natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
According to Article 108(3) of the TFEU, Member States are obliged to inform the Commission of any plan to grant aid (notification obligation) and they may not put into effect any proposed aid measures until the Commission has taken a final position decision on the aid in question (standstill obligation).
V primeru nezakonite državne pomoči v obliki davčnega ukrepa je v točki 35 obvestila o neposredni obdavčitvi ustvarjenega dohodka [210] pojasnjeno, da se znesek, ki ga je treba vrniti, izračuna na podlagi primerjave med dejansko plačanim davkom in davkom, ki bi ga bilo treba plačati na podlagi splošno veljavnega pravila.
The Commission notes that Luxembourg did not notify the Commission of any plan to grant to contested tax ruling, nor did it respect the standstill obligation laid down in Article 108(3) of the TFEU.
Luksemburška davčna uprava mora, da bi izračunala znesek davka, ki bi ga bilo treba plačati, če bi se spoštovala splošno veljavna pravila, to je, če bi bilo neodvisno tržno načelo pravilno uporabljeno za določitev davčne osnove družbe FFT v Luksemburgu, spremeniti metodo letnega izračuna, ki jo je družba FFT uporabila v okviru metode MTMN na podlagi modela MEDAF, to je (i) znesek poplačanega lastnega kapitala in (ii) stopnja plačila, ki se uporabi za ta zahtevani znesek lastnega kapitala, v skladu s presojo iz uvodne izjave 311 zgoraj.
Therefore, in accordance with Article 1(f) of Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 [196], the contested tax ruling constitutes unlawful aid, put into effect in contravention of Article 108(3) of the TFEU.
Nobena določba prava Unije od Komisije ne zahteva, da pri odrejanju vračila pomoči, razglašene za nezdružljivo z notranjim trgom, določi natančen znesek pomoči, ki ga je treba vrniti.
RECOVERY
Nasprotno, zadostuje, da so v sklepu Komisije podatki, ki njegovemu naslovniku omogočajo, da ta znesek brez večjih težav opredeli sam [211].
Article 16(1) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 establishes an obligation on the Commission to order recovery of unlawful and incompatible aid.
Komisija je v oddelku 7.2.2.10 in zlasti v uvodni izjavi 311 predlagala metodo, s katero je mogoče odpraviti selektivno prednost, ki je bila dodeljena družbi FFT s spornim davčnim stališčem [212], če bo Luksemburg ohranil metodo MTMN za določitev davčne osnove družbe FFT.
That provision also provides that the Member State concerned shall take all necessary measures to recover unlawful aid that is found to be incompatible.
Vendar se zaveda, da lahko tudi druge metode za določitev transfernih cen privedejo do zanesljivega približka tržno naravnanega izida, skladnega z neodvisnim tržnim načelom.
Article 16(2) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 establishes that the aid is to be recovered, including interest from the date on which the unlawful aid was at the disposal of the beneficiary until the date of its effective recovery.
Če bi Luksemburg pred iztekom roka za izvajanje tega sklepa predlagal metodo vračila, v kateri bi bila uporabljena druga metoda za določitev transfernih cen, bi bila Komisija posledično pripravljena sprejeti to metodo, če bi zagotovila zanesljiv približek tržno naravnanega izida ter če ne glede na izbiro ne bi ponovila izbir in prilagoditev, ki jih je v poročilu o transfernih cenah izvedel davčni svetovalec družbe FFT in za katere Komisija meni, da odstopajo od neodvisnega tržnega načela.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 794/2004 [197] elaborates the methods to be used for the calculation of recovery interest.
Natančneje, Komisija ne vidi nobenega razloga, zakaj bi bilo treba izvesti prilagoditve računovodskega lastnega kapitala za izračun zneska lastnega kapitala, ki ga je treba poplačati.
Finally, Article 16(3) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 states, that ‘recovery shall be effected without delay and in accordance with the procedures under the national law of the Member State concerned, provided that they allow for the immediate an effective execution of the Commission decision’.
