natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
As pointed out above, under French tax legislation, ‘the autonomous ports, maritime chambers of commerce, chambers of commerce and industry managing port installations, municipalities which are concessionaires of public equipment owned by the State in the seaports, and undertakings to which they may have entrusted the operation of that equipment’ [46] should be subject to corporate tax as regards their economic activities, but are in fact exempt from it.
Oprostitev davka od dohodkov pravnih oseb, katere znesek je sorazmeren z ustvarjenim dobičkom, ni omejena in lahko torej pomeni prednost, ki nima nič skupnega z dodatnimi stroški, ki izhajajo iz obveznosti javne službe.
Consequently, these entities do not have to bear the cost of corporate tax normally assumed by French undertakings in relation to their economic activities.
Nazadnje, trditev velikega pomorskega pristanišča Dunkerque, da strošek nalog javne službe dosledno presega teoretično obračunani davek od dohodkov pravnih oseb, ni podprta z nobenimi podatki in nobenimi zgodovinskimi dejstvi; ker ni pravnega jamstva (ki bi veljalo tudi za prihodnost), da ne bi bilo prekomernega nadomestila, tudi če bi bila ta trditev preverjena za preteklost, to ne zadostuje za izpolnitev pogoja, da ni prekomernega nadomestila.
They therefore benefit from an economic advantage within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU.
Da se ukrep šteje za državno pomoč, mora biti selektiven, tj. prednost mora dajati določenim podjetjem ali proizvodnji v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU [49].
Moreover, the alleged fact that the exemption from corporate tax compensates for the additional costs deriving from tasks of general interest assigned to the ports by the public authorities would call into question the classification as an advantage only if, on the one hand, the amount of the advantage resulting from the tax exemption were in fact intended to compensate for the additional costs associated with tasks of general interest and, on the other hand, this amount were limited to the net additional cost of performing these tasks (no overcompensation) [47].
V skladu z ustaljeno sodno prakso [50] presoja materialne selektivnosti davčnega ukrepa, ki zmanjšuje stroške, ki običajno bremenijo proračun podjetja, vključuje tri faze: najprej je treba določiti skupno ali „običajno“ davčno ureditev (imenovano „referenčni sistem“), ki se uporablja v državi članici.
That is not so in the present case.
Nato je treba ugotoviti, ali zadevni ukrep odstopa od referenčnega sistema, ker uvaja razlikovanja med gospodarskimi subjekti, ki so glede na cilj tega sistema v primerljivem dejanskem in pravnem položaju.
No provision of national law establishes any connection of any kind between the exemption from corporate tax and any public service tasks assigned to the ports [48].
V takem primeru je davčni ukrep a priori selektiven.
Nor does national law guarantee that the amount of the compensation (i.e. the amount of corporate tax not paid) is limitedto the amount needed to cover all or part of the costs arising from the fulfilment of public service obligations.
V tretji fazi je treba ugotoviti, ali je ukrep odstopanja utemeljen z naravo ali splošno shemo referenčnega sistema.
The corporate tax exemption, the amount of which is proportional to the profit made, is not subject to a maximum limit and may therefore lead to an advantage which is disproportionate to the additional cost resulting from the public service obligations.
Kar zadeva to tretjo fazo, mora država članica dokazati, da različna davčna obravnava izhaja neposredno iz temeljnih ali usmerjevalnih načel davčnega sistema [51], opredeljenih kot referenčni sistem.
Finally, the assertion by the GPM of Dunkirk that the cost of the public service tasks systematically exceeds the theoretical corporate tax charge is not demonstrated by any figures or any historical data; in the absence of a legal guarantee (also valid for the future) of absence of overcompensation, even if this assertion had been proved to be true for the past, that would not be sufficient to comply with the no overcompensation requirement.
Referenčni sistem
To be considered State aid, a measure must be selective, in the sense that it favours certain undertakings or the production of certain goods within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU [49].
