natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In particular the Commission considered that the objective of fostering the investments undertaken by big infrastructure projects is an economic policy consideration that is extrinsic to the taxation system at stake and cannot justify the differentiated treatment in favour of PCT.
Grški organi in družba PCT trdijo, da izvzetje od splošno veljavnega davčnega pravila ne prinaša nujno prednosti, ki je selektivna, in da Komisija ne loči med obstojem selektivnosti in obstojem prednosti.
Furthermore, the Commission considered that the fact that some of those or similar tax exemptions were included in previous public contracts on which the Commission adopted positive decisions is not relevant for demonstrating that these measures are justified by the logic of the Greek fiscal system.
Zato čeprav se ugotovi, da gre za selektivni ukrep, to po pravu samem še ne pomeni prednosti in obratno.
Moreover, the Commission raised doubts as regards the compatibility of the measures at stake with Article 107(3)(a) and 107(3)(c) TFEU, argued by the Greek authorities.
Uporaba enakega splošnega pravila v različnih okoliščinah bi bila lahko za nekatere osebe, za katere velja to pravilo, diskriminacijska ali neugodna.
In particular the Commission raised doubts concerning the application of Article 107(3)(a) TFEU, as the conditions of compatibility of this Article have been developed by the Commission in its Guidelines on national regional aid for 2007-2013 and the Greek authorities provided no relevant argumentation as regards the conformity of the measures with the conditions of these Guidelines.
Cilj oprostitve je lahko zagotoviti, da se objektivno različne okoliščine obravnavajo drugače, in s tem preprečiti diskriminacijo in nenamerno škodo.
Concerning the applicability of Article 107(3)(c), the Commission expressed its doubts as regards the necessity and proportionality of the measures.
Grški organi in družba PCT trdijo tudi, da enako kot podjetja, ki jim je zaupano izvajanje storitev splošnega gospodarskega pomena, podjetja, ki so jim zaupane dolgoročne koncesije za gradnjo in upravljanje javne infrastrukture prek zasebnih sredstev, prevzamejo pogodbene obveznosti, da bodo v infrastrukturo vložila velike denarne zneske, ki se bodo ob zaključku koncesijskega obdobja vrnili državi.
COMMENTS FROM INTERESTED PARTIES AND GREECE
Zato je namen zadevnih davčnih ukrepov, da se nadomestijo „strukturne pomanjkljivosti“ teh družb.
Greece and the beneficiary submitted joint comments in this case.
Zato se sklicujejo na sodbo v zadevi Combus [19], v kateri je Splošno sodišče trdilo, da odprava „strukturnih pomanjkljivosti“ ne pomeni priznavanja „prednosti“ iz člena 107(1) PDEU.
The Commission received no comments from any other third party after the opening of the formal investigation procedure.
Odsotnost selektivnosti in/ali upravičenosti v skladu z logiko davčnega sistema
As regards the existence of State aid
O „referenčnem sistemu“ ukrepov v preiskavi
Absence of an advantage
Po mnenju grških organov in družbe PCT je pravilen referenčni sistem splošni režim, ki se uporablja za javne infrastrukturne projekte v Grčiji, vključno z javno-zasebnimi partnerstvi.
The Greek authorities and PCT argue that an exemption from a generally applicable tax rule does not necessarily confer an advantage which is selective, and that the Commission does not make a difference between the existence of selectivity and that of an advantage.
Ta shema velja za vsa podjetja, vključena v velike infrastrukturne projekte in javna/zasebna partnerstva, in med njimi ne dela razlik.
Thus even when a selective measure is identified, it cannot be said that it automatically confers an advantage and vice versa.
Davčne določbe Zakona št. 3755/2009 pomenijo individualno uporabo te splošne sheme.
The application of the same general rule to different situations could give rise to discrimination or to a disadvantage for certain persons which are subject to this rule.
Ker imajo ti projekti posebne značilnosti [20], po katerih se razlikujejo od drugih projektov, so podjetja, odgovorna za javne infrastrukturne projekte, objektivno v očitno drugačnem pravnem in dejanskem položaju v primerjavi z drugimi podjetji, ki opravljajo drugačne dejavnosti.
