natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In response to Ireland's request of 25 February 2015 that the Commission set out its assessment resulting from its investigation into the contested tax rulings in more detail, which according to Ireland appeared to be based on a misapprehension by the Commission as to the applicable national law, the Commission services sent the letter of 17 April 2015 to Ireland, asking Ireland to transmit a copy to Apple.
Glede na dejstvo, da so bile funkcije, ki sta jih opravljali irski podružnici družb ASI in AOE, pravzaprav rutinske operativne in logistične dejavnosti, ključne strateške in poslovne odločitve pa je sprejemalo višje vodstvo v ZDA, glede na dejstvo, da sta se razvoj in uporaba intelektualne lastnine skupine Apple kot glavno gonilo dobičkonosnosti družbe odvijala zunaj Irske, in glede na dejstvo, da je bil sklep o sodelovanju v SODS sprejet ter da sta se upravljanje in nadzor tveganj v okviru SODS izvrševala zunaj Irske, dohodka in ekonomskih pravic, ki so izhajali iz SODS, na noben način ni mogoče pripisati irskima podružnicama družb ASI in AOE.
In the letter, the Commission clarified that, as regards the system of reference for a finding of selectivity, it considered the ordinary tax rules of the Irish corporate income tax system as the appropriate reference system, comprising resident companies and the branches of non-resident companies, whereas Section 25 TCA 97 governed solely the taxation of branches.
Ob upoštevanju tega Irska meni, da Komisija ni ne potrdila ne pojasnila svojega stališča, da je razvrstitev dohodka kot aktivni dohodek v tem primeru pomembna in da je treba aktivni dohodek nekje aktivno upravljati.
Next, the Commission summarised its understanding of the activities of ASI and AOE on the basis of the observations it received from Ireland and Apple in response to the Opening Decision as follows: ‘since ASI and AOE do not have any economic activities outside of their Irish branches, the activity consisting in the procurement, manufacturing, sales and distribution of Apple products outside the Americas is carried out by the Irish branches of ASI and AOE.
Ves dohodek irskih podružnic družb ASI in AOE z izjemo dohodkov od obresti je dohodek iz poslovanja in podružnici ne prejemata dohodkov iz naslova uporabe ali koriščenja intelektualne lastnine skupine Apple, ki jih je mogoče ločiti od dohodka iz poslovanja podružnic.
Any IP licences of ASI and AOE seem to be exclusively used by and exclusively held for the Irish branches, as the Irish branches are solely responsible of the procurement, manufacturing, sales and distribution of Apple products outside the Americas.
V skladu s tem je edini dohodek podružnic, ki spada na področje „dohodka iz premoženja in pravic, ki jih uporablja ali poseduje podružnica ali zastopstvo ali ki so namenjeni podružnici ali zastopstvu“, v skladu z oddelkom 25 TCA 97, dohodek od obresti.
This seems also confirmed by the fact that ASI and AOE only have employees in the Irish branches of ASI and AOE and therefore no operating capacity outside of Ireland.’
Komisija ne more trditi, da bi bilo treba dohodke iz naslova intelektualne lastnine skupine Apple obdavčiti na Irskem v skladu z oddelkom 25 TCA 97.
The Commission then explained, in response to claims made by Apple in its observations on the Opening Decision [118], that functions performed by Apple Inc. employees are outside the scope of the assessment of the contested tax rulings: ‘fictitious remuneration for services provided for free by the group employees to the supposed benefit of ASI or AOE cannot reduce the profits to be allocated between the ASI and AOE head offices and their respective branches.’
Irska je lahko upoštevala in mora upoštevati samo funkcije samih podružnic, zato je lahko ugotovila le to, da se raziskave in razvoj, ki so ustvarili intelektualno lastnino, ter aktivno upravljanje intelektualne lastnine niso odvijali na Irskem.
Finally, the Commission responded to the specific claim made by Ireland in its observations on the Opening Decision that the Commission endorsed the fact that no rights in relation to the IP had been attributed to the Irish branches of ASI and AOE.