Referenčni sistem je francoski davek od dohodkov pravnih oseb, ki se načeloma plačuje od dobička ali dohodka, ki ga ustvarijo družbe ali druge pravne osebe (člen 205 CGI).
According to settled case-law [50], the assessment of the material selectivity of a tax measure mitigating the charges which are normally included in the budget of an undertaking proceeds in three steps.
V skladu s določbami člena 206(1) in člena 1654 CGI so pravne osebe zasebnega ali javnega prava, ki upravljajo podjetje ali se ukvarjajo s pridobitnimi dejavnostmi, zavezane za plačilo davka od dohodkov pravnih oseb.
First, it is necessary to identify the common or ‘normal’ tax regime (the ‘reference system’) applicable in the Member State concerned.
V skladu z določbami člena 165 priloge 4 k CGI so javna podjetja industrijske ali trgovinske narave zavezana za plačilo vseh neposrednih davkov in podobnih dajatvev, ki se uporabljajo za podobna zasebna podjetja.
Second, it is necessary to determine whether the measure in question derogates from the reference system by differentiating between economic operators which, in the light of the objective pursued by said tax regime, are in a comparable factual and legal situation.
Člen 167 priloge 4 k CGI določa, da se navedene določbe uporabljajo zlasti za gospodarske zbornice in avtonomna pristanišča.
If this is the case, the measure is prima facie selective.
Ne francoski organi ne tretje zainteresirane strani niso predložili pripomb o tem po sklepu o začetku postopka.
As a third step, it is necessary to establish whether the derogating measure is justified by the nature or overall structure of the reference system.
Odstopanje od referenčnega sistema
As regards this third step, the Member State must demonstrate that the differential tax treatment results directly from the basic or guiding principles of its tax system [51] identified as reference system.
V skladu z zgoraj navedenima ministrskima sklepoma iz let 1942 in 1943 so „avtonomna pristanišča, pomorske trgovinske zbornice, gospodarske zbornice, ki upravljajo pristaniške objekte, občine koncesionarji javne opreme v lasti države v pomorskih pristaniščih in podjetja, ki lahko namesto njih upravljajo to opremo,“ oproščeni davka od dohodkov pravnih oseb.
Reference system
V nasprotju s trditvami nekaterih francoskih pristanišč oprostitev davka od dohodkov pravnih oseb, ki koristi pristaniščem, torej ne izhaja iz splošnih določb CGI (med drugim člena 165 priloge 4 k CGI) in nepridobitne narave pristaniške dejavnosti, temveč iz ministrskih sklepov iz let 1942 in 1943, ki izrecno odstopata od teh splošnih določb in implicitno štejeta, da pristanišča opravljajo pridobitne dejavnosti [52].
The reference system is the French corporate tax, levied in principle on all profits or income obtained by companies and other legal persons (Article 205 of the CGI).
To potrjuje sklep državnega sveta, ki ga navajajo zainteresirane strani [53].
Under the provisions of Article 206(1) and Article 1654 of the CGI, legal persons governed by private or public law engaging in a business or transactions of a profit-making nature are subject to corporate tax.
Vendar so glede na cilj referenčnega sistema, in sicer obdavčitev dobička družb in drugih pravnih oseb, subjekti, na katere se nanašata ministrska sklepa iz let 1942 in 1943, v dejanskem in pravnem položaju, ki je primerljiv s položajem drugih družb ali pravnih oseb, zavezanih temu davku, kolikor vsa ta podjetja ustvarjajo dobičke.
Under the provisions of Article 165 of Annex 4 to the CGI, public institutions of an industrial or commercial nature are liable to all direct and assimilated taxes applicable to similar private undertakings.
Zadevna oprostitev torej pomeni odstopanje od pravil, ki jih vzpostavlja referenčni davčni sistem.
Article 167 of Annex 4 to the same Code specifies that these provisions apply in particular to chambers of commerce and industry and to the autonomous ports.
