natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Finally, it emerged from the investigation that the bond issuance agreement was adopted at the initiative of BAS and airBaltic's management, which had already suggested to the State in April and June 2009 a capital increase in the company in proportion to their shareholdings.
Nazadnje, Komisija ugotavlja, da Latvija ni utemeljila svoje trditve, da je bil namen člena 7.4 sporazuma preprečiti škodo državi v primeru neizpolnjevanja obveznosti družbe BAS in s tem zaščititi naložbo države v družbo airBaltic.
As highlighted in the opening decision, the Commission is of the opinion that the purchase of 0 %-coupon bonds was not a typical investment by a prudent market operator.
Komisija zato ugotavlja, da država ni ravnala kot vlagatelj v tržnem gospodarstvu, ko je dodelila ukrep 6, in da odstop terjatve ni bil enakovreden ukrepom 1, 2 in 3.
However, the Commission notes that Latvia and BAS were at the time major shareholders of airBaltic and their investment decision should be assessed from this perspective and not from that of a purely external investor.
Zato Komisija meni, da je ukrep 6 pomenil neupravičeno prednost za družbo airBaltic.
Indeed, it appears rational to conclude that the owners of airBaltic were not looking for short-term profit at the time but were interested in keeping the company afloat.
Zaradi razlogov, navedenih v uvodni izjavi 120, bi lahko ukrep 6 izkrivljal konkurenco in vplival na trgovino med državami članicami.
On the basis of the above, the Commission comes to the conclusion that Latvia acted as a prudent market operator when purchasing 0 %-coupon bonds together with the private investor BAS.
Na podlagi navedenih argumentov Komisija ugotavlja, da je ukrep 6 vključeval državno pomoč družbi airBaltic v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU.
The Commission therefore excludes the presence of an undue advantage in relation to measure 4, and assessment of the other cumulative conditions laid down in Article 107(1) TFEU concerning the presence of state aid is superfluous.
Sklepna ugotovitev o obstoju pomoči
The EUR 2,8 million payments by Latvijas Krājbanka (measure 5)
Zaradi navedenih razlogov Komisija ugotavlja, da ukrepi 1, 4 in 5 niso pomenili državne pomoči.
Measure 5 relates to the payment of EUR 2,8 million by Latvijas Krājbanka to airBaltic on 21 and 22 November 2011.
Vendar Komisija meni, da so ukrepi 2, 3 in 6 pomenili državno pomoč družbi airBaltic.
As explained in recital 39 above, airBaltic submitted three payment orders to Latvijas Krājbanka prior to the decisions of the FCMC of 17 November 2011 to limit banking operations above EUR 100,000 and of 21 November 2011 to halt all operations of Latvijas Krājbanka.
Da bi določila znesek pomoči, ki ga je družba airBaltic že prejela, Komisija ugotavlja, da je ukrep 3 vključeval kapitalizacijo prvega državnega posojila v višini 16 milijonov LVL (22,65 milijona EUR) in prve tranše drugega državnega posojila v višini 41,6 milijona LVL (58,89 milijona EUR).
Latvia considers that no State resources were involved given that the operations concerned three payment orders of airBaltic to IATA Clearing House, Riga International Airport and an alternative bank account of airBaltic in a different bank (see recital 39 above).
Tema zneskoma je treba dodati drugo tranšo drugega državnega posojila v višini 25,4 milijona LVL (35,96 milijona EUR), ki je bila družbi airBaltic dana na razpolago 14. decembra 2012, tj. preostali del ukrepa 2, ki ni bil kapitaliziran, in terjatev v višini 5 milijonov EUR, ki jo je država odstopila družbi airBaltic, tj. ukrep 6.
These were, according to Latvia, mere common banking operations concerning private funds of airBaltic.
Skupni znesek državne pomoči, dodeljene družbi airBaltic, torej znaša približno 86,53 milijona LVL (122,51 milijona EUR).
Latvia also argues that the decisions of the FCMC were not imputable to the State.
ZAKONITOST POMOČI
Latvia has explained that the transfer of funds had their origin in payment orders submitted by airBaltic before the FCMC ordered the suspension of the activities of Latvijas Krājbanka on 21 November 2011.
