27 per share, below the value determined by a valuation report of EUR […] per share as of […] (see recital 15).
V skladu s sklepom o začetku postopka Komisija navaja tudi izjavo nekdanjega slovenskega ministra za finance ob koncu njegovega mandata 28. oktobra 2011 (tj. po ukrepu 4): „Z ustanovitvijo Posebne družbe za prestrukturiranje (PDP) smo zagotovili slovenskim podjetjem nove vire financiranja, znanje in izkušnje iz primerov dobrih praks pri prestrukturiranju podjetij.
In January 2009, KAD acquired the shares at a price of EUR 22 per share, below the value determined by a valuation report of EUR […] per share as of […] (see recital 18).
Najbolj odmevna sta zagotovo uspešno izvedena primera Adria Airways in Unior“ [39].
However, the Commission expressed doubts on the reliability of these reports, inter alia, because there was a significant time gap between the moment at which the capital increases took place (February 2007 and January 2009, respectively) and the time at which the shares of the company were valued ([…] and […], respectively).
Ta izjava lahko velja za posreden dokaz, da se ukrep pripiše državi v smislu sodne prakse Stardust Marine.
The Commission has assessed the data and evidence submitted by Slovenia about these reports after the opening of the formal investigation procedure.
Trditev Slovenije, da bi bilo treba to izjavo obravnavati v političnem kontekstu ob koncu mandata ministra za finance kot „drzno in dovolj preprosto, da se jo uspešno posreduje medijem“, se ne zdi prepričljiva.
As regards measure 1, Slovenia has explained that the data on which the report was based dates from 30 September 2006 and was the latest available data at the time the valuer prepared the report.
Poleg tega Komisija kot dodaten posreden dokaz navaja sporočilo za medije Urada predsednika vlade Republike Slovenije z dne 23. junija 2011 (glej uvodno izjavo 88), v katerem je navedeno, da se je slovenska vlada odločila, da bo PDP prispevala 0,5 milijona EUR k dokapitalizaciji leta 2011.
As regards measure 2, it results that the valuation report was commissioned at the same time as the general assembly of Adria had decided to proceed to a capital increase.
Ob upoštevanju navedenega Komisija meni, da je sodelovanje PDP pri dokapitalizaciji leta 2010 vključevalo državna sredstva in da se ukrepi PDP lahko pripišejo državi.
In addition, the Commission has no reason to believe that the valuer (P&S Capital) was not fully independent.
V zvezi z bankami Komisija v skladu s sklepom o začetku postopka navaja, da so Abanka Vipa d.d., UniCredit Banka Slovenije d.d. in Hypo Alpe-Adria Bank d.d. v celoti zasebni subjekti.
In addition, although it is true that there was a time gap of […] months between the moment at which the shares of the company were valued and the moment at which the capital increases took place, the Commission has found no evidence proving that this gap actually had an impact on the estimated value of the shares of Adria.
NLB je bila ob ukrepu 4 v večinski lasti države, in sicer neposredni (45,62 %) ali posredni prek SOD (4,07 %) in KAD (4,03 %) [40], drug pomemben delničar pa je bila le še KBC Banka (25 %).
The Commission observes that the valuation method used in the reports (net present value of expected free cash flows [30]) is widely accepted for cases of acquisitions.
Dejstvo, da je bila država večinski lastnik NLB, ki je tako imela večino glasov v upravnem odboru in nadzornem svetu, kaže na pripisljivost ukrepov državi.
Moreover, it results from a detailed analysis of the reports that the formulas used therein were adequate for the purposes of the valuation and had been adequately applied, and that the assumptions and the projections on turnover growth and profitability seemed realistic.
Vendar na podlagi statuta NLB Komisija ne more z gotovostjo sprejeti sklepa, da se njena odločitev o naložbi v Adrio pripiše državi.
In particular, in the valuation report for the capital injection of 2007 (measure 1), the projected average rates of revenue growth and profitability are within the range of the observed past ones.
Poleg tega Komisija v strukturi upravljanja NLB ni našla znakov o vpletenosti javnih organov.