Poleg tega, kar zadeva ocenjeno plačilo tega lastnega kapitala po tržnem načelu, čeprav se zdi uporaba modela MEDAF nepotrebno težavna, nič ne nasprotuje temu, zakaj se ga ne bi smelo uporabiti za določitev transfernih cen, razen če se uporabi zaradi jasnega odstopanja od tržno naravnanega izida, ki se kaže v donosu lastnega kapitala primerljivih družb.
Legitimate expectations and legal certainty
Subjekt, za katerega velja obveznost vračila
Article 16(1) of Regulation 2015/1589 also provides that the Commission shall not require recovery of the aid if this would be contrary to a general principle of law.
Ob upoštevanju ugotovitev iz uvodnih izjav od 341 do 345 Komisija meni, da mora Luksemburg nezakonito pomoč, ki ni združljiva z notranjim trgom, dodeljeno s spornim davčnim stališčem, najprej izterjati od družbe FFT.
Luxembourg argues, first, that the principle of legitimate expectations mandates that the effects of any decision finding the existence of aid should not take effect until the end of the relevant tax ruling period, i.e. until the end of tax year 2016.
Če družba FFT ne more vrniti celotnega zneska pomoči, pridobljene s spornim davčnim stališčem, mora Luksemburg preostali znesek te pomoči izterjati od družbe Fiat Chrysler Automobiles N.V., ki je nasledila družbo Fiat S.p.A., ker je skupina Fiat pod nadzorom tega subjekta, tako da se na trgu ponovno vzpostavijo konkurenčne razmere, kakršne so bile pred tem.
According to Luxembourg, both the Code of Conduct Group and the OECD Forum on Harmful Tax Practices assured Luxembourg that its tax ruling practice based on the Circular is consistent with the OECD Code of Conduct and Guidelines.
SKLEPNE UGOTOVITVE
Luxembourg therefore submits that it was explicitly confirmed at the Council meeting of 27 May 2011 that, in view of the adoption of the Circular, Luxembourg's tax ruling practice should not be evaluated according to the Code of Conduct [198].
Komisija ugotavlja, da je Luksemburg s spornim davčnim stališčem družbi FFT in skupini Fiat nezakonito dodelil državno pomoč v nasprotju s členom 108(3) PDEU, da ta pomoč ni združljiva z notranjim trgom in da jo mora Luksemburg v skladu s členom 16 Uredbe (EU) 2015/1589 zato izterjati od družbe FFT in, če ta ne vrne celotnega zneska pomoči, od družbe Fiat Chrysler Automobiles N.V. v znesku pomoči, ki še ni bil vrnjen –
According to established case-law, a Member State whose authorities have granted aid in breach of the procedural rules laid down in Article 108(3) of the TFEU may not plead the legitimate expectations of a recipient to justify a failure to comply with the obligation to take the steps necessary to implement a Commission decision instructing it to recover the aid.
SPREJELA NASLEDNJI SKLEP:
If it were allowed to do so, Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU would be deprived of all practical force, since national authorities would thus be able to rely on their own unlawful conduct to render decisions taken by the Commission under those provisions of the TFEU ineffective [199].
Člen 1
Thus, it is not for the Member State concerned, but for the recipient undertaking, to invoke the existence of exceptional circumstances on the basis of which it had entertained legitimate expectations, leading it to decline to repay the unlawful aid [200].
Davčno stališče, ki ga je Luksemburg sprejel 3. septembra 2012 v korist družbe Fiat Finance and Trade Ltd in ki tej družbi omogoča, da določi svojo letno davčno osnovo v Luksemburgu v obdobju petih let, pomeni pomoč v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU, ki ni združljiva z notranjim trgom in jo je Luksemburg nezakonito izvedel, s čimer je kršil člen 108(3) PDEU.