Člen 108(3) PDEU določa, da države članice ne izvedejo ukrepa pomoči, dokler Komisija ne sprejme sklepa, s katerim odobri ukrep.
Latvijas Krājbanka executed the transactions on 25 and 30 November 2011.
Komisija ugotavlja, da je Latvija ukrepe 2, 3 in 6 dodelila družbi airBaltic, ne da bi jih priglasila Komisiji za odobritev.
Moreover, pursuant to the Law on the FCMC of 1 June 2000, the FCMC takes its decisions without having to take account of any requirement or instruction of any other public authority.
Komisija obžaluje, da Latvija ni upoštevala obveznosti mirovanja in da je s tem kršila svojo obveznost po členu 108(3) PDEU.
In addition, the funding of the FCMC is not dependent upon the State, as the FCMC's activities are financed through payments by parties active on the Latvian financial and capital markets.
V zvezi z namero latvijskih organov, da družbi airBaltic odstopijo terjatve v višini 30 milijonov EUR, ki izhajajo iz sindiciranega posojila 2 in so povezane z ukrepom 6, Komisija opozarja na obveznost latvijskih organov v skladu s členom 108(3) PDEU, da Komisijo o kakršnih koli načrtih za dodelitev pomoči obvestijo dovolj zgodaj, da lahko predloži pripombe.
It also appears from the applicable laws that the State is not involved in the execution of the enforcement powers and rights of the FCMC relating to its supervision of credit institutions.
ZDRUŽLJIVOST POMOČI
On the basis of the evidence before it, the Commission is of the view that the trustees appointed by the FCMC acted independently of the State, which would exclude imputability of their actions to Latvia.
Če ukrepi 2, 3 in 6 pomenijo državno pomoč v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU, je treba njihovo združljivost oceniti ob upoštevanju izjem iz odstavkov 2 in 3 navedenega člena.
On the basis of the above, the Commission concludes that measure 5 did not entail state aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU.
Kot je navedeno v sklepu o začetku postopka, se zdi, da so glede na naravo ukrepov in težave družbe airBaltic edina ustrezna merila združljivosti tista v zvezi s pomočjo za reševanje in prestrukturiranje podjetij v težavah iz člena 107(3)(c) PDEU na podlagi smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje, zlasti določbe o pomoči za prestrukturiranje.
The EUR 5 million claim from Taurus attributed to airBaltic (measure 6)
Latvijski organi so na začetku menili, da nobeden izmed ukrepov ne pomeni državne pomoči.
The follow-up complaint received on 18 July 2012 refers to the obligation of the investors under Article 7.4 of the Agreement to hand over to the State or its nominated company — under certain circumstances — the outstanding claims stemming from syndicated loan 2 in exchange for LVL 1 (see recital 42 above).
Vendar je Latvija zaradi dvomov, ki jih je Komisija izrazila v svojem sklepu o začetku postopka, predložila argumente o združljivosti in trdila, da so ukrepi združljiva pomoč za prestrukturiranje.
In accordance with Article 7.4 of the Agreement, Taurus assigned to Latvia a EUR 5 million claim it had against airBaltic for LVL 1.
V prvem načrtu, predloženem Komisiji, so bile opredeljene nekatere šibkosti družbe airBaltic in navedena ugotovitev, da družba potrebuje približno [175–185] milijonov EUR osnovnega kapitala, da bi lahko obnovila svojo floto in učinkovito tekmovala z nizkocenovnimi prevozniki.
Subsequently, Latvia assigned the claim to airBaltic.
Latvija trdi, da je bilo od aprila 2011 sprejetih več ukrepov, vključno z zaprtjem vozlišča družbe airBaltic v Vilni in ukinitvijo prog, s čimer se je začel postopek prestrukturiranja družbe airBaltic.
In relation to the remaining claims, amounting to EUR 30 million (EUR 42,47 million), which were supposed to be novated within the framework of syndicated loan 2, the Latvian authorities requested the investors by letter of 9 February 2012 to assign to it their respective claims in exchange for 1 LVL each.
