natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Commission also requested a list of rulings concerning the application of the Excess Profit exemption.
Komisija je zahtevala tudi seznam predhodnih odločb v zvezi z uporabo sheme oprostitve presežnega dobička.
By letter of 21 January 2014, Belgium replied to the questions of the Commission's request for information, but did not provide the Commission with the requested list of rulings, indicating that providing such a list would require more time.
Belgija je z dopisom z dne 21. januarja 2014 odgovorila na vprašanja iz zahteve za informacije, ki jo je poslala Komisija.
On 21 February 2014, the Commission sent follow-up questions and repeated its request for a list of rulings.
Vendar pa ji ni poslala zahtevanega seznama predhodnih odločb, kar je pojasnila s tem, da bi za predložitev takega seznama potrebovala več časa.
For the rulings issued in 2004, 2007, 2010 and 2013 under the contested scheme, the Commission also requested the full text of the rulings as well as the applications requesting those rulings, plus their annexes, and — where applicable — subsequent correspondence related to those requests.
Komisija je 21. februarja 2014 poslala nadaljnja vprašanja in ponovila svojo zahtevo v zvezi s seznamom predhodnih odločb.
On 18 March 2014, Belgium responded to the Commission's follow-up questions and provided the individual rulings requested, including applications, annexes and further correspondence related to the granting of those rulings.
V zvezi z odločbami, ki so bile na podlagi sporne sheme izdane v letih 2004, 2007, 2010 in 2013, je zahtevala tudi, naj se ji pošljejo celotno besedilo odločb, ustrezne vloge za odločbe, priloge in po potrebi vsa poznejša korespondenca, povezana s temi vlogami.
By letter of 28 July 2014, the Commission indicated that the Excess Profit exemption could represent incompatible State aid.
Belgija je 18. marca 2014 odgovorila na nadaljnja vprašanja Komisije ter ji poslala zahtevane predhodne odločbe, vključno z vlogami, prilogami in poznejšo korespondenco, povezanimi z izdajo teh odločb.
The Commission also requested more information about a number of individual rulings.
Komisija jo je z dopisom z dne 28. julija 2014 obvestila, da bi lahko oprostitev presežnega dobička pomenila državno pomoč, ki ni združljiva z notranjim trgom.
By letters of 1 September and 4 November 2014, Belgium replied to the request of 28 July 2014.
Zahtevala je tudi dodatne informacije v zvezi z več posameznimi odločbami.
On 25 September 2014, a meeting was held between the Commission services and the Belgian authorities.
Belgija je na zahtevo z dne 28. julija 2014 odgovorila z dopisoma z dne 1. septembra in 4. novembra 2014.
By letter of 3 February 2015, the Commission informed Belgium that it had decided to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 108(2) of the Treaty in respect of the Excess Profit exemption (hereinafter: the ‘Opening Decision’).
Službe Komisije so se z belgijskimi organi sestale 25. septembra 2014.
On 29 May 2015, following a request for a deadline extension, Belgium submitted its comments to the Opening Decision.
Komisija je z dopisom z dne 3. februarja 2015 Belgijo obvestila, da se je v zvezi z oprostitvijo presežnega dobička odločila začeti formalni postopek preiskave iz člena 108(2) Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije (v nadaljnjem besedilu: PDEU).
On 5 June 2015, the Opening Decision was published in the Official Journal of the European Union [2].
Belgija je 29. maja 2015 po zahtevi za podaljšanje roka predložila svoje pripombe v zvezi s sklepom o začetku postopka.
In that decision, the Commission invited interested parties to submit their comments on the measure.
Sklep o začetku formalnega postopka preiskave (v nadaljnjem besedilu: sklep o začetku postopka) je bil 5. junija 2015 objavljen v Uradnem listu Evropske unije [2].
On 1 and 2 July 2015, interested parties submitted comments on the Opening Decision, which were forwarded to the Belgian authorities.
Komisija je v navedenem sklepu zainteresirane strani pozvala, naj predložijo svoje pripombe o zadevnem ukrepu.
