natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
COMMENTS BY BELGIUM ON THE OBSERVATIONS BY SIF
To trditev jasno ovrže preučitev razlogov za dezinvestiranje holdinga FSIH: če holding FSIH ni želel, da bi skupini Duferco konkurirali drugi ponudniki, ji je s tem ustregel, saj je njegov delež nujno potrebovala za sklenitev sporazuma s skupino NLMK.
SIF's observations require no specific comments by Belgium.
Vendar Komisija ne zahteva sistematično uvedbe postopka javnega razpisa [22], da se prodaja šteje za skladno s tržno ceno.
Belgium also declares that it is at the Commission's disposal to carry out an audit should the loan granted to SIF be considered State aid.
Nasprotno, priporoča, da se v takem primeru tržna cena oceni na podlagi neodvisnih izvedenskih mnenj.
ASSESSMENT OF THE MEASURES
Vendar holding FSIH ni uporabil nobenega takega izvedenskega mnenja.
ASSESSMENT OF THE EXISTENCE OF AID WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 107(1) TFEU
Belgija v zvezi s tem meni, da je bila priprava poročila o oceni vrednosti tako nekoristna kot javni razpis, „ker je bil holding FSIH v družbi Farrell dejavno in učinkovito udeležen vse od svojega kapitalskega vstopa leta 2003 in je zelo dobro poznal jeklarski sektor“ [23].
Article 107(1) TFEU lays down that ‘any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, in so far as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the internal market’.
Komisija torej ugotavlja, da regija Valonija ni uporabila nobene od obeh metod, s katerima sama običajno določi tržno ceno, in sicer javnega razpisa ali neodvisnega izvedenskega mnenja.
This provision sets out the conditions under which a measure by a Member State could be considered State aid.
Kadar država članica trdi, da določena gospodarska transakcija izpolnjuje merilo zasebnega vlagatelja v tržnem gospodarstvu, mora predložiti dokaze, iz katerih je razvidno, da je bila odločitev za transakcijo takrat sprejeta na podlagi ekonomskih ocen, primerljivih s tistimi, ki bi jih preudaren zasebni vlagatelj v podobnih okoliščinah naročil za določitev gospodarske prednosti, ki iz tega izhaja.
First, the measures in question must have a State origin in the sense that they must involve State resources and be imputable to the State.
Iz sodbe EDF [24] namreč izhaja:
Second, the Commission must ascertain whether the State resources confer an advantage.
Na podlagi teh dokazov mora biti jasno razvidno, da je zadevna država članica predhodno ali istočasno z dodelitvijo gospodarske prednosti […] z dejansko izvedenim ukrepom sprejela odločbo o naložbi v podjetje pod javnim nadzorom.
Third, the measures must be selective (e.g. apply to a company, an economic sector or a geographical area) rather than a generally applicable measure.
V zvezi s tem bi morala predložiti dokaze, na podlagi katerih bi bilo razvidno, da ta odločitev temelji na ekonomskih ocenah, primerljivih s tistimi, ki bi jih v okoliščinah obravnavane zadeve pred izvedbo navedene naložbe opravil racionalni zasebni vlagatelj, ki je v zelo podobnem položaju kot država članica, da bi lahko opredelil prihodnji donos take naložbe.
Fourth, the measures must be likely to distort competition and affect trade between Member States.
Nasprotno, ekonomske ocene, izvedene po dodelitvi take prednosti, naknadna ugotovitev dejanskega donosa naložbe, ki jo izvede zadevna država članica, ali naknadne utemeljitve dejansko uporabljenega postopka ne morejo zadostovati za dokaz, da je ta država članica predhodno ali istočasno s to dodelitvijo tako odločitev sprejela kot delničarka […].“
For the six measures in question the Commission will first examine the criteria of State origin, selectivity and the impact on competition and intra-Community trade.
Vendar Komisija ugotavlja, da gre pri metodah ocenjevanja vrednosti, ki sta jih predložili Belgija in […], za študije, opravljene po izvedbi obravnavanega ukrepa.