The exemption may aim at ensuring that objectively different situations are treated differently and thus neither discrimination nor inadvertent disadvantages arise.
Zato se na splošno veljavna davčna pravila ne morejo obravnavati kot veljaven „referenčni sistem“.
Moreover they argue that in the same way as undertakings entrusted with the performance of services of general economic interest, the undertakings entrusted with long-term concessions to create and operate public infrastructure through private funds assume contractual obligations to invest significant sums of money for infrastructure that will be returned to the state at the end of the concession period.
Pravilen referenčni sistem je tisti, ki upošteva te značilnosti, priznane tudi v zakonodaji EU [21], in zahteva posebno obravnavo [22].
Thus the tax measures in question are meant to compensate for the ‘structural disadvantages’ these companies have.
Zato je Grčija z mehanizmom, ki ga je vzpostavila, da bi zagotovila ustrezno obravnavo posebnih značilnosti javnih infrastrukturnih projektov, po katerih se ti ločijo od drugih dejavnosti, uvedla nekatere davčne določbe, ki pojasnjujejo pravila, veljavna za nekatera področja obdavčevanja in ki (i) bi sicer lahko povzročila diskriminacijo javnih infrastrukturnih projektov, (ii) niso dovolj jasna in skladna s splošnimi načeli davčnega sistema ali (iii) so manj pomembna od navedene obvezne zahteve po zagotovitvi najučinkovitejše uporabe/razporeditve javnih sredstev.
For this they refer to the Combus judgment [19], where the General Court stated that removing a ‘structural disadvantage’ does not amount to the grant of an ‘advantage’ caught by Article 107(1) TFEU.
Poleg tega navajajo, da zakonodajna tehnika, uporabljena pri uvedbi davčnega ukrepa, ne opredeljuje splošne narave ukrepa.
Absence of selectivity and/or justification by the logic of the tax system
S sklicevanjem na sodbo v zadevi Gibraltar [23] trdijo, da uvedba izvzetja od splošno veljavnih pravil v državah članicah ne pomeni selektivnosti ali prednosti po pravu samem.
i.
Zgolj upoštevanje pristopa, ki temelji na „odstopanju“, bi bila formalistična metoda, ki bi se lahko preprosto zaobšla.
Concerning the ‘system of reference’ of the measures under examination
Cilj zadevnega ukrepa
According to the Greek authorities and PCT, the correct system of reference is the general regime applied to public infrastructure projects in Greece, including Private Public Partnerships.
Grški organi in družba PCT trdijo, da je glede na sodno prakso v zadevi Adria-Wien, cilj ukrepa, v okviru katerega je treba oceniti določbe v korist družbe PCT, spodbujanje uspešnega izvajanja javnih infrastrukturnih projektov.
This scheme applies to all undertakings engaging in big infrastructure projects and public/private partnerships and does not differentiate between them.
Zavračajo oceno Komisije v sklepu o začetku postopka v zvezi z „nepomembnostjo“ in „neveljavnostjo“ tovrstnega ukrepa.
The fiscal provisions of Law 3755/2009 represent the individual application of this general scheme.
Sklicujejo se tudi na cilj okoljskih dajatev in trdijo, da Komisija v sklepu o začetku postopka ugotavlja, da se noben davčni ukrep s posebnim ciljem, ki ni zbiranje prihodkov od davkov, ne bi mogel nikoli upravičiti na podlagi narave splošnega davčnega sistema.
As these projects have special characteristics [20] that distinguish them from other projects, the undertakings responsible for public infrastructure projects are objectively in a clearly different legal and factual situation when compared with other undertakings engaged in other types of activity.
Države članice lahko prek svojega davčnega sistema neovirano izvajajo politiko, ki se jim zdi ustrezna, če je skladna s pravom EU.
Thus the generally applicable tax rules cannot be considered as the valid ‘system of reference’.