On 14 September 2015, Belgium informed the Commission that it had no intention to make any observations on those comments.
Zainteresirane strani so 1. in 2. julija 2015 predložile svoje pripombe o sklepu o začetku postopka, ki so bile posredovane belgijskim organom.
By letter of 16 September 2015, the Commission requested Belgium to further substantiate certain points made in their written comments of 29 May 2015 on the Opening Decision.
Belgija je 14. septembra 2015 Komisijo obvestila, da ne namerava odgovoriti na te pripombe.
Belgium replied to that request by letter of 16 October 2015.
Komisija je z dopisom z dne 16. septembra 2015 Belgijo pozvala, naj utemelji nekatere trditve, navedene v njenih pisnih pripombah z dne 29. maja 2015 o sklepu o začetku postopka.
On 20 October 2015 and 7 December 2015, meetings took place between the Commission services and the Belgian authorities.
Belgija je na to zahtevo odgovorila z dopisom z dne 16. oktobra 2015.
DESCRIPTION OF THE CONTESTED SCHEME
Službe Komisije in belgijski organi so se sestali 20. oktobra in 7. decembra 2015.
The Excess Profit exemption scheme
OPIS SPORNE SHEME
The Excess Profit exemption scheme allows Belgian resident companies that are part of a multinational group and Belgian permanent establishments of foreign resident companies that a part of a multinational group (hereinafter: ‘Belgian group entities’) to reduce their tax base in Belgium by deducting from their actually recorded profit so-called ‘excess profit’.
Shema oprostitve presežnega dobička
That excess profit is determined by estimating the hypothetical average profit that a standalone [3] company carrying out comparable activities could be expected to make in comparable circumstances and subtracting that amount from the profit actually recorded by the Belgian group entity in question.
Shema oprostitve presežnega dobička omogoča družbam rezidentkam Belgije, ki so del multinacionalne skupine, in belgijskim stalnim poslovnim enotam družb rezidentk v tujini, ki so del multinacionalne skupine (v nadaljnjem besedilu: belgijski subjekti skupine), da znižajo svojo davčno osnovo v Belgiji, tako da od dobička, ki so ga dejansko zabeležile, odštejejo svoj „presežni dobiček“.
An advance ruling, issued by a special ruling commission ( ‘Service des Décisions Anticipées’ in French or ‘Dienst Voorafgaande Beslissingen’ in Dutch, hereinafter: the ‘Ruling Commission’), is necessary to benefit from the Excess Profit exemption.
Ta presežni dobiček se določi tako, da se oceni hipotetični povprečni dobiček, ki bi ga lahko v primerljivih okoliščinah ustvarilo samostojno [3] podjetje, ki opravlja primerljive dejavnosti, nato pa se ta znesek odšteje od dobička, ki ga je zadevni belgijski subjekt skupine dejansko zabeležil.
According to the Belgian authorities [4], the rationale for the Excess Profit exemption is to ensure that a Belgian group entity is only taxed on its arm's length profit by exempting from taxation the profit recorded in excess of its arm's length profit, which corresponds to synergies, economies of scale or other benefits drawn from its participation in a multinational group and which would not exist for a comparable standalone company.
Za upravičenost do oprostitve presežnega dobička mora služba za predhodne odločbe (Service des Décisions Anticipées) sprejeti predhodno odločbo.
According to the Belgian authorities [5], the amount of excess profit exempted under the Excess Profit exemption is determined by using a two-step approach:
Po navedbah belgijskih organov [4] je oprostitev presežnega dobička utemeljena z željo zagotoviti, da se belgijski subjekt skupine obdavči samo na podlagi svojega dobička, doseženega pri poslovanju v običajnih tržnih razmerah, tako da se mu dovoli, da iz svoje davčne osnove izvzame zabeleženi dobiček, ki presega navedeni dobiček, dosežen pri poslovanju v običajnih tržnih razmerah, in ki ustreza sinergijam, ekonomiji obsega ali drugim prednostim, ki izhajajo iz njegovega sodelovanja v multinacionalni skupini, ter ki ne bi obstajal za primerljivo samostojno podjetje.