It will then analyse the economic advantage criterion for each of the measures.
Te so bile opravljene šele v odgovor na pomisleke, ki jih je Komisija izrazila v sklepu o začetku postopka, torej precej po nastanku dejanskega stanja v zadevi.
The Commission notes that Belgium did not dispute the State origin of the financing, its selectivity or its impact on competition and trade between Member States.
Komisija v zvezi s tem iz pripomb […] [25] ugotavlja, da se je morala družba KPMG, ko jo je ta zaprosila za naknadno oceno vrednosti družbe Duferco US, odreči pristopu na podlagi prihodkov, saj takrat ni bilo nobenega poslovnega načrta, ki bi ga pripravila družba Duferco US.
Consequently, for these criteria the Commission will limit itself to confirming the analysis made in the opening decision.
Komisija je trikrat zahtevala kakršen koli predhodni dokument, iz katerega bi bilo razvidno predhodno delo, ki je bilo podlaga za odločitev holdinga FSIH [26].
Belgium contests only the condition concerning the existence of an economic advantage.
Belgija je odgovorila, da so bili od leta 2003, datuma kapitalskega vstopa holdinga FSIH v družbo Duferco US, trije predstavniki holdinga zastopani v upravnih odborih družb Duferco US in Farrell ter so sodelovali pri njunem upravljanju.
STATE ORIGIN AND IMPUTABILITY CRITERIA
Delničarji družbe Duferco US naj bi izmenjali številna poročila [27].
The Commission points out that ‘for advantages to be capable of being categorised as aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) EC, they must, first, be granted directly or indirectly through State resources […] and, second, be imputable to the State […]’ [15].
Komisija meni, da iz njiju nikakor ni mogoče razbrati ocene vrednosti deleža holdinga FSIH v družbi Duferco US.
The body at the origin of the measures under investigation is the financial holding company FSIH.
Belgija meni, da so bili ti izvedenci iz jeklarstva sposobni sami oceniti položaj podjetja [28].
FSIH, a company whose object is intervention in steel companies based abroad, is a subsidiary wholly owned by SOGEPA, which itself is wholly owned by the Walloon Region.
Vendar Komisija navaja, da Belgija ni predložila nobenega zapiska, dopisa ali drugih dokumentov, iz katerih bi bile razvidne izmenjave, ki so jih ti izvedenci iz jeklarstva lahko imeli s skupino Duferco, da bi določili ceno deleža holdinga FSIH v družbi Duferco US.
The funds available to FSIH are therefore under the control of the Walloon Region and therefore constitute State resources.
Glede na ta dejstva, razloge za dezinvestiranje holdinga FSIH in sodno prakso, ki izhaja iz sodbe EDF, Komisija ugotavlja, da holding FSIH ob prodaji svojih deležev v družbi Duferco US ni ravnal kot zasebni vlagatelj v tržnem gospodarstvu.
The description of SOGEPA and FSIH demonstrates that the role of the public authorities is key in the interventions of SOGEPA and FSIH.
Določitev zneska pomoči
SOGEPA acts at the request of the Walloon Government.
Komisija je pokazala, da holding FSIH ni ravnal kot zasebni vlagatelj in je družbi DII dodelil gospodarsko prednost, ki je ta pod običajnimi tržnimi pogoji ne bi dobila.
Article 3(1) of its statutes states that ‘[The object of the company is to carry out all tasks entrusted to it by the Walloon Government, ….
Ker Belgija ni dokazala, da bi bila s predhodno oceno družbe Duferco US dobljena prodajna cena, ki je bila dejansko plačana, je Komisija sama ocenila vrednost družbe Duferco US na 49,99 % (delež, ki ga je imel holding FSIH).
In this context, it implements decisions to intervene in commercial companies taken by the Walloon Government and manages the holdings, obligations, advances or interests that the Walloon Region or itself may have in such companies.’
Najprej, Komisija zavrača popolno izključitev metode ocene na podlagi lastniškega kapitala, ki se je uporabila v sklepu o začetku postopka.
