natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
When a Member State argues that an economic transaction meets the market economy investor criterion, it must provide evidence demonstrating that the decision to proceed with the transaction was made, at the time, on the basis of economic evaluations comparable to those which, under similar circumstances, a rational private operator would have had carried out in order to determine the resulting economic advantage.
Ker je v edinem neodvisnem izvedenskem mnenju iz tistega obdobja navedena tržna cena med […] in […] milijoni USD, je znesek pomoči za [družbo, ki je takrat obvladovala družbo DPH] iz tega ukrepa enak razliki med spodnjim delom tega razpona in dejansko ceno transakcije, tj. 25,58 milijona USD (ali 20,36 milijona EUR [38]).
The above findings show what follows from the EDF judgment [24]:
Ukrep št. 3
That evidence must show clearly that, before or at the same time as conferring the economic advantage, … took the decision to make an investment, by means of the measure actually implemented, in the public undertaking.
Enakovrednost transakcije
84 In that regard, it may be necessary to produce evidence showing that the decision is based on economic evaluations comparable to those which, in the circumstances, a rational private investor in a situation as close as possible to that of the Member State would have had carried out, before making the investment, in order to determine its future profitability.
Šteje se, da je transakcija v skladu z načelom zasebnega vlagatelja v tržnem gospodarstvu, če se lahko dokaže, da je bila izvedena enakovredno med javnimi in zasebnimi vlagatelji.
However, the Commission notes that the valuation methods produced by Belgium and by […] are studies carried out after the measure in question was implemented.
[…] potrjuje trditve, ki jih zagovarja Belgija.
They were carried out solely to respond to the Commission's concerns in the opening decision, i.e. after the events in question.
Komisija ne zanika istočasnosti transakcij.
In this regard, the Commission notes in the observations by […] [25] that, while the latter had asked KPMG to reconstruct the valuation of Duferco US ex post KPMG had to discard the income approach since there was no business plan prepared by Duferco US at the time.
Zavrača pa prvi dve trditvi Belgije in posledično meni, da kapitalska naložba holdinga FSIH ni enakovredna kapitalski naložbi družbe Duferco Développement.
The Commission on three occasions requested any previous document indicating the existence of work preceding FSIH's decision [26].
Čeprav je bila družba DSIH formalno ustanovljena zunaj skupine Duferco, Komisija namreč opozarja, da je bila družba DSIH za skupino Duferco zgolj nosilec, da bi skupaj s holdingom FSIH prevzela družbo, Carsid Développement, katere celotni kapital je bil v njeni lasti v okviru holdinga SIF.
Belgium replied that, since 2003, when FSIH acquired its stake in the capital of Duferco US, three managers representing FSIH were on the boards of directors of Duferco US and Farrell and were involved in the management of these companies.
Opozoriti je treba, da je bila skupina Duferco edina delničarka holdinga SIF do 18. decembra 2012, ko je skupina NLMK kupila 50-odstotni delež tega luksemburškega holdinga.
Numerous reports were exchanged between the shareholders of Duferco US [27].
Zato je skupina Duferco plačala […] milijonov EUR za nakup družbe Carsid Développement prek družbe DSIH in prejela […] milijonov EUR od prodaje družbe Carsid Développement prek svoje hčerinske družbe SIF.
Belgium also submitted two examples of reports dated August 2004 and March 2005.
Ta transakcija, pri kateri je šlo dejansko samo za prenos hčerinskih družb, je bila donosna za skupino Duferco, medtem ko je za holding FSIH pomenila izdatek v višini […] milijonov EUR.
These reports are the records of several pages of two visits to Farrell made by representatives of FSIH.
Komisija ugotavlja, da je holding FSIH z enako kapitalsko naložbo […] milijonov EUR v denarju prenesel na hčerinsko družbo skupine Duferco, medtem ko je ta prejela […] milijonov EUR neto, ne da bi morala prevzeti novo tveganje.
However, the Commission notes that Belgium has not produced any memo, correspondence or other documents recording the exchanges the steel-industry experts might have had with the Duferco Group to determine the price of FSIH's stake in Duferco US.