First, the arm's length prices charged in transactions between the Belgian group entity and its associated enterprises are fixed based on a transfer pricing report provided by the taxpayer.
Po navedbah belgijskih organov [5] se znesek presežnega dobička, oproščenega na podlagi sheme oprostitve, določi na podlagi pristopa v dveh fazah:
The Belgian group entity is identified as the ‘central entrepreneur’ in that relationship and is accordingly left with the residual profit from those transactions.
prvič, primerljive tržne cene, uporabljene za transakcije, sklenjene med belgijskim subjektom skupine in družbami, s katerimi je povezan, se določijo na podlagi poročila o transfernih cenah, ki ga zagotovi davčni zavezanec.
Second, according to Belgium the residual profit should not be seen as the Belgian group entity's arm's length profit, as it may exceed the profit that a comparable standalone company would have made in circumstances similar to those of the entity without being part of a multinational group.
Ker se belgijski subjekt skupine v tem razmerju šteje za „osrednjega podjetnika“, se preostali dobiček iz teh transakcij pripiše njemu;
Therefore, that ‘excess profit’ is established on the basis of a second report submitted by the taxpayer as part of its ruling request under the contested scheme and exempted from taxation.
drugič, po mnenju Belgije se preostali dobiček ne sme šteti za dobiček belgijskega subjekta skupine, dosežen pri poslovanju v običajnih tržnih razmerah, ker lahko presega dobiček, ki bi ga primerljivo samostojno podjetje ustvarilo v okoliščinah, ki so podobne okoliščinam, v katerih deluje subjekt, ne da bi bilo del multinacionalne skupine.
Belgium claims that the reports submitted under both steps apply the most appropriate OECD transfer pricing methods.
Zato se ta „presežni dobiček“ določi na podlagi drugega poročila davčnega zavezanca, predloženega v okviru vloge za predhodno odločbo, ki jo je vložil na podlagi sporne sheme, in oprosti davka.
In practice, the information provided indicates that the method used for the second step is the transactional net margin method (‘TNMM’).
Belgija trdi, da se v poročilih, predloženih v teh dveh fazah, uporabijo najprimernejše metode OECD za določanje transfernih cen.
The use of the TNMM in this context seeks to approximate the profitability of an entity within a multinational group by comparing it with the profits of comparable independent [6] (standalone) companies engaged in similar activities.
V praksi iz predloženih informacij izhaja, da je metoda, uporabljena v drugi fazi, metoda stopnje čistega dobička (v nadaljnjem besedilu: TNMM).
The TNMM estimates the profit independent companies could be expected to make on an activity, such as the activity of selling goods, by taking an appropriate base such as costs, turnover or fixed assets — depending on functions performed, risks assumed and assets used — and applying a profit ratio ( ‘a profit level indicator’), reflecting that observed for comparable independent companies to that base.
Uporaba metode TNMM v tem smislu je namenjena približni oceni donosnosti subjekta, ki je del multinacionalne skupine, tako da se primerja z dobički primerljivih neodvisnih [6] (samostojnih) podjetij, ki opravljajo podobne dejavnosti.
Applying that method, a hypothetical average profit is calculated for the Belgian group entity based on a benchmark study comparing it with comparable standalone companies [7].
Metoda TNMM omogoča oceno dobička, ki bi ga lahko neodvisna podjetja imela od dejavnosti, na primer prodaje blaga, tako da se vzame primerna osnova, kot so stroški, promet ali naložbe v osnovna sredstva (glede na funkcije, ki se opravljajo, prevzeta tveganja in vložena sredstva), in uporabi stopnja dobička ( „kazalnik dobičkonosnosti“), ki izraža stopnjo, ugotovljeno na tej podlagi za primerljiva neodvisna podjetja.
The hypothetical average profit is fixed as a point in the interquartile range of the chosen profit level indicator of a set of comparable standalone companies [8], averaged over a set period of time (usually five years).