Poleg tega ni pomembno, kje se dobiček evidentira.
The Commission explained that the Opening Decision only describes the arrangements under the CSAs as regards the allocation of IP as presented by the Irish authorities, but that this had not been endorsed by the Commission in its assessment.
Dobički družb ASI in AOE so izkazani v računovodskih izkazih teh družb, vendar niso bili obdavčeni – razen dobičkov irskih podružnic in dohodka od naložb, ki izhaja iz ZDA –, ker družbi nista rezidentki v ZDA.
The Commission also clarified that, contrary to Ireland's claim, it had not applied the OECD arm's length principle in the Opening Decision as a source of law.
To neobdavčenje dobička je posledica neusklajenosti državnega sistema obdavčevanja in ni bistveno za namene državne pomoči.
COMMENTS FROM IRELAND IN RESPONSE TO THE LETTER OF 17 APRIL 2015
Irska meni, da naj bi Komisija na sestanku dne 7. maja 2015 sprejela, da neodvisno tržno načelo in odobreni pristop nista del irskega prava v zvezi z obdavčitvijo podružnic in da pravo Unije ni zahtevalo, da se neodvisno tržno načelo vključi v oddelek 25 TCA 97.
In a letter dated 4 May 2015, Ireland claimed that, by the letter of 17 April 2015, the Commission had significantly changed its assessment of the alleged aid, in particular with respect to the reference framework.
Iz tega sledi, kot trdi Irska, da v kolikor se za sporni davčni stališči ni uporabilo neodvisno tržno načelo, to ni pomenilo odklona ali odstopanja od zahtev irskega sistema davka od dohodkov pravnih oseb na splošno in zlasti oddelka 25 TCA 97.
According to Ireland, that change of assessment constitutes a breach of Ireland's right to a fair hearing.
Kar zadeva stališče Komisije, da se neodvisno tržno načelo uporablja kot ustrezno orodje z vidika državne pomoči, Irska trdi, da je to povsem nova utemeljitev in da močno odstopa od stališča Komisije v sklepu o začetku postopka, ki naj bi se skliceval na dejstvo, da Irish Revenue ni uporabila neodvisnega tržnega načela OECD.
Ireland submitted that the Commission seemed to have abandoned the arm's length principle and that it should therefore issue a new or supplemental Opening Decision setting out the new analysis.
Poleg tega Irska meni, da uporaba neodvisnega tržnega načela kot orodja z vidika državne pomoči za nazaj nima podlage v sodni praksi sodišč Unije ne v praksi odločanja Komisije, in poleg tega ni mogoče reči, da izhaja iz preskusa zasebnega subjekta v tržnem gospodarstvu ali da se na splošno lahko potrdi s sklicevanjem na tržne pogoje.
As regards the reference framework, Ireland claims that it was not clear which reference framework was being proposed by the Commission.
Uporabljati neodvisno tržno načelo kot orodje z vidika državne pomoči in izjavljati, da je del prava Unije že od leta 1958, bi pomenilo povsem nanovo pisati zgodovino in ne bi bilo v skladu z načelom pravne varnosti.
ASI and AOE are not tax-resident in Ireland and are taxable under the general rules of corporate taxation.
Glede na dejstvo torej, da neodvisno tržno načelo ni del irskega prava, neuporabe neodvisnega tržnega načela tudi ni mogoče ustrezno označiti za prednost.
Whereas persons resident in Ireland are taxable on all their income wherever arising, non-residents are, pursuant to Section 25 TCA 97, only taxable on their source income.
A tudi če bi se štelo, da se neodvisno tržno načelo v tem primeru uporablja, je sklep ad hoc poročila [davčnega svetovalca skupine Apple] [119] tak, da je dejanska razporeditev dobička irskima podružnicama povsem v skladu z neodvisnim tržnim načelom.
Ireland further explained that all of the income of ASI's and AOE's Irish branches, apart from interest income, is trading income.
Če se Komisija ni strinjala s to analizo, bi morala skladno s tem obvestiti Irsko in ji dati možnost, da odgovori.