Ti razlogi so povezani s tem, kako je holding FSIH ocenil svojo kapitalsko naložbo v družbi DSIH, zlasti kar zadeva (i) sredstva in obveznosti družbe Carsid Développement ter (ii) oceno vrednosti projekta […].
In light of these facts, the reasons for FSIH's withdrawal and the case-law in the EDF judgment, the Commission concludes that FSIH did not act as a private investor in a market economy when it sold its shares in Duferco US.
Družba Carsid Développement je nastala leta 2006 z delno odcepitvijo od svoje matične družbe Carsid, ki je na novoustanovljeno družbo prenesla nekatera sredstva v naravi.
Quantification of the aid
Holding FSIH je pri oceni vrednosti družbe Carsid Développement (in torej družbe DSIH) dejansko upošteval […] milijonov EUR poslovnih terjatev [40].
The Commission has demonstrated that, by not acting as a private investor, FSIH granted an economic advantage to DII that it would not have obtained under normal market conditions.
Nasprotno pa Belgija kljub tovrstnemu pozivu Komisije [41] ni predložila prepričljivih dokazov, da je holding FSIH pri oceni vrednosti družbe DSIH upošteval obveznosti družbe Carsid Développement.
In the absence of evidence from Belgium that an ex-ante evaluation of Duferco US resulted in the sale price that was actually paid, the Commission undertook its own evaluation of the valuation of 49,99 % of Duferco US (stake held by FSIH).
Komisija ugotavlja, da ji Belgija ni predložila nobenih dokazil o teh razpravah niti nobenega izvedenskega mnenja, ki bi potrjevalo vrednost saniranih zemljišč.
First, the Commission refuses to completely rule out the own funds valuation method that was used in the opening decision.
Sklepa torej, da holding FSIH teh obveznosti ni zadovoljivo upošteval pri oceni vrednosti družbe Carsid Développement.
Nevertheless, and to take account of Belgium's comments concerning the intrinsic limits of this method, the Commission will use it only for verification.
Kar zadeva projekt […], regija trdi, da je holding FSIH svojo analizo oprl na objektivne stroškovne postavke, obravnavane v neodvisni študiji, ki jo je skupina Duferco leta 2006 naročila družbi, specializirani za sanacijo degradiranih industrijskih območij in odlagališč (v nadaljnjem besedilu: SPAQuE), in na ocene tržne vrednosti dekontaminiranih zemljišč.
Table 1
Komisija priznava pomen stroškovnih postavk, ki jih je v tistem obdobju določil neodvisni izvedenec.
Own funds and net results of Duferco US (USD thousand)
Nasprotno pa opozarja, da tržna vrednost dekontaminiranih zemljišč ni bila predmet neodvisnih predhodnih študij.
2003/09
Belgija utemeljuje navedeni znesek […] milijonov EUR z izvedensko študijo družbe Galtier, izvedeno leta 2010, tj. štiri leta po obravnavanem ukrepu.
2004/09
Komisija opozarja, da je bila v neodvisni študiji družbe SPAQuE leta 2006 vseeno predlagana ocena prihodkov, ki bi lahko izhajali iz prodaje dekontaminiranih zemljišč [42].
2005/09
Nazadnje, tudi če bi se strinjali z napovedjo o […] milijonih EUR, ki jo zagovarja Belgija, Komisija ugotavlja, da ni običajno, da zasebni vlagatelj v tržnem gospodarstvu oceni vrednost projekta z nediskontirano vsoto svojih stroškov in pričakovanih dobičkov.
2006/09
Zasebni vlagatelj v tržnem gospodarstvu namreč ne vrednoti enako dobičkov, ki bodo uresničeni šele daleč v prihodnosti, in izdatkov, ki naj bi nastali kmalu.
Own capital
Komisija navaja, da do takih napak pri presoji ne bi prišlo, če bi bila takrat izvedena popolna in poenotena ocena vrednosti družbe Carsid Développement.
Net income
Komisija torej ugotavlja, da holding FSIH ni izvedel take vrste predhodne ekonomske ocene, kot bi jo zahteval zasebni vlagatelj v tržnem gospodarstvu.