Poleg tega trdijo, da je Komisija zmotno sklenila, da je navedeni cilj davčnega sistema „nepomemben“ [24], ker Sodišče v zadevi Azores [25] ni izjavilo, da cilj ni pomemben.
The correct system of reference is the one that has taken into account these characteristics also recognised by EU legislation [21] which calls for special treatment [22].
Namen analize selektivnosti ni določiti, ali je „cilj“ ukrepa v preiskavi „sam po sebi“ „veljaven“ ali „pomemben“ ali ne.
Thus the mechanism set up by Greece to ensure the appropriate treatment of the particular characteristics of public infrastructure projects, which distinguish them from other activities, is the introduction of certain fiscal provisions clarifying the rules applying in certain areas of taxation, the application of which (i) could otherwise lead to discrimination against public infrastructure projects, (ii) is characterised by lack of clarity and consistency with the general principles of the tax system; or (iii) is outweighed by the above mandatory requirement in terms of ensuring the most efficient use/allocation of public resources.
„Cilj“ ukrepa je „temelj“, na podlagi katerega se lahko primerjata „pravni in dejanski položaj“ podjetij.
Furthermore, they indicate that the legislative technique used in introducing a tax measure does not determine the general nature of a measure.
Grški organi in podjetje PCT trdijo, da Komisija ni pojasnila, zakaj „cilj“ politike ni „veljaven“ ali „pomemben“ za namene ocene selektivnosti.
By making reference to the Gibraltar judgment [23], they argue that the introduction by a Member State of an exemption to generally applicable rules does not automatically give rise to selectivity and an advantage.
V zvezi s tem se sklicujejo na sodbe v zadevah Adria-Wien [26], Regione Sardegna [27] in British Aggregates [28], pri čemer ugotavljajo, da se Sodišče ni opredelilo proti tem ciljem, ampak je samo ocenilo, ali so zadevni ukrepi selektivni.
Merely following a ‘derogation-based’ approach would be a formalistic methodology that would be easy to circumvent.
Pravni in dejanski položaj podjetja PCT z vidika cilja zadevnega ukrepa
Objective of the measure concerned
Grški organi in podjetje PCT trdijo, da sta pravni in dejanski položaj podjetja PCT in drugih podjetij, ki so prevzela velike infrastrukturne projekte, z vidika cilja uspešnega izvajanja javnih infrastrukturnih projektov drugačna v primerjavi s pravnim in dejanskim položajem drugih podjetij.
The Greek authorities and PCT argue that in the light of the Adria-Wien case-law, the objective of the measure under which the provisions in favour of PCT have to be assessed consists in the promotion of the successful implementation of public infrastructure projects.
Na tej podlagi ugotavljajo, da je Komisija v svojem sklepu o začetku postopka spregledala okoliščine/posebne značilnosti teh projektov.
They refute the Commission's assessment in the opening decision as to the ‘irrelevance’ and ‘invalidity’ of this type of objective.
Davčna obravnava, priznana podjetju PCT in drugim podjetjem v primerljivem položaju, zanje ne more pomeniti konkurenčne prednosti v primerjavi z drugimi podjetji, ki take obravnave nimajo, ker ti vrsti podjetij ne konkurirata med seboj glede izvajanja zadevnih javnih infrastrukturnih projektov.
They also refer to the objective pursued by environmental levies, in order to argue that the Commission's conclusion in the opening decision has as a consequence that any tax measure with a specific objective other than the collection of tax revenue could never be justified by the nature of the general tax system.
Ta shema velja brez izjem za vsa podjetja, ki izvajajo take projekte, pri čemer ni omejitev ne glede regije ali sektorja, kjer se ti projekti izvajajo, ne glede proračuna ali rokov.
Member States are free within the limits of compliance with EU law to pursue the policy they deem appropriate through their tax systems.
Zato ni dejanske selektivnosti.
Moreover, they argue that the Commission was wrong to conclude that the said objective of the tax system is ‘irrelevant’ [24], as the Court in the Azores case [25] did not state that the objective is without importance.