Since FFT did not submit any argument to that effect in any of its observations submitted to the Commission, the Commission considers Luxembourg's reliance on legitimate expectations inadmissible for the purposes of the present Decision.
Člen 2
In any event, for a claim of legitimate expectations to succeed, the expectation must arise from prior Commission action in the form of precise assurances [201].
Luksemburg mora od družbe Fiat Finance and Trade Ltd zahtevati vračilo nezdružljive in nezakonite pomoči iz člena 1.
Luxembourg argues that an agreement in a Code of Conduct Group meeting that ‘there [is] no need for the [Luxembourg tax measure on companies engaged in intra-group financing activities] to be assessed against the criteria of the Code of Conduct’ constitutes such a precise assurance giving rise to legitimate expectations.
Zneski, ki jih ni mogoče izterjati od družbe Fiat Finance and Trade Ltd na podlagi zahteve za vračilo, opisane v odstavku 1, se izterjajo od družbe Fiat Chrysler Automobiles N.V.
The Commission recalls that the Code of Conduct, adopted by the ECOFIN Council [202], is a non-legally binding instrument which aims at providing a forum of discussion for Member States on measures which have, or may have, a significant impact on the location of business within the Union.
Zneskom, ki jih je treba vrniti, se prištejejo obresti od datuma, ko so bili dani na voljo upravičencem, do njihovega dejanskega vračila.
The Code of Conduct and the State aid rules pursue different objectives: while the Code of Conduct aims at tackling harmful tax competition between Member States, the State aid rules seeks to address distortions of between competitors that result from favourable treatment, also in the form of tax reductions, by Member States to certain undertakings.
Obresti se izračunajo na podlagi obrestnoobrestnega računa v skladu s poglavjem V Uredbe (ES) št. 794/2004.
Moreover, while the Code of Conduct group enjoys a certain margin of appreciation, the Commission has no discretion in determining whether a measure falls within the notion of State aid, since that notion is an objective one.
Člen 3
Thus, an agreement in the Code of Conduct Group meeting can neither bind nor restrict the Commission's actions in exercising its powers which are conferred on it by the TFEU in the field of State aid [203].
Vračilo dodeljene pomoči iz člena 1 se izvede takoj in učinkovito.
The same is true for agreements reached in the OECD Forum on Harmful Tax Practices.
Luksemburg zagotovi, da se ta sklep izvrši v štirih mesecih po uradnem obvestilu o tem sklepu.
At its meeting on 6 December 2011, the OECD Forum ‘agreed that the following 10 regimes did not need to be examined further […] Luxembourg — Advance tax analysis for intra-group financing’.
Člen 4
The OECD is not a Union institution, nor is the Union a member of that organisation [204].
Luksemburg v dveh mesecih od datuma uradnega obvestila o tem sklepu Komisiji predloži informacije o metodi, ki je bila uporabljena za izračun natančnega zneska pomoči.
Its conclusions, which are non-binding, cannot bind the Union institutions.
Luksemburg obvešča Komisijo o napredku nacionalnih ukrepov, sprejetih za izvajanje tega sklepa, do dokončne izterjave pomoči iz člena 1.
Moreover, far from giving a precise assurance, the OECD Forum refrained from further examining the Luxembourg tax analysis for intra-group financing.
Na zahtevo Komisije takoj predloži informacije o že sprejetih in načrtovanih ukrepih za uskladitev s tem sklepom.
It is therefore impossible to draw any kind of conclusions or inferences from this statement as regards the application of the State aid rules to the contested tax ruling.
Člen 5
Second, Luxembourg argues that the Commission infringed the principle of legal certainty.
Ta sklep je naslovljen na Veliko vojvodstvo Luksemburg.
It refers to previous decision-making practice where the Commission accepted to limit recovery based on that principle.
V Bruslju, 21. oktobra 2015
However, there is no previous decision-making practice that might have created uncertainty about the fact that tax rulings could lead to the granting of State aid.