The branches have no income that results from ‘the use/exploitation of IP right’ that is separable from the trading income of the branches.
V zvezi s selektivnostjo Irska trdi, da Komisija ni izvedla nobene analize selektivnosti.
In fact, the Irish branches of ASI and AOE have no separate IP income stream, nor would it be correct to treat any part of the branches' income as IP income.
Komisija še zlasti nikdar ni trdila, da je bila obravnava družb ASI in AOE ugodnejša v primerjavi z drugimi podružnicami.
Furthermore, Ireland reiterated that Apple's highly valuable technology, design and marketing IP is created, developed and managed in the US and is not in any way attributable to ASI's and AOE's Irish branches.
Evropsko sodišče je priznalo, da družbe rezidentke in nerezidentke niso v enakem pravnem ali dejanskem položaju [120].
There are also no activities in the branches associated with the management of the licences granted under the CSA.
Obvezovati Irsko, naj družbe rezidentke in nerezidentke obravnava, kot da so primerljive, bi bilo v nasprotju z mednarodno prakso, mednarodnimi davčnimi načeli, kot je načelo teritorialnosti, in neskladno z irsko nacionalno zakonodajo.
Therefore, the profits of ASI and AOE arising as a result of the CSA are not attributable to the Irish branches.
In tudi če bi različna obravnava obveljala za selektivno, bi to povsem jasno upravičevali narava in/ali splošna shema TCA.
Ireland stated that the trading income is net trading income after deductions rather than gross trading receipts.
V dopisu z dne 17. julija 2015 je Irska predložila tudi Cookovo mnenje kot potrditev trditve Irske, da sta bili družbi ASI in AOE ves čas obdavčeni v skladu z oddelkom 25 TCA 97 in da njuna davčna obravnava skladno s tem ni vključevala državne pomoči.
That net income must be ‘arising […] through or from the branch’, which means that ‘the branch is the causal source of the income, to which the income is properly attributed’.
Cooke v svojem mnenju trdi, da v nasprotju z domnevno trditvijo Komisije, da bi morala Irish Revenue družbi ASI in AOE obravnavati kot davčni rezidentki na Irskem in ju obdavčiti z davkom od dohodka pravnih oseb na podlagi oddelka 21 TCA 97, Irish Revenue nima ne svobode ne diskrecijske pravice, da bi se oddaljila od nedvoumne vsebine oddelka 25 TCA 97.
Section 25 TCA 97 cannot be constructed as providing that a flow of gross receipts through a branch determines the attribution of a company's entire income to the branch.
Gospod Cooke se sklicuje na sodbi višjega sodišča in vrhovnega sodišča v zadevi McGrath proti McDermott [121], kjer je bilo izraženo stališče, da sodišče ne bi smelo upoštevati zahtevnih in vnaprej določenih transakcij, ki nimajo nobenega poslovnega namena, razen izogibanja davkom.
Ireland reiterates that such an interpretation would lead to absurd results bearing no relation with economic reality.
Višje sodišče naj bi navedlo, da se sodišče pri ugotavljanju, ali obstaja obveznost plačila davka, ne ozira na vsebino ali finančni rezultat transakcije.
According to Ireland, the reason why much of the income of ASI and AOE has not been subject to taxation is a result of mismatches between national tax regimes, which cannot be rectified with State aid rules.
Upošteva dejanski pravni učinek in zakonite pravice vpletenih strani v skladu s pravnimi idejami in koncepti.
Finally, Ireland maintained that the arm's length principle is not part of the Irish tax regime and that the Commission's ‘clarification’ in the letter that it applies the OECD rules in the Opening Decision as a ‘non-binding’ recommendation is far from reflecting the position of the Commission in the Opening Decision.
Glede na dejstvo, da sta družbi ASI in AOE centralno upravljani in nadzorovani iz ZDA, Cooke v svojem mnenju trdi, da je Irish Revenue pravilno obravnavala hčerinski družbi kot davkoplačevalki nerezidentki.