Poleg tega si grški organi niso privzeli pravice, da sami presodijo o načinu uporabe teh davčnih določb, ki so se več let sistematično uvajale v vse javne infrastrukturne projekte.
Under the selectivity analysis the aim is not to determine whether or not the ‘objective’ of the measure under examination ‘alone’ is ‘valid’ or ‘relevant’.
Logika davčnega sistema
The ‘objective’ of the measure consists in ‘the basis’ upon which the comparison of the ‘legal and factual situation’ of companies can be made.
Grški organi in podjetje PCT trdijo, da so zadevne davčne določbe in shema, ki velja zanje, skladne s temeljnimi ali glavnimi načeli, ki urejajo ustrezna grška davčna pravila, ker (a) so namenjene uresničevanju cilja javne politike, ki je skladen s temeljnimi načeli splošnega davčnega sistema, zlasti z načelom sorazmernosti, z gospodarnostjo in s ciljem davčnega sistema o povečanju prihodkov ter s ključnimi politikami Grčije v zvezi z vzpostavitvijo javne infrastrukture, (b) si prizadevajo zagotoviti, da se objektivno različni položaji obravnavajo različno, pri čemer se uporabljajo načela enakosti in sorazmernosti ter se prepreči izkrivljanje rezultatov, ki so cilj davčnega sistema, (c) se uporabljajo na podlagi objektivnih meril, (d) so zasnovane posebej kot zakonodajni mehanizem, namenjen reševanju ključnih finančnih vprašanj, ki izhajajo iz izvajanja javnih infrastrukturnih projektov in ki lahko ogrozijo sodelovanje zasebnega sektorja [29].
They argue that the Commission does not explain why the policy ‘objective’ is not ‘valid’ or ‘relevant’ for the purposes of the selectivity assessment.
Poleg tega se z zagotavljanjem pravne varnosti na podlagi teh določb in s tem zmogljivosti davkoplačevalcev, da plačujejo davek, spodbujajo naložbe zasebnega sektorja v javno infrastrukturo ter posledično širitev davčne osnove in zbiranje povečanih prihodkov od davkov.
For this they refer to the Adria-Wien [26], Regione Sardegna [27] and British Aggregates [28] judgments arguing that the Court did not pronounce itself against these objectives, but simply assessed whether the measures at stake were selective.
Zato so ustrezni ukrepi upravičeni na podlagi logike sistema.
PCT's legal and factual situation in light of the objective of the measure concerned
Odsotnost ocene pogojev v zvezi z izkrivljanjem konkurence in vpliv na trgovino
The Greek authorities and PCT argue that in light of the objective of the successful implementation of public infrastructure projects PCT and the other undertakings assuming big infrastructure projects are in a different legal and factual situation than other undertakings.
Grški organi in podjetje PCT trdijo, da Komisija ni določila storitev in geografskih trgov, ki so pomembni za oceno konkurenčnosti, ni analizirala pogojev konkurence na upoštevnih trgih in ni dokazala, da so konkurenčna pristanišča EU, navedena v sklepu o začetku postopka, dejanski ali morebitni konkurenti pristanišča Pirej in podjetja PCT.
On this basis, they argue that the Commission has overlooked in its opening decision the circumstances/particular characteristics of these projects.
Trdili so tudi, da Komisija ni proučila upoštevnega trga, na katerem posluje kontejnerski terminal podjetja PCT, in pogojev na upoštevnem trgu.
The tax treatment accorded to PCT and others in comparable situation cannot give a competitive advantage over other undertakings which do not receive such treatment, since the two types of undertakings do not compete in respect of the performance of the public infrastructure projects concerned.
S tako proučitvijo bi se dokazalo, da zadevne davčne določbe ne vplivajo negativno na konkurenco in trgovino v EU.
All the undertakings which are implementing such projects are equally subject to this scheme and no one is to be excluded, and there are no limitations set as regards the region or sector of application, budget or time limits.