Komisija zato meni, da je davčna oprostitev v korist zgoraj navedenih subjektov prima facie selektivna.
Neither the French authorities nor interested third parties made any comments on this point following the opening decision.
Dejstvo, da se ukrep nanaša na vsa francoska pristanišča – če se predpostavlja, da je dokazano [54] –, te ugotovitve ne postavlja pod vprašaj.
Derogation from the reference system
Obravnavani ukrep v resnici ni splošen glede na referenčni sistem, saj se uporablja samo za nekatera podjetja (upravljavce pristanišč), ki pa so v dejanskem in pravnem položaju, ki je primerljiv s položajem drugih družb ali pravnih oseb, zavezanih za plačilo tega davka, tj. vseh podjetij, ki ustvarjajo dobiček.
By virtue of the ministerial decisions of 1942 and 1943 referred to above, ‘the autonomous ports, maritime chambers of commerce, chambers of commerce and industry managing port installations, municipalities which are concessionaires of public equipment owned by the State in the seaports, and undertakings to which they may have entrusted the operation of that equipment’ are exempt from corporate tax.
Ukrep bi bil splošen samo, če bi upoštevali referenčni sistem, omejen na pristanišča (referenčni sistem, oblikovan z ministrskima sklepoma iz let 1942 in 1943), zgoraj pa je bilo dokazano, da so referenčni sistem splošne določbe o davku od dohodkov pravnih oseb, za plačilo katerega so zavezana podjetja iz vseh sektorjev.
Contrary to the arguments of certain French ports, the corporate tax exemption in favour of the ports results therefore not from the general provisions of the CGI (and in particular Article 165 of Annex 4 to the CGI) and the non-profit-making nature of the activity of the ports, but from the ministerial decisions of 1942 and 1943, which explicitly derogate from these general provisions and implicitly take the view that the ports engage in profit-making activities [52].
Poleg tega glede na cilj referenčnega sistema, in sicer da se ves dobiček, ki ga ustvarijo pravne osebe, obdavči z davkom od dohodkov, značilnosti, kot jih navajajo francoski organi in zainteresirane strani (naloge, naložene pristaniščem v podporo drugim podjetjem, posebne storitve, uporaba s strani gospodarskih zbornic, neobstoj konkurence, financiranje iz pristaniških pristojbin in uveljavljanje pravi javnih organov), niso upoštevne za ugotovitev, da obstaja drugačen dejanski in pravni položaj.
This is confirmed by the decision of the Council of State cited by the interested parties [53].
Čeprav je mogoče s temi okoliščinami, če je to ustrezno, pojasniti, da imajo upravljavci pristanišč, odgovorni za naloge splošnega pomena, manjšo dobičkonosnost in torej manjši obdavčljivi dobiček, z njimi ni mogoče utemeljiti oprostitve davka od dohodkov pravnih oseb za ustvarjeni dobiček, kljub stroškom v zvezi s temi nalogami splošnega pomena.
However, in the light of the objective of the reference system, which is to tax the profits made by companies and legal persons, the entities covered by the ministerial decisions of 1942 and 1943 are in a comparable factual and legal situation to that of the other companies or legal persons subject to the tax in so far as all these undertakings generate profits.
Poleg tega je francoska uprava v zvezi z vlogo za vzpostavitev davčne ureditve odstopanja v korist avtonomnim službam turističnih pristanišč že priznala, da „evropska ureditev pravil o konkurenci izključuje, da bi bili lahko davčni ukrepi odstopanja odobreni v korist nekaterih dejavnosti“ [55].
The exemption in question therefore constitutes a derogation from the rules established by the reference tax system.
Utemeljitev glede na naravo in splošno shemo sistema
The Commission therefore considers that the tax exemption in favour of the above-mentioned entities is prima facie selective.