Za zagotovitev ponovne vzpostavitve donosnosti družbe airBaltic je bil v poznejši fazi razvit celovit sklop pobud v zvezi s prihodki, poslovanjem, omrežjem, floto in splošno organizacijo (načrt reShape).
Furthermore, Latvia brought an action before the Riga Regional Court in relation to three of the investors in order to enforce Article 7.4 of the Agreement.
Prvi načrt je bil razvit leta 2011 in je vključeval glavne finančne vidike prestrukturiranja.
Latvia has indicated its intention to also attribute these claims to airBaltic.
Po navedbah Latvije je to pripeljalo do sklenitve sporazuma in na koncu do načrta reShape iz marca 2012.
Latvia argues that the assignment of the EUR 5 million claim to airBaltic was a contingency measure aimed at protecting the State's financial interests and should be seen as a pari passu measure under the Agreement, and thus exclude State aid.
Argumenti Latvije so proučeni v naslednjih oddelkih.
The Commission notes that it follows clearly from Article 7.4 of the Agreement that the relevant claims were to be assigned or handed over ‘to the State or its nominated company for the sum of LVL 1’.
Upravičenost
Therefore, since the decision to attribute the EUR 5 million claim to airBaltic was taken by the State, this decision is imputable to it and entails State resources.
V skladu s točko 33 smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje so do pomoči za prestrukturiranje upravičena samo podjetja v težavah v smislu točk 9 do 13 smernic.
It emerged during the course of the formal investigation procedure that the agreements for the syndicated loans were never signed.
Komisija je že ugotovila, da je bila družba airBaltic vsaj od leta 2011 podjetje v težavah (glej uvodno izjavo 87).
However, it appears from the evidence submitted by Latvia that the courts recognised the validity of the Agreement as regards the obligation of the private investors to assign to the State or its nominated company the claims resulting from syndicated loan 2.
Točka 12 smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje določa, da novoustanovljeno podjetje ni upravičeno do pomoči za reševanje ali prestrukturiranje, tudi če je njegov začetni finančni položaj negotov.
In this respect, Latvia indicates that, according to several judgments of the Latvian courts, the owner of the EUR 5 million claim is not entitled to request repayment of this amount but only to claim shares in airBaltic reflecting a EUR 5 million advance payment into the share capital of the company.
Podjetje načeloma velja za novoustanovljeno prva tri leta po začetku poslovanja na zadevnem področju.
Since the State already owned 99,8 % of the shares of airBaltic, Latvia argues that the entitlement to additional shares does not represent any meaningful economic value for the State.
Družba airBaltic je bila ustanovljena leta 1995 in je ni mogoče šteti za novoustanovljeno podjetje.
The Commission notes that contrary to what Latvia suggests, while the courts may have recognised the right of the State to take over the claims resulting from syndicated loan 2 in line with Article 7.4 of the Agreement, this does not mean that Latvia was obliged to attribute this claim to airBaltic.
Poleg tega airBaltic ne pripada poslovni skupini v smislu točke 13 smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje.
The Commission notes that a prudent market economy operator would have not assigned the claim to airBaltic for LVL 1.
Komisija zato ugotavlja, da je družba airBaltic upravičena do pomoči za prestrukturiranje.
Latvia has not provided evidence as to why the State was better off granting the claim to airBaltic than keeping it or using it for some other purpose.
Veljavnost načrta za prestrukturiranje
As a result of the assignment, Latvia placed the company in a more favourable position than its competitors.
Komisija ugotavlja, da se je prestrukturiranje družbe airBaltic začelo aprila 2011, ko je vodstvo družbe pripravilo prvi načrt za prestrukturiranje.
Furthermore, the Commission does not agree with the arguments of the Latvian authorities and highlights that any additional share in airBaltic would have an additional value to the State, even if small, such that the presence of aid cannot be excluded.
Ta načrt se je osredotočal predvsem na optimizacijo flote in potrebo po zamenjavi zrakoplovov družbe z učinkovitejšimi letali, kar je tudi temelj za poznejši načrt ReShape.