Metoda TNMM omogoča izračun hipotetičnega povprečnega dobička za belgijski subjekt skupine na podlagi študije, s katero se opravi primerjava med tem subjektom in primerljivimi samostojnimi podjetji [7].
That hypothetical average profit is regarded by Belgium as the profit that the Belgian group entity would have made if it had been a standalone company instead of part of a multinational group.
Hipotetični povprečni dobiček je določen kot vrednost v kvartilnem razmiku izbranega kazalnika dobičkonosnosti za sklop primerljivih samostojnih podjetij [8], katere povprečje se izračuna v določenem obdobju (običajno pet let).
For the purpose of this Decision, that profit is referred to as the ‘adjusted arm's length profit’.
Belgija navedeni hipotetični povprečni dobiček šteje za dobiček, ki bi ga ustvaril belgijski subjekt skupine, če bi bil samostojno podjetje in ne del multinacionalne skupine.
The amount of excess profit to be exempted is then calculated as the difference between the arm's length profit estimated for the Belgian group entity following the first step (averaged over a projected time horizon) and the ‘adjusted arm's length profit’ obtained under the second step (also averaged over the same projected time horizon).
V tem sklepu je navedeni dobiček poimenovan z izrazom „prilagojeni dobiček, dosežen pri poslovanju v običajnih tržnih razmerah“.
That difference is translated into an exemption percentage of pre-tax profit (of either EBIT [9] or PBT [10]) to achieve an average excess profit percentage over a projected period.
Znesek presežnega dobička, ki ga je treba oprostiti, se nato izračuna kot razlika med dobičkom, doseženim pri poslovanju v običajnih tržnih razmerah, ocenjenim za belgijski subjekt skupine v prvi fazi (povprečje, izračunano v določenem obdobju), in „prilagojenim dobičkom, doseženim pri poslovanju v običajnih tržnih razmerah“, dobljenim v drugi fazi (prav tako povprečje, izračunano v istem predvidenem obdobju).
That percentage represents the agreed tax base discount applied under the contested scheme to the Belgian group entity's profit actually recorded for the five years during which the ruling binds the Belgian tax administration.
Ta razlika se izrazi v odstotku oprostitve dobička pred obdavčitvijo (EBIT [9] ali PBT [10]), da bi se dobil povprečni odstotek presežnega dobička v predvidenem obdobju.
The Belgian authorities claim that the projected commercial results of those entities benefitting from the contested scheme are evaluated against their profit actually recorded after three years.
Ta odstotek predstavlja sprejeto znižanje davčne osnove, ki se v okviru sporne sheme uporablja za dejansko zabeleženi dobiček belgijskega subjekta skupine za pet let, v katerih predhodna odločba zavezuje belgijsko davčno upravo.
The agreed percentage can then be adjusted if required by that evaluation.
Belgijski organi trdijo, da se pričakovani poslovni rezultati subjektov, ki so upravičeni do sporne sheme, ocenijo na podlagi dobička, ki so ga dejansko zabeležili po treh letih.
However, there is no indication that such an evaluation has ever actually resulted in an adjustment of the agreed discount percentage in any of the cases reviewed by the Commission.
Dogovorjeni odstotek se nato lahko prilagodi, če je to pri tej oceni potrebno.
On the basis of Article 185(2) WIB 92, an advance ruling is a compulsory element for benefitting from the Excess Profit exemption.
Vendar nič ne kaže, da je v primerih, ki jih je preučila Komisija, taka ocena že privedla do prilagoditve dogovorjenega odstotka znižanja.
That provision also limits the grant of a ruling to entities forming part of a multinational group of associated companies with respect to their cross-border relations.
Na podlagi člena 185(2) CIR 92 je predhodna odločba obvezna za upravičenost do oprostitve presežnega dobička.
Furthermore, according to the Belgian Law of 24 December 2002 [11], rulings are only available for new situations [12].
S to določbo je izdaja take odločbe tudi omejena na subjekte, ki so del multinacionalne skupine družb, povezanih v okviru njihovih čezmejnih odnosov.