Za Komisijo
Indeed, in the decision referred to by Luxembourg, the Commission limited recovery because of uncertainty created by a previous Commission decision.
Članica Komisije
In the present case, to the contrary, the Notice on Direct Business Taxation makes express reference to tax rulings and the circumstances according to which they could be considered to lead to the granting of State aid.
Člena 87 in 88 Pogodbe ES sta od 1. decembra 2009 člena 107 in 108 Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije (v nadaljnjem besedilu: PDEU).
As regards the argument of Luxembourg that the aid amount cannot be quantified with precision, due amongst others to the novelty of the approach, and recovery should therefore be excluded, the Commission notes that it has applied the arm's length principle in its past decision-making practice, in particular with respect to measures adopted by Luxembourg, and it concluded that a violation thereof could constitute State aid [205].
Člena sta vsebinsko enaka prejšnjima členoma.
That conclusion has further been confirmed by the Court of Justice [206].
V tem sklepu je treba sklicevanje na člena 107 in 108 PDEU razumeti kot sklicevanje na člena 87 in 88 Pogodbe ES, kjer je to primerno.
There is therefore nothing novel in the Commission's approach to the contested tax ruling.
S PDEU so bile uvedene tudi nekatere terminološke spremembe, izraz„Skupnost“ je nadomeščen z izrazom „Unija“, izraz „skupni trg“ pa z izrazom „notranji trg“.
Member States should be aware that an agreement between a tax authority and a company that leads to a favourable treatment for the company in terms of artificially lowering its tax base, because the transfer prices it employs do not give a reliable approximation of a market-based outcome, lead to a violation of the State aid rules and should, in case of doubt, be notified to the Commission.
V tem sklepu se uporablja terminologija PDEU.
Finally, as regards the allegedly difficulty to quantify the aid amount and therefore not order recovery, the Court has previously held [207] that the Commission is not required to state the exact amount of the aid to be recovered.
UL C 369, 17.10.2014, str. 37.
Union law merely requires recovery of unlawful aid to restore the position to the status quo ante and that repayment be made in accordance with the rules of national law [208].
Sklic HT.4020 – Prakse izdajanja davčnih stališč.
Accordingly, the Commission may confine itself to declaring that there is an obligation to repay the aid at issue and leave it to the national authorities to calculate the exact amount of aid to be repaid [209].
Luksemburški organi v dopisih uporabljajo izraz „predhodno stališče“ (décision anticipative) in ne „davčno stališče“ (ruling fiscal).
It can therefore be concluded that the arguments of legitimate expectations and legal certainty invoked by Luxembourg are without merit for the purposes of recovery of the aid unlawfully granted to FFT by way of the contested tax ruling.
Oba izraza pa se nanašata na isto vrsto postopka, ki daje davčnemu zavezancu določeno stopnjo gotovosti o tem, kako se bo v konkretnem primeru uporabila zakonodaja o obdavčitvi dohodkov pravnih oseb.
Methodology for recovery
V tem sklepu se uporablja izraz „davčno stališče“ (ruling fiscal), ki ima enak pomen kot „predhodno stališče“ (décision anticipative). .
In accordance with the TFEU and the Court of Justice's established case-law, 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.
Pod številko zadeve SA.37267 (2013/CP) – Prakse izdajanja davčnih stališč – LU.
The Court has also consistently held that the obligation on a State to abolish aid regarded by the Commission as being incompatible with the internal market is designed to re-establish the previously existing situation.
Luksemburški organi so nekatere informacije počrnili, zlasti imena družb in hčerinskih družb.
In this context, the Court has stated that that objective is attained 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.
Deli tega besedila so bili skriti, da se ne bi razkrile zaupne informacije.
In relation to unlawful State aid in the form of tax measures, the Notice on business taxation [210] provides in point 35 thereof that the amount to be recovered should be calculated on the basis of a comparison between the tax actually paid and the amount which should have been paid if the generally applicable rule had been applied.