On the subject of steel, any decision by SOGEPA that goes beyond simple portfolio management also requires agreement from the Ministers for the Economy and for the Budget of the Walloon Region.
Da pa bi se upoštevale pripombe Belgije v zvezi z omejitvami te metode, jo bo Komisija uporabila samo za preverjanje.
In this respect, the articles that appeared in the newspaper Le Soir on 21 November 2011 report the reactions of the Walloon Ministers for the economy at the time.
Preglednica št. 1
These individuals clearly bear the responsibility of the Walloon Government for FSIH's interventions.
Lastniški kapital in čisti poslovni izid družbe Duferco US (v tisočih USD)
In conclusion, the Commission considers that the measures under investigation meet the criteria of State origin and are imputable to the Walloon Region.
2003–2009
THE CRITERION OF SELECTIVITY
2004–2009
They are therefore selective.
2006–2009
THE CRITERIA OF EFFECT ON COMPETITION AND TRADE BETWEEN MEMBER STATES
Lastniški kapital
The Duferco Group is active on the steel market.
Čisti poslovni izid
The interventions by FSIH allowed the Duferco Group to maintain a stronger competitive position than it would have had in the absence of these interventions.
Preglednica št. 2
Moreover, within the EU, there are a number of other active operators on the steel market and steel products are traded between a number of Member States.
Lastniški kapital in čisti poslovni izid družbe Farrell (v tisočih USD)
The advantage conferred by FSIH's interventions on a market open to competition affected this trade.
Iz teh podatkov preprosto izhaja, da metoda ocenjevanja vrednosti, ki temelji na vrednosti lastniškega kapitala, nedvomno pokaže višjo vrednost v letu 2006 kot v letu 2003.
Indeed, where State financial aid strengthens the position of an undertaking as compared with other undertakings competing in intra-Community trade, the latter must be regarded as affected by that aid' [16].
Komisija je vrednost udeležbe holdinga FSIH v družbi Duferco US vseeno ocenila po metodi, ki jo zagovarja Belgija: metodi večkratnika dobička pred obrestmi, davki in amortizacijo.
Consequently, in line with the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union [17], the measures are likely to distort competition and affect trade between Member States.
Po tej metodi je treba oceniti (i) dobiček pred obrestmi, davki in amortizacijo za leto 2006 (leto prodaje) ter (ii) večkratnik, ki se zanj uporabi glede na primerljiva podjetja.
THE CRITERION OF ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE
Bistveni elementi tega dobrega poslovnega izida bi morali biti 14. junija 2006 že znani, saj sta do konca poslovnega leta ostala samo še dva meseca in pol.
The economic and financial transactions carried out by public bodies do not confer an advantage on the recipient, and therefore do not constitute State aid, if they are carried under normal market conditions [18].
Komisija zato meni, da je razpon, ki ga zagovarja Belgija, neupravičeno nizek.
In other words, it is necessary to consider whether, under similar circumstances, a private investor operating under normal market conditions would have made the same intervention.
Poleg tega opozarja, da se pri naknadni študiji, ki jo je opravila družba KPMG, upošteva „pričakovani“ dobiček pred obrestmi, davki in amortizacijo za poslovno leto 2006 v višini 42 milijonov USD.
If this is not the case, the recipient undertaking has received an economic advantage which it would not have obtained under normal market conditions, placing it in a more favourable position than that of its competitors [19].
Komisija je na podlagi primerjave teh različnih elementov ugotovila, da bi se lahko med letom 2006 realno pričakoval dobiček pred obrestmi, davki in amortizacijo v višini 47,12 milijona USD [30].
The Commission will examine the six measures granted to the Duferco Group using this criterion.
Oceno Komisije potrjuje naslednje.
Measure 1
Holding FSIH je 12. junija 2006 v dopisu [31] svojemu upravnemu odboru z dne 14. junija predvidel stabilen poslovni izid v višini „20 do 25 milijonov USD“ za leto 2006 in prihodnja leta.