Table 2
Glede na navedeno in sodno prakso EDF, navedeno že v uvodni izjavi (248), Komisija ugotavlja, da holding FSIH ni ravnal kot zasebni vlagatelj v tržnem gospodarstvu, s čimer je družbi DSIH dodelil gospodarsko prednost pod pogoji, ki niso tržni.
Own funds and net results of Farrell (USD thousand)
Ker je z odsvojitvijo dejavnosti družbe DSIH nastala samo ena terjatev, ki ni bila unovčena in je zdaj v lasti družbe Duferco Wallonie, Komisija meni, da je znesek pomoči, dodeljene družbi DSIH, enak skupnemu znesku kapitalske naložbe holdinga FSIH, tj. […] milijonov EUR.
These data simply show that a valuation method based on the value of own funds unquestionably results in a higher value in 2006 than in 2003.
Ukrepa št. 4 in 5
However, the Commission, estimated the value of FSIH's stake in Duferco US using the method recommended by Belgium, i.e. the EBITDA multiple.
Neustreznost primerjalnega pristopa
This method requires an estimate of (i) the EBITDA for 2006 (the year of the sale); and (ii) a multiple to be applied to it on the basis of comparable companies.
Komisija meni, da je treba za presojo, ali neko posojilo vsebuje element pomoči, ugotoviti, ali bi lahko upravičeno podjetje zadevne zneske pod podobnimi pogoji dobilo na kapitalskem trgu [43].
Belgium advocated using an EBITDA of between EUR 25 and 42 million for 2006.
Komisija lahko pri tej presoji uporabi primerjalni pristop in obravnavana posojila oceni z vidika tržnih transakcij, ki se jih zdijo primerljive.
According to the consolidated accounts of Duferco US at 30 September 2006 [29], the EBITDA was in fact USD 52,25 million (operating result: 45,97 + depreciation and amortisation: 6,28).
V okviru tega je Komisija Belgijo prosila, naj navede, ali sta [družba, ki je bila takrat na čelu skupine Duferco] in holding SIF leta 2009 pridobila podobna posojila pri finančnih ustanovah, ki niso holding FSIH, in, če je odgovor pritrdilen, pod kakšnimi pogoji.
The bulk of this good result should have already been known on 14 June 2006 since there were only two and a half months before the end of the financial year.
Belgija je Komisiji predložila preglednice z nekaterimi posojili, dodeljenimi [družbi, ki je bila takrat na čelu skupine Duferco] in holdingu SIF.
The Commission therefore considers that the range advocated by Belgium is unfairly low.
Belgija je v zvezi z [družbo, ki je bila takrat na čelu skupine Duferco] pojasnila, da ta kot nedejavna holdinška družba ni nikoli potrebovala bančnega posojila, tako da teh dveh obrestnih mer ni mogoče primerjati z obrestno mero, ki so jo banke dejansko uporabile za to družbo.
It also notes that the ex post study carried out by KPMG uses a ‘forecast’ EBITDA for the 2006 financial year of USD 42 million.
Za [družbo, ki je bila takrat na čelu skupine Duferco] se torej celotna primerjava, ki jo je predložila Belgija, nanaša na njene hčerinske družbe.
The combination of these different amounts leads the Commission to maintain that an EBITDA of USD 47,12 million [30] could realistically have been anticipated in 2006.
Za [družbo, ki je bila takrat na čelu skupine Duferco] in holding SIF je Komisija že v sklepu o začetku postopka ugotovila [44], da preglednice vključujejo posojila, ki niso primerljiva z obravnavanimi: različne zapadlosti (na splošno krajše od zapadlosti obeh zadevnih posojil), različni zneski (veliko nižji kot pri obeh posojilih), druga vrsta (preglednice vključujejo na primer obnovljiva enoletna posojila in dovoljene prekoračitve) in, nazadnje, drugo vrsto zavarovanj (hipoteke na nepremičnine ali druga opredmetena sredstva).
The Commission's estimate is supported by the following information.
Belgija Komisiji očita, da ni zadosti obrazložila, zakaj predloženih posojil ni upoštevala kot veljavnih elementov za primerjavo.
On 12 June 2006, in a memo [31] to its board of directors meeting on 14 June, FSIH predicted a stabilised result of USD 20 to 25 million for 2006 and subsequent years.