Ti deli so nakazni s tropičjem med oglatima oklepajema.
In order to arrive at an amount of tax which should have been paid if the generally applicable rules would have been complied with, that is, if arm's length principle had been properly applied for the determination of FFT's tax base in Luxembourg, the Luxembourg tax administration must change the annual calculation method employed by FFT in the context the TNMM method on the basis of the CAPM, i.e. (i) the amount of capital remunerated; and (ii) the level of remuneration applied to this capital amount need, in line with the above assessment, presented in recital 311.
Komisija je v zvezi s preiskavo, ki se nanaša na družbo FFT, zadevi dodelila novo številko ter opomin z dne 7. aprila 2014 in vse nadaljnje dopise uvrstila pod št. SA.38375 (2014/CP) – Luksemburg – Domnevna pomoč podjetju FFT.
No provision of Union law requires the Commission, when ordering the recovery of aid declared incompatible with the internal market, to quantify the exact amount of the aid to be recovered.
Uredba Sveta (ES) št. 659/1999 z dne 22. marca 1999 o določitvi podrobnih pravil za uporabo člena 108 Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije (UL L 83, 27.3.1999, str. 1).
Rather, it is sufficient for the Commission's decision to include information enabling the addressee of the decision to work out that amount itself without overmuch difficulty [211].
Vsa sklicevanja na Uredbo (ES) št. 659/1999 je treba razumeti kot sklicevanja na Uredbo (EU) 2015/1589 in brati v skladu s korelacijsko tabelo v Prilogi II k slednji uredbi.
The Commission has proposed one possible methodology in Section 7.2.2.10 and, in particular, in recital 311 for eliminating the selective advantage granted to FFT by the contested tax ruling [212], if Luxembourg retains the TNMM to determine FFT's tax base.
Glej opombo 2.
However, the Commission appreciates that other transfer pricing methods may also result in a reliable approximation of a market-based outcome in line with the arm's length principle.
Glej uvodno izjavo 16.
Thus, should Luxembourg propose a method for recovery within the deadline for the implementation of this decision using an alternative transfer pricing method, the Commission would be ready to accept that method provided it results in a reliable approximation of a market-based outcome and provided that whatever method is chosen it does not replicate the choices and adjustments made by FFT's tax advisor in the transfer pricing report that the Commission considers constitute a deviation from an arm's length principle.
Glej opombo 5.
In particular, the Commission sees no reason why any adjustments should be made to FFT's accounting capital for the calculation of the amount of capital to be remunerated.
Dopis z dne 24. marca 2015 je bil Komisiji poslan 24. marca 2014 in nato ponovno 26. marca 2015.
Moreover, regarding the estimated arm's length remuneration on that capital, while the use of the CAPM methodology seems unnecessary cumbersome, there appears to be no reason why it could not be used for transfer pricing purposes, unless it is employed to clearly deviate from a market-based outcome, which is reflected in an observable return on equity for peers.
Glej letno poročilo družbe Fiat Chrysler Automobiles za poslovno leto 2014.
Entity from which the aid is to be recovered
V tem sklepu se sklicevanja na družbo Fiat S.p.A. lahko razumejo kot sklicevanja na družbo Fiat Chrysler Automobiles N.V. in obratno.
In light of the observations in recitals 341 to 345, the Commission considers that Luxembourg should, in the first place, recover the unlawful and incompatible aid granted by the contested tax ruling from FFT.
Poročilo o transfernih cenah se včasih sklicuje na FFT in včasih na FF&T, kar pa označuje isti subjekt.
Should FFT not be in a position to repay the full amount of the aid received as a result of the contested tax ruling, Luxembourg should recover the remaining amount of that aid from Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV, the successor of Fiat SpA, since it is that entity which controls the Fiat group, so as to ensure that the previously existing competitive situation on the market is restored through recovery.