On the justifications for the withdrawal of FSIH
To najprej potrjuje, da je holding FSIH imel določen pregled nad finančnim stanjem družbe.
The Commission takes the view that although the analysis of the reasons for FSIH's withdrawal is not enough to prove the imprudent nature of the investment, it still sheds precious light on the measure in question.
Vendar to predvsem dobro kaže, kakšno raven dobička pred obrestmi, davki in amortizacijo je bilo mogoče vnaprej predvideti.
Belgium justifies FSIH's withdrawal from Duferco US by: (i) the feeling FSIH had about a future downturn in the steel sector; (ii) the conclusion of the slab supply agreement with […] which, while stabilising the results, still risked limiting the potential gains of Duferco US; (iii) the abundance of liquid assets in the Duferco Group, which created a window of opportunity for FSIH to sell its stake in Duferco US; (iv) the ongoing negotiations for the sale of 50 % of SIF to NLMK, which envisaged the integration of Duferco US into the partnership with the latter.
Večkratnik, ki ga je treba uporabiti, je Komisija povzela na podlagi metodologije, ki jo je družba Hatch Beddows uporabila pri oceni družbe Duferco US iz leta 2003, in sicer večkratnik […].
With regard to the first reason, the Commission notes that Belgium did not consider this to be very important in its response of 8 April 2015.
Ta študija je namreč edina predhodna analiza, ki je bila na voljo ob prodaji.
The Commission had asked Belgium to produce any study, prior to the measure, on the prospects for the steel market for the next five years.
To pomeni, da naj bi vrednost deleža holdinga FSIH v družbi Duferco US znašala […] milijonov USD [32].
Belgium produced an overview of the state of the American economy taken from The National Economic Review on the first eight months of 2006 and a study of the steel sector dated 10 April 2006 by Crédit Suisse.
Znesek pomoči ustreza razliki med to oceno in prodajno ceno v višini […] milijonov USD, določeno leta 2006, tj. 15,24 milijona USD.
The first two studies are general overviews of American growth in the first two quarters; they show that GDP growth had slowed due to the decline in the housing sector but do not predict recession in the short term.
Temu znesku je treba prišteti vrednost nakupne opcije, tj. […] milijona USD, kot jo je naknadno ocenila družba KPMG.
The second study, which directly concerns the steel market, remains cautious as to the evolution of this market in the United States:
Skupni znesek pomoči, ki jo je prejela družba DII, tako znaša 15,34 milijona USD, tj. načeloma 11,58 milijona EUR [33].
Steel stocks in the United States remain low, which continues to support demand.
Komisija opozarja, da tako ocenjeni znesek pomoči potrjuje, da prodajna cena za delež holdinga FSIH v družbi Duferco US ne ustreza znesku, ki bi ga lahko pričakoval zasebni vlagatelj, ki deluje pod običajnimi tržnimi pogoji.
As such, we still have (at least) several months before we need to worry about excess supply on the American market.
Ukrep št. 2
It is imports (or production) that create stocks and this relationship seems crucial to us for the following reason.
Belgija je v pripombah dezinvestiranje holdinga FSIH v družbi Duferco US utemeljila z naslednjimi dejavniki: cikličnost sektorja, vstop in vpliv novih zasebnih vlagateljev v skupino Duferco ([…] in NLMK), razpoložljivost likvidnih sredstev znotraj skupine Duferco.
Although the American market remains strong, we think that the risks of pressure on supply (imports and increased production) could lead to a build-up of stocks throughout 2006 and therefore to easing of the American market at the end of 2006 as supply exceeds demand.’
Medtem ko zadnji dejavnik ni sporen, pa Komisija zanika, da bi imela prva dva odločilno vlogo.
On reading these studies, the Commission notes that Belgium was correct in limiting the importance that the perception of the steel market had in FSIH's decision to withdraw.
Nobeden od obeh razlogov namreč ni naveden v zapisniku upravnega odbora holdinga FSIH z dne 14. junija 2006 [34], v katerem je obravnavana odprodaja deležev družbe DPH.