In addition, by granting the claim to airBaltic, the State gave up not only to the claim but also any right to interest at a rate of [5 — 7] % thereon.
Hkrati je družba zaprla vozlišče v Vilni.
The Commission reiterates the conclusions reached in section 7.2.1 above, that is, when the Agreement was entered into on 3 October 2011, the State did not know whether it would need to make use of Article 7.4 of the Agreement.
Komisija ugotavlja, da je načrt za prestrukturiranje iz aprila 2011 določal glavne potrebe družbe airBaltic.
In addition, the State was not obliged to assign to airBaltic the claims affected by the application of that provision.
Čeprav navedeni načrt ni bil povsem razvit, je bil prva podlaga za določitev potreb družbe airBaltic po prestrukturiranju in zagotovitev obnovitve sposobnosti preživetja.
Finally, the Commission observes that Latvia has not substantiated its claim that the purpose of Article 7.4 of the Agreement was to safeguard the State's investment in airBaltic by preventing any harm to the State in case of default of BAS.
Poleg tega je bil podlaga za načrt reShape, ki je bil v pripravi, ko je bil podpisan sporazum (tj. 3. oktobra 2011), in dokončan marca 2012.
The Commission thus concludes that by providing measure 6, the State did not act as a market economy investor, nor was the operation pari passu with measures 1, 2 and 3.
Komisija je v svoji praksi priznala, da razvoj načrtov za prestrukturiranje traja nekaj časa, in menila, da se obdobje prestrukturiranja začne ob sprejetju prvega načrta.
Therefore, the Commission is of the opinion that measure 6 conferred an undue advantage on airBaltic.
Komisija je na primer v sklepu v zvezi z družbo Varvaressos [37] menila, da je treba ukrepe, ki so bili družbi dodeljeni od leta 2006 do leta 2009, oceniti kot del nepretrganega prestrukturiranja na podlagi načrta za prestrukturiranje iz leta 2009 (ki je zajemal obdobje 2006–2011).
For the reasons set out in recital 120 above, measure 6 was likely to distort competition and affect trade between Member States.
Podobno kot v primeru družbe airBaltic je bil načrt za prestrukturiranje družbe Varvaressos iz leta 2009 razvit na podlagi „strateškega in poslovnega načrta“ iz leta 2006.
On account of the arguments above, the Commission comes to the conclusion that measure 6 involved state aid for the benefit of airBaltic within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU.
Obnova dolgoročne sposobnosti preživetja
Conclusion on the existence of aid
V skladu s točko 34 smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje je dodelitev pomoči za prestrukturiranje pogojena z izvajanjem načrta za prestrukturiranje, ki ga mora v vseh primerih posameznih pomoči potrditi Komisija.
The Commission concludes that measures 1, 4 and 5 did not entail state aid for the reasons set out above.
V točki 35 je pojasnjeno, da mora načrt za prestrukturiranje, katerega trajanje mora biti čim krajše, obnoviti dolgoročno sposobnost preživetja podjetja v smiselnem časovnem okviru in na podlagi realističnih predvidevanj prihodnjih pogojev poslovanja.
However, the Commission considers that measures 2, 3 and 6 constituted state aid to airBaltic.
V skladu s točko 36 mora načrt opisati okoliščine, ki so povzročile težave podjetja, ter upoštevati sedanje stanje in prihodnje obete na trgu v najbolj optimističnem, najbolj pesimističnem in osnovnem scenariju.
In order to determine the amount of aid already disbursed to airBaltic, the Commission observes that measure 3 consisted of the capitalisation of the first State loan of LVL 16 million (EUR 22,65 million) and the first tranche of the second State loan of LVL 41,6 million (EUR 58,89 million).
Načrt mora zagotavljati preobrat, ki bo podjetju omogočil, da bo po zaključku prestrukturiranja vse svoje stroške krilo samo, vključno z amortizacijo in finančnimi dajatvami.