Merila za analizo, ki jih je uporabila Komisija, naj namreč ne bi bila sprejemljiva, saj po mnenju Belgije [45] obrestna mera ni odvisna (i) niti od zapadlosti posojila, (ii) niti od vrste posojila, (iii) niti od zneska posojila.
This confirms, first, that FSIH had a certain view of the company's financial situation.
V nasprotju s trditvami Belgije Komisija ugotavlja, da je v finančnih krogih na splošno sprejeto, da zapadlost posojila nesporno vpliva na določitev njegovega poplačila.
But this mainly provides a good indication of the EBITDA level that could be expected ex ante.
Tako je Evropska centralna banka na diagramu [46] prikazala razmerje med ravnjo poplačila posojila in njegovo zapadlostjo.
The accounting and financial reconstruction carried out by KPMG in 2014 concludes that a net result of EUR 20,3 million goes hand in hand with an EBITDA of EUR 42,3 million.
Krivulja zelo jasno kaže, da se poplačilo povečuje glede na zapadlost posojila, zlasti v prvih desetih letih.
If we accept this EBITDA/net result ratio of 2,09 and apply it to a provisional net result of EUR 22,5 million (arithmetic mean of the range predicted by FSIH in its memo to the board of directors), one obtains a forecast EBITDA for 2006 of EUR 47 million, which is very close to the EUR 47,12 million estimated by the Commission in the preceding recital.
Taka ugotovitev izhaja tudi iz sodne prakse Splošnega sodišča Evropske unije.
With regard to the multiple to be applied, the Commission accepts the multiple taken from the methodology used by Hatch Beddows when it valued Duferco US in 2003, i.e. a multiple of […].
Splošno sodišče je v zadevi Arbel Fauvet [47] potrdilo analizo Komisije, da pogoji plačila kratkoročnega posojila in dolgoročnega posojila ne morejo biti podobni:
This study is the only ex-ante analysis that was available at the time of sale.
„Podaljšanje limita na tekočem računu, ki ga je odobrila zasebna banka, je namreč v primerjavi s spornima predplačiloma, ki ju je treba vrniti v treh letih, zelo kratkoročno posojilo, v zvezi s katerim upniki torej ne izvedejo enakih analiz tveganja.
The amount of aid is the difference between valuation and the sale price of USD […] million set in 2006, i.e. USD 15,24 million.
Komisija meni, da tudi vrsta posojila vpliva na njegovo plačilo.
The value of the purchase option, i.e. USD […] million as estimated ex-post by KPMG, should be added to this amount.
Tveganja, povezanega s projektom financiranja potrebe po obratnem kapitalu, ni mogoče poplačati enako kot tveganje, povezano s projektom kapitalske naložbe.
The total amount of aid received by DII is therefore USD 15,34 million, or in principle EUR 11,58 million [33].
Ker se raven tveganja razlikuje glede na vrsto financiranega projekta, je posledično prilagojeno tudi njegovo poplačilo.
The Commission observes that the amount of aid estimated in this way confirms that the sale price of FSIH's stake in Duferco US does not correspond to what a private investor operating under normal market conditions could have expected.
Zato Komisija ne sprejema ugovora Belgije in potrjuje, da zavrača uporabo primerjalnega pristopa na podlagi posojil, ki jih je predložila Belgija.
Measure 2
Potem ko je Komisija zavrnila preučitev posojil, ki jih je predložila Belgija, sta […] in holding SIF želela Komisijo seznaniti še z drugimi posojili.
In its comments, Belgium used the following factors to explain why FSIH withdrew from DPH: the cyclical nature of the sector, the entry and influence of new private investors in the Duferco Group ([…] and NLMK) and the availability of liquidity in the Duferco Group.
[…] je tako predložila preglednico z 19 večvalutnimi posojili v višjih zneskih, kot jih je navedla Belgija.
Although this last factor is not in doubt, the Commission questions, on the other hand, whether the first two factors played a decisive role.
Večina drugih posojil je bila dodeljena med letoma 2003 in 2008, torej pred začetkom finančne krize in v obdobju, ko je trg jekla še vedno rasel.