Opis nalog, ki jih opravlja družba Fiat S.p.A., je bil v različici spornega davčnega stališča, ki ga je predložil Luksemburg, navedeni v sklepu o začetku postopka, delno počrnjen.
CONCLUSION
Navedba „družbe Fiat S.p.A.“ je bila dodana v ta opis na podlagi nepopravljene različice tega davčnega stališča, ki jo je Luksemburg predložil 24. marca 2014.
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Vendar sporno davčno stališče neha veljati, če se izkaže, da so dejstva ali okoliščine, opisane v prošnji, nepopolni ali netočni, če so ključni elementi dejanskih transakcij drugačni, kot so opisani v zahtevi po podatkih, ali če vnaprejšnji cenovni sporazum ni več skladen z nacionalnim ali mednarodnim pravom.
Article 1
V uvodnih izjavah od 44 do 46 sklepa o začetku postopka je natančneje pojasnjeno, kako davčni svetovalec utemeljuje izbiro MTMN za določitev obdavčljivega dobička družbe FFT.
The tax ruling issued by Luxembourg on 3 September 2012 in favour of Fiat Finance and Trade Ltd., which enables the latter to determine its tax liability in Luxembourg on a yearly basis for a period of 5 years, constitutes aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) of the TFEU that is incompatible with the internal market and that was unlawfully put into effect by Luxembourg in breach of Article 108(3) of the TFEU.
Glej uvodno izjavo 51.
Article 2
MEDAF se uporablja za oceno teoretične stopnje donosa, zahtevane za sredstva, natančneje, za lastni kapital.
Luxembourg shall recover the incompatible and unlawful aid referred to in Article 1 from Fiat Finance and Trade Ltd.
MEDAF je natančneje opisan v uvodnih izjavah od 39 do 42 sklepa o začetku postopka.
Any sums that remain unrecoverable from Fiat Finance and Trade Ltd., following the recovery described in the paragraph 1, shall be recovered from Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV
Baselski odbor za bančni nadzor, Mednarodno približevanje merjenja kapitalske ustreznosti in kapitalskih standardov – spremenjeni okvir, junij 2004 (v nadaljnjem besedilu: okvir Basel II).
The sums to be recovered shall bear interest from the date on which they were put at the disposal of the beneficiaries until their actual recovery.
Ker družba FFT ni regulirana oseba, razlage okvira Basel II, ki jo je davčni svetovalec navedel za primer družbe FFT, da bi bilo sprejeto sporno davčno stališče, regulatorni organ za finančne institucije ni ne preučil ne potrdil.
The interest shall be calculated on a compound basis in accordance with Chapter V of Regulation (EC) No 794/2004.
Zdi se, da „lastni kapital, ki se uporablja za opravljanje nalog“ ne ustreza nobeni posebej opredeljeni regulativni kategoriji kapitala.
Article 3
Izrazi „lastni kapital, izpostavljen tveganju“, „minimalne kapitalske zahteve“, „minimalna kapitalska zahteva iz okvira Basel II“, „minimalni lastni kapital, izpostavljen tveganju“ in „minimalni lastni kapital“ se brez razlikovanja uporabljajo v celotnem poročilu o transfernih cenah, vendar se sklicujejo na isti pojem, to je na hipotetični regulativni kapital družbe FFT, kot ga je ocenil davčni svetovalec, ko je po analogiji uporabil okvir Basel II.
Recovery of the aid granted referred to in Article 1 shall be immediate and effective.
Lastni kapital družbe FFT se je zmanjšal za vrednost deležev v družbah FFNA in FFC, ki so bili poplačani z dividendami.
Luxembourg shall ensure that this Decision is implemented within four months following the date of notification of this Decision.
„Lastni kapital za pokrivanje nalog, ki jih družba opravlja“ je drugo poimenovanje, ki ga davčni svetovalec uporablja za označevanje „lastnega kapitala, ki se uporablja za opravljanje nalog“, to je pojma, ki ga je davčni svetovalec uvedel v poročilu.