Francoski organi navajajo, da je ukrep sestavni del francoskega davčnega sistema že več kot 70 let, vendar pretečeni čas ne more zadostovati za to, da bi se odstopanje od običajnih pravil tega sistema štelo za utemeljeno glede na naravo in splošno shemo sistema.
The fact that the measure applies to all French ports, assuming it to have been established [54], does not call this conclusion into question.
S pretečenim časom pa je mogoče utemeljiti uporabo postopka za obstoječo pomoč (glej spodaj).
The measure at issue is not general in relation to the reference system, since it applies only to certain undertakings, the port operators, which are nevertheless in a factual and legal situation comparable to that of the other companies or legal persons subject to the tax, in other words to all profit-making undertakings.
Komisija poleg tega meni, da je logika obravnavanega referenčnega sistema obdavčitev dobička.
The measure would be general only if a reference system were to be considered which was confined to the ports themselves (a reference system formed by the ministerial decisions of 1942 and 1943), whereas it has been shown above that the reference system consists of the general corporate tax provisions to which undertakings of all sectors are subject.
Oprostitev davka, ki temelji zgolj na pripadnosti neki kategoriji podjetij ali ki je priznana samo nekaterim subjektom, ki jih opredeljuje zakon, pa s to logiko ni skladna.
Furthermore, in the light of the objective of the reference system, which is to subject the profits made by any legal person to income tax, characteristics such as those cited by the French authorities and the interested parties (tasks imposed on the ports for the benefit of other undertakings, special obligations, operation by CCI, absence of competition, financing by port charges and exercise of the official powers of a public authority) will not serve to establish the existence of a different factual and legal situation.
Kar zadeva trditev nekaterih zainteresiranih strani, da obravnavani ukrep ne pomeni „hude kršitve načela enakosti“, Komisija poudarja, da to, da nek ukrep ne pomeni „hude kršitve načela enakosti“ v francoskem pravu, ne pomeni, da izhaja neposredno iz temeljnih ali usmerjevalnih načel referenčnega sistema ali je posledica mehanizmov, ki so lastni sistemu in ki so potrebni za njegovo delovanje in učinkovitost (***) [56], v smislu zakonodaje o državni pomoči.
Although those circumstances can in some cases explain that the operators of ports assigned general interest tasks have a lower profitability and therefore lower taxable profits, they cannot justify the exemption from corporate tax of the profits made, in spite of the costs associated with such general interest tasks.
Kot izhaja iz sklepa ustavnega sveta [57], se torej pri presoji načela enakosti v francoskem pravu upoštevajo cilji ukrepa odstopanja, tj. cilji splošnega pomena zunaj davčnega sistema, ki jih ni mogoče upoštevati v fazi utemeljitve glede na naravo in splošno shemo davčnega sistema.
The French administration has already recognised, with regard to a request to create a derogating tax regime in favour of the autonomous marina authorities, that ‘the European regulations on competition rules preclude the possibility of granting derogating tax measures in favour of certain activities’ [55].
Čeprav bi se lahkocilji zunaj sistema potencialno upoštevali v fazi presoje združljivosti pomoči, z njimi ni mogoče utemeljiti selektivnosti odstopanja niti zagotoviti dokaza o neobstoju državne pomoči.
Justification based on the nature and general scheme of the system
Poleg tega se sklep ustavnega sodišča, ki ga navajajo zainteresirane strani, ne nanaša na ministrske sklepe, s katerimi so pristanišča oproščena davka od dohodkov pravnih oseb, temveč na zakonodajno besedilo, s katerim so nekateri športni dogodki oproščeni davka, katerega logika je drugačna od logike davka od dohodkov pravnih oseb.
The French authorities state that the measure has been an integral part of the French tax system for over 70 years, but the passage of time cannot suffice to consider a derogation from the normal rules of the system to be justified by the nature and general scheme of the system.
Komisija zato meni, da oprostitev davka od dohodkov pravnih oseb ni utemeljena glede na naravo in splošno shemo francoskega davčnega sistema.