The second tranche of the second State loan of LVL 25,4 million (EUR 35,96 million) made available to airBaltic on 14 December 2012 — i.e. the remaining part of measure 2 which had not been capitalised — should be added to that amount, together with the EUR 5 million attributed to airBaltic as measure 6.
Pričakovani donos kapitala mora biti dovolj velik, da prestrukturiranemu podjetju omogoča samostojno konkuriranje na trgu (točka 37).
The overall total amount of State aid granted to airBaltic is therefore approximately LVL 86,53 million (EUR 122,51 million).
Komisija ugotavlja, da načrt za prestrukturiranje opisuje okoliščine, ki so povzročile težave družbe airBaltic, in da so bile te predvsem posledica svetovne gospodarske krize v letih 2008 in 2009, ki je močno vplivala na baltsko regijo in prizadela tudi sektor zračnega prevoza.
LEGALITY OF THE AID
Poleg tega načrt za prestrukturiranje pojasnjuje, da so poslovna strategija družbe airBaltic iz preteklosti in številne odločitve nekdanjega vodstva družbe dodatno prispevale k njenim težavam.
Article 108(3) TFEU states that a Member State shall not put an aid measure into effect before the Commission has adopted a decision authorising this measure.
V zvezi s poslovno strategijo družbe airBaltic načrt za prestrukturiranje poudarja predvsem, da se je družba v preteklosti osredotočala izključno na širjenje in ne na donosnost, s tem pa je bila izpostavljena nevzdržno visokim odhodkom.
The Commission observes that Latvia granted measures 2, 3 and 6 to airBaltic without notifying them to the Commission for approval.
Stroški so bili poleg tega zelo visoki zaradi flote, ki je vključevala štiri različne vrste zrakoplovov, visoki pa so bili tudi stroški zakupa zrakoplovov.
The Commission regrets that Latvia did not comply with the stand-still obligation and therefore violated its obligation according to Article 108(3) TFEU.
Družba je odpirala letalske proge brez ustrezne ocene njihove donosnosti in veliko prog je ustvarjalo izgubo.
As regards the intention of the Latvian authorities to grant to airBaltic EUR 30 million resulting from syndicated loan 2 and linked to measure 6, the Commission recalls the obligation of the Latvian authorities under Article 108(3) TFEU to inform the Commission, in sufficient time to enable it to submit its comments, of any plans to grant aid.
Komisija je res dosledno menila, da se je treba v sedanjih gospodarskih okoliščinah izogibati zgolj kratkoročnim preobratom in namesto tega ustvariti trdno podlago za prihodnjo rast.
Insofar as measures 2, 3 and 6 constitute state aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU, their compatibility must be assessed in the light of the exceptions laid down in paragraphs 2 and 3 of that Article.
Načrt za prestrukturiranje poudarja spremembo poslovne strategije družbe airBaltic, ki naj bi postala hibridni letalski prevoznik, se osredotočila na donosnejše stranke prek večine storitev, ki jih tradicionalno ponujajo mrežni prevozniki, in si hkrati prizadevala za stroškovno učinkovitost, ki jo običajno razvijajo nizkocenovni prevozniki.
As indicated in the opening decision, in view of the nature of the measures and of the difficulties of airBaltic, the only relevant compatibility criteria appear to be those concerning aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty under Article 107(3)(c) TFEU on the basis of the R&R Guidelines, and in particular the provisions regarding restructuring aid.
Novo vodstvo družbe je od oktobra 2011 že izvedlo velik del te strategije.
The Latvian authorities were initially of the view that none of the measures entailed state aid.
Poleg tega načrt za prestrukturiranje predvideva tri glavne vrste ukrepov za prestrukturiranje, in sicer: (i) optimizacijo prihodkov in stroškov za obstoječe poslovanje, (ii) preoblikovanje omrežja, s čimer naj bi se prilagodili namembni kraji, pogostost in časovna razporeditev, da bi se optimizirala RASK in CASK [39] na ravni proge, ter (iii) optimizacijo omrežja in flote, da se pregleda in opredeli optimalna velikost omrežja in flote.
However, on the basis of the doubts raised by the Commission in its opening decision, Latvia provided compatibility arguments and argued that the measures constitute compatible restructuring aid.