Because a ruling is required to obtain the benefit of the Excess Profit exemption and because a ruling can only be delivered for profit derived from a new situation, the advantage that a multinational group obtains from the contested scheme is conditioned upon the relocation or increase of its activities in Belgium and is proportional to the importance of the new activities and profit created in Belgium.
Poleg tega se lahko v skladu z belgijskim zakonom z dne 24. decembra 2002 [11] predhodne odločbe izdajo samo za nove položaje [12].
The rulings issued under the contested scheme that were examined by the Commission invariably concern changes in the organisational structure of the multinational group where the description of the key facts in the ruling request underlines the planning of a relocation of activities to Belgium, new investments to be made and the creation of new jobs in Belgium.
Ker se za upravičenost do oprostitve presežnega dobička zahteva predhodna odločba in ker se lahko taka odločba izda le za dobiček, ki izhaja iz novega položaja, je prednost, ki jo bo lahko multinacionalna skupina pridobila na podlagi sporne sheme, pogojena s preselitvijo njenih dejavnosti v Belgijo ali povečanjem njenih dejavnosti v Belgiji ter sorazmerna z obsegom novih dejavnosti in novega dobička, ustvarjenega v navedeni državi.
In sum, Belgian group entities that have obtained a ruling under the contested scheme may apply an annual pro-active downward adjustment of their corporate income tax base through the exemption of alleged ‘excess profit’ from their profit actually recorded on the basis of Article 185(2)(b) WIB 92.
Predhodne odločbe, ki so bile izdane v okviru sporne sheme in jih je preučila Komisija, se brez razlikovanja nanašajo na spremembe v organizacijski strukturi multinacionalne skupine; v tem okviru so pri bistvenih elementih, opisanih v vlogah za predhodne odločbe, poudarjeni načrtovana preselitev dejavnosti v Belgijo, nove naložbe, ki jih je treba izvesti, in ustvarjanje novih delovnih mest v navedeni državi.
In other words, Belgium considers that this excess profit should not be attributed to the Belgian group entity and should therefore be excluded from its Belgian tax base in accordance with Article 185(2)(b) WIB 92.
Skratka, belgijski subjekti skupine, ki so pridobili predhodno odločbo na podlagi sporne sheme, lahko vsako leto na podlagi člena 185(2)(b) CIR 92 opravijo proaktivno negativno prilagoditev svoje davčne osnove za davek od dohodkov pravnih oseb, tako da od dejansko zabeleženega dobička odštejejo domnevni „presežni dobiček“.
Consequently, a Belgian group entity benefitting from the Excess Profit exemption is taxed on an amount resulting from the difference between its profit actually recorded and its ‘excess profit’.
Belgijski organi tako menijo, da se ta presežni dobiček ne bi smel pripisati belgijskemu subjektu skupine in da bi torej moral biti izključen iz njegove davčne osnove v Belgiji v skladu s členom 185(2)(b) CIR 92.
The relevant legal and regulatory framework
Posledično mora belgijski subjekt skupine, ki je upravičen do oprostitve presežnega dobička, plačati davek od zneska, ki ustreza razliki med dobičkom, ki ga je dejansko zabeležil, in njegovim „presežnim dobičkom“.
The taxation of income pursuant to the Belgian corporate income tax system
Veljavni zakonodajni in regulativni okvir
The WIB 92 establishes the rules for the taxation of income by Belgium.
Obdavčitev dohodka na podlagi sistema davka od dohodkov pravnih oseb v Belgiji
Article 1 defines four income taxes which cover taxation of income of natural persons (Title II: Articles 3 to 178), resident companies (Title III: Articles 179 to 219), other legal persons (Title IV: Articles to 226) and non-resident taxpayers — natural persons, companies, other legal persons (Title V: Articles 227 to 248/3).
CIR 92 določa pravila obdavčitve dohodkov, ki jih uporablja Belgija.
Article 183 WIB 92 states that the income subject to tax according to Title III (for resident companies) is of the same type as that subject to Title II (for natural persons) and that the taxable amount is established following the rules applicable to profit.