The passage of time can, on the other hand, be used to justify the use of the procedure for existing aid (see below).
Da bi se ukrep štel za državno pomoč, mora vplivati na trgovino med državami članicami Unije in izkrivljati konkurenco ali groziti, da jo bo izkrivljal.
The Commission considers that the inherent logic of the reference system in this case is to tax profits.
Ti dve merili sta tesno povezani.
A tax exemption based solely on belonging to a certain category of undertakings or granted only to certain entities identified by law is not in keeping with this logic.
Kot je Sodišče opozorilo med drugim v sodbi Eventech [58],
Finally, as regards the assertion by certain interested parties that the measure at issue does not create any ‘clear breach of the principle of equal treatment’, the Commission would point out that the fact that a measure does not create any ‘clear breach of the principle of equal treatment’ in French law does not mean that it derives directly from the intrinsic basic or guiding principles of the reference system or is the result of inherent mechanisms necessary for the functioning and effectiveness of the system (***) [56] within the meaning of State aid law.
[…] v skladu z ustaljeno sodno prakso Sodišča pri opredelitvi nacionalnega ukrepa kot državne pomoči ni treba ugotavljati stvarnega vpliva pomoči na trgovino med državami članicami niti dejanskega izkrivljanja konkurence, ampak je treba le preučiti, ali ta pomoč lahko prizadene to trgovino in izkrivi konkurenco (sodba Libert in drugi, C-197/11 in C-203/11, EU:C:2013:288, točka 76 in navedena sodna praksa).
As found in the decision of the Constitutional Council [57], the evaluation of the principle of equality in French law takes into consideration the objectives pursued by the derogating measure, i.e. objectives of generalinterest extrinsic to the tax system, which cannot be used at the stage of justification by the nature and general scheme of the tax system.
Zlasti kadar pomoč države članice okrepi položaj nekaterih podjetij v primerjavi z drugimi konkurenčnimi podjetji v trgovini znotraj Skupnosti, se šteje, da pomoč vpliva na ta zadnja podjetja (glej v tem smislu sodbo Libert in drugi, EU:C:2013:288, točka 77 in navedena sodna praksa).
Although objectives extrinsic to the system may possibly be taken into account at the stage of the assessment of the compatibility of aid, they do not permit justification of the selectivity of a derogation or, therefore, demonstration of the absence of State aid.
V zvezi s tem ni potrebno, da podjetje, ki je prejemnik pomoči, samo sodeluje v trgovini znotraj Skupnosti.
In addition, the decision of the Constitutional Council mentioned by the interested parties does not concern the ministerial decisions exempting the ports from corporate tax, but a legislative text exempting certain sports meetings from a tax with a different intrinsic logic to that of corporate tax.
Kadar namreč država članica dodeli pomoč podjetju, lahko s tem ohrani ali poveča njegovo notranjo dejavnost, tako da zmanjša možnosti podjetij s sedeži v drugih državah članicah, da vstopijo na trg te države članice (glej v tem smislu sodbo Libert in drugi, EU:C:2013:288, točka 78 in navedena sodna praksa).
The Commission therefore considers that the corporate tax exemption is not justified by the nature and general scheme of the French tax system.
Poleg tega v skladu s sodno prakso Sodišča ne obstaja prag ali odstotek, do katerega bi se lahko štelo, da trgovina med državami članicami ni prizadeta.
In order to be classified as State aid, the measure must affect intra-EU trade and distort, or threaten to distort, competition.
Sorazmerno majhen obseg pomoči ali sorazmerna majhnost podjetja, ki prejme pomoč, namreč a priori ne izključujeta možnosti, da bi bila trgovina med državami članicami prizadeta (sodba Altmark Trans in Regierungspräsidium Magdeburg, C-280/00, EU:C:2003:415, točka 81).
These two criteria are closely linked.