Neither of these reasons figures in the minutes of the meeting of the board of directors of FSIH on 14 June 2006 [34] which dealt with the sale of its shares in DPH.
Komisija zaradi teh precejšnih razlik meni, da 19 posojil, ki jih je predložila […], niso dobra primerjava za posojilo holdinga FSIH.
However the minutes report another, more pressing, motive: an urgent need for liquid assets on the part of FSIH.
V zvezi s holdingom SIF Komisija meni, da posojili, s katerima je bila seznanjena, nista upoštevni.
‘At the end of 2005, FSIH was faced with a significant need for cash to finance urgent projects.
Res je, da gre za dolgoročni posojili.
At the same time, the Duferco Group had the opportunity to sell its industrial unit located in Russia.
Vendar sta obe imeli pomembna zavarovanja: (i) zavarovanja družbe DPH in skupine NLMK; (ii) za posojilo Rabobank: […]; (iii) za posojilo Sumitomo: poroštvo […].
FSIH took advantage of this opportunity to ask [the company that controlled DPH at the time] to buy its shares in DPH.’
Posojilo, ki ga je dodelil holding FSIH, ni zavarovano z nobenim poroštvom.
It should be noted that FSIH had received EUR 180 million from SOGEPA when it was established.
Poleg tega so bila posojila, ki jih je predložil holding SIF, […], medtem ko je posojilo, ki ga je dodelil holding FSIH, […].
At the end of 2005, this amount was almost entirely tied up: EUR 95 million had been invested in Duferco US and EUR 80 million in DPH.
To pomeni, da je bilo posojilo, ki ga je dodelil holding FSIH, bolj tvegano kot posojila, ki jih navaja holding SIF.
Yet in 2006, FSIH wanted to support other projects which were no doubt regarded as greater priorities from the point of view of the Walloon public authorities.
Zato teh posojil ni mogoče uporabiti za primerjavo.
These projects included the refurbishing of Carsid's blast furnace and coke plant, ‘a strategic project for the future of the steel industry in the Charleroi basin that will most certainly fall under the scope of SOGEPA’ [35].
Glede na navedeno Komisija ugotavlja, da primeri posojil, ki so jih predložili Belgija, […] in holding SIF, niso primerljivi z obravnavanima posojiloma.
In light of these reasons, it seems that FSIH decided to transfer its stake in DPH for mainly political and social considerations: FSIH had to find the cash to be able to continue to support the steel industry in Wallonia.
Primerjalna metoda zato v obravnavanem primeru ni prepričljiva.
By acting this way, FSIH's intention was not to maximise the value of its stake.
Analiza posojil glede na sporočilo o referenčnih obrestnih merah iz leta 2008
Indeed, the Walloon company was put in a weak position to negotiate its exit from DPH with Duferco.
Za primer, ko je težko ali nemogoče opredeliti podobne transakcije na trgu, je Komisija pripravila kazalnike za določitev, ali posojila vključujejo elemente pomoči.
In this context, [the company that controlled DPH at the time] was free to make an aggressive takeover bid.
Belgija trdi, da je [družba, ki je bila takrat na čelu skupine Duferco], lahko upravičila bonitetno oceno AAA ob dodelitvi posojila s strani holdinga FSIH.
This is when FSIH commissioned an independent study to validate the bid from [the company that controlled DPH at the time], as shown in the minutes of the meeting of the FSIH board of directors of 14 June 2006 [36]:
Komisija tej trditvi oporeka.
The Commission does not deny that FSIH behaved as a private investor when it commissioned the independent study from Ernst & Young.
Zato bi se glede na sklepanje Belgije [družbi, ki je bila takrat na čelu skupine Duferco] dodelila kvečjemu bonitetna ocena BB.
Nevertheless, it notes that, despite requests along these lines [37], Belgium was unable to provide proof that the conclusions of the study were actually taken into account during negotiations between the parties.
Komisija ugotavlja, da sta od kakih deset vodilnih jeklarskih skupin na svetu, ki so bile ocenjene leta 2009 [49], samo dve dobili bonitetno oceno A in A-, tri so bile uvrščene v kategorijo BBB, štiri pa so spadale v kategorijo BB.