V členu 1 so opredeljene štiri kategorije davkov od dohodkov, ki zajemajo davek fizičnih oseb (naslov II: členi 3 do 178), družb rezidentk (naslov III: členi 179 do 219), drugih pravnih oseb (naslov IV: členi 220 do 226) in davčnih zavezancev nerezidentov – fizičnih oseb, podjetij, drugih pravnih oseb (naslov V: členi 227 do 248/3).
Article 24 WIB 92 clarifies that the taxable income of industrial, commercial and agricultural undertakings includes all income from entrepreneurial activities such as ‘profit from all the operations handled by those undertakings or through their intermediation’ as well as ‘profit from all increases in value of their assets or decrease in value of their liabilities when that profit has been realised and registered in the accounts’.
Člen 183 CIR 92 določa, da so dohodki, ki so obdavčeni na podlagi naslova III (družbe rezidentke), iste vrste kot dohodki, obdavčeni na podlagi naslova II (pravne osebe), in da se obdavčljivi znesek določi na podlagi pravil, ki se uporabljajo za dobiček.
Article 185(1) WIB 92 provides that companies are taxed on the total amount of their profit before distribution.
Člen 24 CIR 92 določa, da obdavčljivi dohodki industrijskih, komercialnih in kmetijskih podjetij zajemajo vse dohodke, ki izhajajo iz podjetniških dejavnosti, kot je dobiček iz „vseh dejavnosti, ki jih opravljajo poslovne enote teh podjetij ali ki se opravljajo z njihovim posredovanjem,“ ali iz „vseh povišanj vrednosti sredstev […] in vseh znižanj vrednosti obveznosti […], če so bili ti dobički ali izgube izvedeni ali izraženi v poslovnih knjigah ali letnih računovodskih izkazih“.
Read in conjunction with Article 1, Article 24 and Article 183 WIB 92, this means that the taxable profit under Belgian tax law should at least include — as a starting point and notwithstanding possible subsequent upward/downward adjustments — the total profit registered in the taxpayer's accounts.
Člen 185(1) CIR 92 določa, da so družbe zavezane davku od skupnega zneska dobička pred razdelitvijo.
Indeed, the establishment of the tax base under the Belgian income tax code relies on the profit actually recorded in the taxpayer's accounts as a starting point.
Ta določba v povezavi s členi 1, 24 in 183 CIR 92 pomeni, da mora obdavčljivi dobiček na podlagi belgijske davčne zakonodaje vključevati najmanj – kot izhodišče in ne glede na morebitne poznejše prilagoditve navzgor ali navzdol – skupni znesek dobička, zabeležen v poslovnih knjigah davčnega zavezanca.
A number of upward adjustments (such as non-deductible expenses) or downward adjustments (such as partial exemption of certain dividends received, deduction of losses carried forward, tax incentives) can be applied at subsequent steps in the establishment of the tax base.
Davčna osnova na podlagi belgijskega davka od dohodkov se namreč določi na podlagi dobička, dejansko zabeleženega v poslovnih knjigah davčnega zavezanca, ki se vzame kot izhodišče.
For each of those operations, taxpayers must provide information to the tax administration through their tax return (Form 275.1) and be able to give justifications for those adjustments.
Za določitev davčne osnove se lahko pozneje uporabi več pozitivnih (kot so neodbitni stroški) ali negativnih prilagoditev (kot so delna oprostitev nekaterih razdeljenih dividend, odštetje prenesenih izgub, davčne spodbude).
When Belgian tax law provides for a permanent exemption of a part of the profit actually recorded in the taxpayer's accounts as a reserve, an adjustment can notably be reflected in the calculation of the tax base in the first operation of that calculation through a so-called ‘increase of the initial situation of the reserves’.
Davčni zavezanci morajo za vsako od teh operacij davčni upravi zagotoviti informacije na podlagi svoje davčne napovedi (obrazec 275.1) in biti sposobni predložiti dokazila, ki utemeljujejo take prilagoditve.