The economic prospects at the time of FSIH's withdrawal seem insufficient to present this withdrawal as a real opportunity.
Nasprotno, v zapisniku je naveden drug nujnejši razlog: nujna potreba holdinga FSIH po likvidnih sredstvih.
With regard to the second reason, the Commission notes that the implementation of the supply contracts led to significant improvements in Farrell's results from the 2006 financial year.
„Konec leta 2005 je holding F.S.I.H. potreboval veliko denarnih sredstev za financiranje nujnih projektov.
Net sales almost doubled; the operating result moved from a loss of USD […] million to a positive result of USD […] million; the net result moved from a loss of USD […] million to a positive result of USD […] million.
V istem obdobju je imela skupina Duferco priložnost prodati svoj industrijski obrat v Rusiji.
Given that the 2006 financial year closed on 30 September, FSIH could not have been unaware of the improvement in June 2006.
Holding F.S.I.H je to priložnost izkoristil tako, da je [družbo, ki je takrat obvladovala družbo DPH] prosil, naj mu proda svoje deleže v družbi D.P.H.“
Since FSIH was not a hedge fund, the Commission is not convinced that an increase in and stabilisation of revenue at a predictable and comfortable level were valid reasons for withdrawing.
Opozoriti je treba, da je holdingu FSIH ob ustanovitvi 180 milijonov EUR namenila družba SOGEPA.
The Commission has no objections to the third reason, but considers that it should be qualified in relation to the real reason behind the withdrawal of FSIH: the cooperation between Duferco and NLMK.
Konec leta 2005 je bil ta znesek skoraj v celoti vključen v osnovna sredstva: 95 milijonov EUR je bilo vloženih v družbo Duferco US in 80 milijonov EUR v družbo DPH.
As […] indicated in its comments to the Commission [20], the sale by FSIH of its stake in Duferco US was an essential condition for NLMK to acquire a stake in the capital of SIF.
Med temi projekti je bila obnova plavža in koksarne Carsid, „strateški projekt za prihodnost jeklarstva na območju Charleroija, ki je vsekakor spadal med cilje družbe SOGEPA“ [35].
‘NLMK had in particular set as a precondition to the entire operation that all the shares in Duferco US be controlled by SIF, which therefore implied a buyback of the shares held by FSIH.’
Glede na te razloge se zdi, da se je holding FSIH predvsem zaradi političnih in družbenih preudarkov odločil prodati svoj delež v družbi DPH: da bi lahko še naprej podpiral jeklarstvo v Valoniji, je potreboval likvidna sredstva.
In light of the above, FSIH was undoubtedly in a position of strength to negotiate the sale of its stake in Duferco.
Tako ni imel v mislih čim bolj povečati vrednost svojega deleža.
In this context, the fact that it did not, however, seek to recover more than its initial investment of EUR 95 million indicates that FSIH did not behave as a prudent investor.
Nasprotno, ta valonska družba se je postavila v podrejeni položaj, da bi se s skupino Duferco dogovorila o svojem izstopu iz družbe DPH.
Faced with such an assumption, Belgium responded in its comments that FSIH's investment should be analysed in the functional currency of Duferco US (US dollar) and not that of FSIH (euro).
Ravnanje holdinga FSIH kot zasebnega vlagatelja
In US dollars, the sale price obtained by FSIH (USD […] million) gave it a decent return of 6,81 % per year.
V teh okoliščinah je imela [družba, ki je takrat obvladovala družbo DPH] proste roke pri oddaji udarne ponudbe za odkup.
The Commission does not agree with this position for two reasons.
Holding FSIH je šele takrat naročil neodvisno študijo ponudbe [družbe, ki je takrat obvladovala družbo DPH], kot je razvidno iz zapisnika upravnega odbora holdinga FSIH z dne 14. junija 2006 [36]:
First, it believes that the only currency that makes sense for FSIH, as the manager of a fund denominated in euros, is the euro.