On the contrary, it seems that in its haste to sell its stake, FSIH left it to [the company that controlled DPH at the time] to propose a price, which was accepted without the information in the subsequent report being used in the negotiation.
Komisija na podlagi tega sklepa, da bi skupina Duferco leta 2009 težko upravičila bonitetno oceno AAA, poleg tega se zdi bonitetna ocena BB, dobljena na podlagi pristopa, ki ga predlaga Belgija, v skladu s pristopom več drugih jeklarskih skupin – to je tudi najpogosteje ugotovljena ocena v letu 2009.
Therefore, the Commission maintains that the Ernst & Young 2006 Report was not used in the way of a private investor in a market economy would have done and served merely to make a negotiation that was already practically over look like a market transaction.
Kar zadeva vrednost zavarovanj, se Komisija ne strinja z Belgijo, da so bila zavarovanja v zvezi s posojilom, dodeljenim [družbi, ki je bila takrat na čelu skupine Duferco], zelo trdna.
In light of the above, it seems that the haircuts, which were the subject of lengthy argument by Belgium, were not discussed, or at least not sufficiently discussed, as such with [the company that controlled DPH at that time] during the negotiations.
Spomniti je treba, da ta zavarovanja vključujejo zastavitev 15 % delnic družbe DPH in zagotovilo za prednostno vračilo ob zapadlosti prihodnje, a skoraj gotove terjatve v višini […] milijonov USD.
On the contrary, they appear to be an ex-post structuring of justifications partially relied on internally by FSIH to convince itself of the merits of the price proposed by [the company that controlled DPH at the time].
Najprej, v zvezi z zastavitvijo 15 % delnic družbe DPH Komisija ugotavlja, da družba DPH, registrirana v […], ne kotira na borzi, tako da so njene delnice po definiciji slabo likvidne.
The Commission also notes that, however questionable Belgium feels the results of the Ernst & Young 2006 Report to be, the Walloon Region did not deem it necessary to seek a second expert opinion as it did in 2003 when it invested in Duferco US.
Vrednost zavarovanja se presoja glede na njegovo stopnjo likvidnosti v primeru neizpolnitve obveznosti posojilojemalca, torej njegove kratkoročne unovčljivosti brez izgube vrednosti.
The Commission concludes that FSIH, by selling its stake for USD […] million, gave [the company that controlled DPH at the time] an economic advantage that it would not have been able to obtain under normal market conditions.
Zato Komisija meni, da tega zavarovanja ni mogoče šteti za običajno, temveč ga je treba, nasprotno, šteti za nizko.
Since the only independent report from the time indicated a market price of between USD […] and […] million, the aid to [the company that controlled DPH at the time] that is present in this measure is the difference between the lower end of the range and the actual price of the transaction, i.e. USD 25,58 million (or EUR 20,36 million [38]).
Dalje, v zvezi s terjatvijo v višini […] milijonov USD Komisija opozarja, da je morala [družba, ki je bila takrat na čelu skupine Duferco] v skladu s členom 3 posojilne pogodbe posojilo vrniti do 31. decembra 2015 ali prej v primeru spremembe nadzora nad holdingom SIF v skladu s pogodbo z dne 1. septembra 2008, sklenjeno med družbo DII in skupino NLMK.
Measure 3
V zadnjem primeru člen 6.1 pogodbe podrobno določa, da se je [družba, ki je bila takrat na čelu skupine Duferco] zavezala, da bo prednostno in pred vsakim drugim plačilom ali vračilom kakršnih koli dolgov potrebne zneske namenila vračilu dolga na podlagi posojilne pogodbe.
On the pari passu nature of the transaction
Člen 6.2 tudi določa, da se [družba, ki je bila takrat na čelu skupine Duferco] zavezuje, da bo družba DII uveljavitev svoje prodajne opcije odložila do 18. decembra 2012 in/ali do uresničitve naložb, navedenih v prilogi.
A transaction is considered to have complied with the market economy investor principle if it can be proven that it was made pari passu between the public and private investors.
Komisija pojasnjuje, da se vrednost zavarovanja presoja glede na zmožnost njegovega unovčenja.