Kar zadeva konkurenčne pogoje na trgu, trdijo, da na podlagi sodbe v zadevi WAM [30] že dejstvo, da države članice EU trgujejo s kontejnerskim tovorom in da je več pristanišč, ki konkurirajo med seboj glede zagotavljanja storitev pristaniških kontejnerskih terminalov, ne pomeni po pravu samem, da vsaka pomoč, dodeljena upravljavcu pristanišča, izpolnjuje merilo o vplivu na trgovino in/ali izkrivljanju konkurence, ki je določeno v členu 107(1) PDEU.
Thus there is no de facto selectivity.
Zato trdijo, da Komisija ni analizirala vpliva davčnih določb na konkurenco in trgovino na upoštevnih trgih.
Moreover, the Greek authorities have not retained any discretionary power as to how to apply these fiscal provisions that have been systematically introduced in all public infrastructure projects for several years.
Podjetje PCT je zagotovilo podrobnejše pripombe glede navedenih trditev.
Logic of the tax system
Opredelitev upoštevnega trga
The Greek authorities and PCT argue that the fiscal provisions in question and the scheme of which they are part are consistent with the basic or guiding principles governing the relevant Greek tax rules, since they (a) are intended to pursue a public policy objective consistent with the basic principles of the general tax system, in particular the principle of proportionality, the economy and the revenue raising objective of the tax system and key policies of Greece regarding the creation of public infrastructure; (b) aim to ensure that objectively different situations are treated differently, thus applying the principles of equality and proportionality and ensuring that the results intended by the tax system are not distorted; (c) are applied upon the basis of objective criteria; (d) are designed specifically as the legislative mechanism addressing key financial concerns arising in the implementation of public infrastructure projects, which risk jeopardising the private sector participation [29].
Kar zadeva opredelitev upoštevnega trga, se podjetje PCT sklicuje na sklep Komisije o združitvah [31], da bi dokazalo obstoj dveh ločenih upoštevnih trgov za pristaniške storitve kontejnerskih terminalov; promet v notranjosti države in promet s pretovarjanjem.
Moreover by providing legal certainty through these provisions, and thus by safeguarding the ability of the taxpayer to pay tax, private sector investment in public infrastructure and thus the extension of the tax base and the collection of increased tax revenue is promoted.
V zvezi s prometom v notranjosti države trdi tudi, da se zdi, da je Komisija v svojem sklepu o začetku postopka štela, da geografski obseg trga zajema „Grčijo in vzhodno Sredozemlje“, ne da bi pojasnila, zakaj ga je opredelila drugače kot grška Komisija za varstvo konkurence, ki je določila, da je geografski obseg trga za prekladalne storitve, kar zadeva promet v notranjosti, omejen na srednjo in južno Grčijo [32].
Thus the relevant measures are justified by the logic of the system.
Poleg tega podjetje PCT trdi, da srednja in južna Grčija z vidika ponudbe in povpraševanja pomenita geografski trg, ki je drugačen od severnega dela Grčije, in sicer zaradi: (a) sposobnosti pristaniškega kontejnerskega terminala podjetja PCT, da oskrbi bistveno večji obseg prometa kot solunsko pristanišče in katero koli drugo grško pristanišče ter pod konkurenčnejšimi pogoji zaradi njegove večje tehnične zmogljivosti, (b) osredotočenosti industrije, trgovine in populacije pretežno v širšem območju Aten in na splošno v osrednjem/južnem delu države, (c) topografije Grčije, ki terja dodatne stroške za prevoz kontejnerjev med solunskim pristaniščem na severnem delu Grčije in osrednjim in južnim delom države ter obratno.
Absence of an assessment regarding the conditions relevant to distortion of competition and effect on trade
Kar zadeva storitve pretovarjanja kontejnerjev, se podjetje PCT sklicuje na sklepe Komisije v zadevah Maersk/ECT in Hutchinson/Evergreen, v katerih je za upoštevne geografske trge za storitve pretovarjanja kontejnerjev določila vzhodno Sredozemlje in črnomorsko območje.