„Da bi holding FSIH potrdil predlagano ceno transakcije, je pri družbi Ernst & Young naročil oceno vrednosti skupine.“
Second, and more fundamentally, it points out that this debate has no impact on the only important question, which is whether the price of USD […] million (or equivalently, EUR […] million) corresponds to the market price that a private investor could have obtained under similar circumstances.
Kadar javni organ proda neko stvar osebi zasebnega prava, je treba ugotoviti, ali je prodajna cena enaka tržni, torej ustreza ceni, ki bi jo lahko kupec dosegel pod tržnimi pogoji.
Having duly put this into context, the Commission would like to reply to this question.
Javni organ mora za to uporabiti odprt, pregleden in brezpogojen postopek javnega razpisa, ali pa se mora opreti na neodvisno izvedensko mnenje.
on the behaviour of FSIH as a private investor
Komisija ne zanika, da je holding FSIH ravnal kot zasebni vlagatelj, ko je naročil neodvisno študijo družbe Ernst & Young.
When the sale of FSIH's stake in Duferco US was being negotiated, the Commission first finds that FSIH did not set up an open, transparent and unconditional tender procedure because, according to FSIH, it ‘was difficult to envisage turning to a third-party buyer for the sale of a minority shareholding in a (unlisted) private company’ [21].
Vendar ugotavlja, da ji Belgija kljub tovrstnim pozivom [37] ni mogla predložiti dokazov, ki bi potrjevali, da so bile ugotovitve te študije dejansko upoštevane v pogajanjih med strankama.
The examination of the reasons for FSIH withdrawing clearly discredits this argument: if FSIH did not seek bidders other than Duferco, it was to please the latter, which had a pressing need for FSIH's shares to conclude the agreement with NLMK.
Nasprotno, zdi se, da je holding FSIH, ki se mu je mudilo prodati svoj delež, [družbi, ki je takrat obvladovala družbo DPH] prepustil pobudo, da predlaga ceno, ki je bila sprejeta, ne da bi se v pogajanjih uporabili elementi iz poznejšega izvedenskega mnenja.
However, the Commission does not systematically require the setting up of a tender procedure [22] for a sale to be deemed to be in line with the market price.
Zato Komisija trdi, da poročilo Ernst & Young iz leta 2006 ni bilo uporabljeno tako, kot bi ga uporabil zasebni vlagatelj v tržnem gospodarstvu, in se je, skratka, uporabilo samo za to, da bi pogajanjem, ki so bila že praktično končana, dalo videz tržne transakcije.
On the other hand, in that case it recommends seeking independent studies to assess the market price.
Glede na navedeno se zdi, da se o „odbitkih“, ki jih Belgija na dolgo argumentira, kot takih ni razpravljalo – ali vsaj ne dovolj – med pogajanji z [družbo, ki je takrat obvladovala družbo DPH].
FSIH did not commission any report of this nature.
Nasprotno, zdi se, da so se z njimi naknadno ubesedili razlogi, s katerimi je holding FSIH sam pri sebi upravičeval ceno, ki jo je predlagala [skupina, ki je takrat obvladovala družbo DPH].
In this respect, Belgium considers that preparing a valuation report was as pointless as a call for tenders ‘given the active and effective involvement of FSIH in Farrell since it acquired its stake in the capital in 2003 and its excellent knowledge of the steel sector.’ [23]
Iz teh razlogov Komisija meni, da ji „odbitkov“ ni treba komentirati podrobno, saj ravnanje holdinga FSIH nikakor ni bilo ravnanje zasebnega vlagatelja v tržnem gospodarstvu.
The Commission therefore notes that the two methods it generally uses to determine a market price, i.e. a call for tenders or an independent report, were not used by the Walloon Region.
Komisija ugotavlja, da je holding FSIH s prodajo svojega deleža za […] milijonov USD [družbi, ki je takrat obvladovala družbo DPH] dodelil gospodarsko prednost, ki je pod običajnimi tržnimi pogoji ne bi dobila.