Zato pogoj, v skladu s katerim mora biti pomoč taka, da prizadene trgovino med državami članicami, ni odvisen od lokalne ali regionalne narave opravljenega prevoza ali pomena zadevnega področja dejavnosti (sodba Altmark Trans in Regierungspräsidium Magdeburg, EU:C:2003:415, točka 82).“
As the Court recalled in particular in the Eventech judgment [58]:
V sodbi Wam [59] je med drugim poudarilo naslednje:
in accordance with the Court's settled case-law, for the purpose of categorising a national measure as State aid, it is necessary, not to establish that the aid has a real effect on trade between Member States and that competition is actually being distorted, but only to examine whether that aid is liable to affect such trade and distort competition (the judgment in Libert and Others, C-197/11 and C-203/11, EU:C:2013:288, paragraph 76 and case-law cited).
[…] okoliščina, da se je gospodarski sektor liberaliziral na ravni Skupnosti, [je] primerna za opredelitev dejanskega ali potencialnega vpliva pomoči na konkurenco in njunega učinka na trgovino med državami članicami (zgoraj navedena sodba Cassa di Risparmio di Firenze in drugi, točka 142 in navedena sodna praksa).
In particular, when aid granted by a Member State strengthens the position of an undertaking compared with other undertakings competing in intra-Community trade, the latter must be regarded as affected by that aid (see, to that effect, the judgment in Libert and Others, EU:C:2013:288, paragraph 77 and case-law cited).
Glede pogoja izkrivljanja konkurence je treba spomniti, da pomoči, ki naj bi podjetju omogočile razbremenitev stroškov, ki jih sicer nosi v okviru izvajanja tekočih poslov ali splošnih dejavnosti, načeloma izkrivljajo pogoje konkurence (sodba z dne 19. septembra 2000 v zadevi Nemčija proti Komisiji, C-156/98, Recueil, str. I-6857, točka 30, in zgoraj navedena sodba Heiser, točka 55).“
In that regard, it is not necessary that the beneficiary undertakings are themselves involved in intra-Community trade.
V obravnavanem primeru pa davčna ugodnost, ki jo imajo zadevna pristanišča, te razbremenjuje tekočih stroškov, ki bi jih morali običajno nositi.
Where a Member State grants aid to undertakings, internal activity may be maintained or increased as a result, so that the opportunities for undertakings established in other Member States to penetrate the market in that Member State are thereby reduced (see, to that effect, the judgment in Libert and Others, EU:C:2013:288, paragraph 78 and case-law cited).
Daje jim prednost v primerjavi s francoskimi pristanišči in tujimi pristanišči Evropske unije, ki te ugodnosti nimajo.
Further, according to the Court's case-law, there is no threshold or percentage below which it may be considered that trade between Member States is not affected.
Zato lahko vpliva na trgovino znotraj Skupnosti in izkrivlja konkurenco.
The relatively small amount of aid or the relatively small size of the undertaking which receives it does not as such exclude the possibility that trade between Member States might be affected (the judgment in Altmark Trans and Regierungspräsidium Magdeburg, C-280/00, EU:C:2003:415, paragraph 81).
Konkurenca v sektorju pristanišč namreč obstaja ter jo še povečujejo narava in značilnosti prometa, zlasti pomorskega prometa in prometa po celinski plovnih poteh.
Consequently, the condition that the aid must be capable of affecting trade between Member States does not depend on the local or regional character of the transport services supplied or on the scale of the field of activity concerned (the judgment in Altmark Trans and Regierungspräsidium Magdeburg, EU:C:2003:415, paragraph 82).’
Tudi če bi se lahko štelo, da imajo pristanišča pravni monopol pri ponujanju pristaniških storitev znotraj pristanišča, ki ga upravljajo, prometne storitve, ki jih ponujajo, vsaj nekoliko konkurirajo storitvam, ki jih ponujajo druga pristanišča ali ki so ponujene v njih ali ki jih ponujajo drugi ponudniki prevoza v Franciji [60] in v drugih državah članicah.