The Greek authorities and PCT argue that the Commission failed to identify the services and geographic markets which are relevant to the competitive assessment, did not analyse the conditions of competition in the relevant markets and did not establish that the competing EU ports mentioned in the opening decision are actual or potential competitors of the Port of Piraeus and PCT.
Meni tudi, da Komisija v svojem sklepu o začetku postopka šteje, da trg geografsko zajema „Grčijo in vzhodno Sredozemlje“.
They further argue that the Commission failed to examine the relevant market in which PCT's container terminal operates as well the competitive conditions in the relevant market.
Konkurenčni pogoji na upoštevnem trgu
Such examination would demonstrate that the fiscal provisions at stake do not have an adverse effect on competition and trade in the EU.
Kar zadeva promet s pretovarjanjem, podjetje PCT trdi, da njegov kontejnerski terminal ne konkurira s pristanišči EU glede zagotavljanja prekladalnih storitev za globokomorski kontejnerski promet s pretovarjanjem v vzhodnem Sredozemlju, razen s kontejnerskim terminalom na pomolu I podjetja PPA.
Concerning the competitive conditions in the market, they argue that on the basis of the WAM judgement [30] the mere fact that there is container cargo traded between EU Member States and that there are various ports which compete with each other on the provision of container port facility services does not automatically mean that any aid given to a port operator meets the criterion on effect on trade and/or distortion of competition set out in Article 107(1) TFEU.
Trdi tudi, da Komisija ni pojasnila, zakaj meni, da so na tem trgu različna pristanišča v državah članicah EU [33], ki konkurirajo s pristaniškim kontejnerskim terminalom podjetja PCT.
Thus they argue that the Commission did not analyse the effect of the fiscal provisions on competition and trade in the relevant markets.
Po mnenju podjetja PCT je izjava Komisije, da „… se solunsko pristanišče, pristanišče Konstanca v Romuniji, koprsko pristanišče v Sloveniji in nekatera pristanišča v Italiji lahko štejejo za neposredne konkurente“, v nasprotju z ugotovitvami Komisije v zadevi C 21/2009 [34].
PCT provided more detailed comments as regards the above argumentation.
Podjetje PCT meni, da se pristanišča v Italiji in koprsko pristanišče v Sloveniji ne nahajajo v vzhodnosredozemskem segmentu trga, ki ga je določila Komisija, ampak v osrednjem Sredozemlju.
Definition of the relevant market
Poleg tega pristanišče Pirej zdaj ne oskrbuje prometa s pretovarjanjem, namenjenega v notranjost države, ki ga oskrbujejo ta pristanišča („zbirno območje“) [35].
Concerning the definition of the relevant market, PCT refers to Commission decisions in the area of mergers [31] in order to argue that there are two distinct relevant markets for container terminal port services; hinterland traffic and transhipment traffic.
Z vidika ponudbe podjetje PCT trdi, da bi ta pristanišča do neke mere lahko nadomeščala pristaniški kontejnerski terminal podjetja PCT, ker bi lahko oskrbovala nekatere vrste kontejnerskih ladij, ki jih lahko oskrbuje kontejnersko pristanišče podjetja PCT, vendar ne vseh, ker je globina morja v njih manjša in imajo manjšo zmogljivost žerjavov [36].
It also argues that concerning the hinterland traffic, the Commission in its opening decision appears to consider that the geographic scope of the market encompasses ‘Greece and Eastern Mediterranean’, without explaining why it defines it differently than the Hellenic Competition Commission, which ruled that the geographic scope of the market for stevedoring services as regards hinterland traffic is limited to central and southern Greece [32].
Z vidika povpraševanja pa ta pristanišča ne morejo nadomeščati pristanišča Pirej, ker: (a) Pirej zagotavlja najkrajši in najcenejši [37] odmik od smeri Suez/Gibraltar, ki predstavlja glavne globokomorske kontejnerske ladijske linije v Sredozemskem morju [38], (b) Pirej zagotavlja najnižje cene goriva za ladje na svetovni ravni, (c) pristanišče Konstanca bi zlasti vključevalo dodatne stroške za pilote v Dardanelah in Bosporju.