Skupaj je bilo razvitih 13 pobud, ki se nanašajo na prihodke, in 13 pobud, ki se nanašajo na stroške, dve dodatni pobudi pa sta bili razviti na področju preoblikovanja omrežja in obnove flote.
In particular, Latvia provided an updated restructuring plan in December 2013, complemented by submissions of 28 January, 28 February and 24 March 2014.
V zvezi z optimizacijo flote Komisija ugotavlja, da ima raznolika in starajoča se flota družbe airBaltic manj učinkovito porabo goriva in zahteva več vzdrževanja kot flote konkurentov, kar za družbo pomeni vedno višje stroške.
Latvia notes that the restructuring of airBaltic started on 18 April 2011, when a first plan was submitted to the company's management.
V letih 2012 in 2013 se je družba airBaltic odločila, da bo uporabljala samo del svojih razpoložljivih zrakoplovov, da bi znižala stroške.
This first plan, which was submitted to the Commission, identified some of the weaknesses of airBaltic and established that approximately EUR [175 — 185] million in share capital was needed to allow the company to renew its fleet and allow it to compete effectively with low-cost carriers.
Leta 2013 je svoji floti dodala dve letali Bombardier Q400, da bi delno nadomestila izgubo zmogljivosti zaradi umika letal Fokker in Boeing 757 iz flote.
Latvia argues that as of April 2011, several actions were taken, including the closure of airBaltic's hub in Vilnius and the cancellation of routes, thereby starting airBaltic's restructuring process.
Poleg tega je zaradi zamenjave flote opravila ponovna pogajanja o ugodnejših pogojih za sedanje zakupne pogodbe, dokler ne bo leta […] ali […] na voljo novi Bombardier CS300.
In order to guarantee airBaltic's return to profitability, a comprehensive set of initiatives covering revenues, operations, network, fleet and overall organisation were developed at the later stage (the reShape plan).
V zvezi s preoblikovanjem omrežja Komisija ugotavlja, da je novo omrežje leta 2013 v primerjavi s prejšnjim letom prineslo dodatnih [16–21] milijonov LVL ([22,7–29,8] milijona EUR) na ravni C1 [40], med drugim zaradi ukinitve nedonosnih prog (npr. […]) in zmanjšanja pogostosti letov ([…] na […], […] in […]).
This first plan was developed in 2011, and included the principal financial aspects of the restructuring.
Pobude v zvezi s prihodki vključujejo uvedbo nove strukture cen vozovnic ali optimizacijo strukture pristojbin za prtljago.
According to Latvia, this led to entering the Agreement and eventually resulted in the reShape plan of March 2012.
Poleg tega se bo spodbujala spletna prijava, kabinsko osebje in prodajalci pa bodo prejemali fleksibilne prejemke.
The arguments of Latvia will be assessed in the following sections.
Pobude v zvezi s stroški vključujejo ponovna pogajanja o cenah goriva s sedanjimi dobavitelji in pogodbah o preverjanju in obnovi motorjev, optimizacijo zakupa ter znižanje stroškov za hangarje in stroškov v zvezi z nočitvami posadke v hotelih.
Eligibility
Opravljena bodo tudi ponovna pogajanja o sedanjih sporazumih s ponudniki storitev zemeljske oskrbe.
According to point 33 of the R&R Guidelines, only firms in difficulty within the meaning of points 9 to 13 of the R&R Guidelines are eligible to receive restructuring aid.
Večina ukrepov za prestrukturiranje, navedenih v prejšnjih uvodnih izjavah, je bila že izvedena.
The Commission has already concluded that airBaltic was a firm in difficulty from at least 2011 (see recital 87 above).
Zaradi pobud v zvezi z optimizacijo prihodkov in znižanjem stroškov, obnove flote in preoblikovanja omrežja je družba airBaltic leto 2012 zaključila z izgubo pred obrestmi in davki v višini 30 milijonov LVL (42,47 milijona EUR), medtem ko je načrtovana izguba pred obrestmi in davki znašala 38 milijonov LVL (53,8 milijona EUR).