According to Ireland, the Opening Decision relies squarely on the OECD definition of the arm's length principle.
Na podlagi oddelka 25 TCA 97 so predmet obdavčitve samo dobički, za katere se lahko dokaže, da izhajajo iz poslovanja prek ali iz podružnice ali zastopstva, Komisija združuje družbe s podružnicami, ko zahteva, da bi morala Irish Revenue obdavčiti dobičke iz poslovanja družbe in ne podružnice.
If the Commission suggests that there is a second type of ‘non-OECD’ arm's length principle, it should have heard Ireland's arguments on this point.
Poleg tega Irish Revenue ni imela nobene diskrecijske pravice, da bi neodvisno tržno načelo uporabila po analogiji, ker to načelo v zadevnem trenutku ni bilo del irskega davčnega zakonika.
COMMENTS FROM APPLE ON THE LETTER OF 17 APRIL 2015
Cooke sklene svoje mnenje s tem, da v irskem pravu ni nobene podlage za obdavčitev vseh dobičkov družb AOE in ASI na Irskem.
In a letter dated 4 May 2015, Apple indicated that they take issue with the Commission approach that seems to require that Irish tax resident companies and the Irish branches of ASI and AOE should be treated in the same way and taxed on their worldwide income.
Edina pristojnost Irish Revenue v zadevnih letih je bila obdavčiti tisti del dobičkov družb ASI in AOE, ki je bil sorazmeren z dejavnostmi njunih podružnic na Irskem.
According to Apple, the profit-generating activities of a non-resident company occurring outside of Ireland are not relevant to the amount of tax due in Ireland.
Za konec, v skladu s Cookovim mnenjem bi bilo v komercialni realnosti nevzdržno vztrajati pri tem, da je mogoče celotni prihodek iz zadevnih poslov pripisati funkcijam, ki sta jih izvajali podružnici.
Moreover, Apple claims that the Commission incorrectly attributes all profits to the Irish branches based on the irrelevant and false assumption that ASI and AOE do not have any economic activity outside their Irish branches.
To je razvidno iz dejstva, da stranke ne čakajo vso noč pred Applovimi trgovinami po svetu, da bi kupile najnovejši iPhone ali iPad, zato ker se prodajajo iz Corka, ampak zaradi vrednosti, ki so jo tem izdelkom prinesli obsežno vlaganje, tehnične in tehnološke inovacije, oblikovalski ugled in vse, kar se vlaga v širok nabor Applovih izdelkov, večino tega pa je mogoče pripisati dosežkom v ZDA ali drugje.
Apple claims that critical activities conducted by or for ASI and AOE occur outside of Ireland, and lists as an example that the boards of ASI and AOE decided to enter into the CSA with Apple Inc., while the negotiations with respect to sales, procurement and manufacturing contracts are managed by Apple Inc. executives on behalf of ASI and AOE.
DOPIS SKUPINE APPLE Z DNE 7.
Finally, Apple claims that the remainder of the profits, which are not subject to tax in Ireland, are subject to eventual taxation in the US.
SEPTEMBRA 2015 (Z IZVEDENSKIM MNENJEM)
Apple disputes that any IP licences of ASI and AOE have been exclusively used by and exclusively held for the Irish branches.
Družbi ASI in AOE za davčne namene nista rezidentki na Irskem, zato nista v primerljivem dejanskem in pravnem položaju kot irske družbe rezidentke, kot navaja irska davčna zakonodaja.
This is because the Commission incorrectly asserts that ASI and AOE have no economic activity outside the Irish branches.
Skupina Apple je svoje stališče podprla s predložitvijo mnenja [svetovalca skupine Apple].
Instead, in their roles as a procurement and distribution centre and a routine product assembler, respectively, the Irish branches had only limited access to the licensed IP for assembling and shipping products.
Sklep tega mnenja je, da je Irska ustrezno upoštevala dejstvo, da družbi ASI in AOE nista bili družbi rezidentki, in da je način, kako je Irska obravnavala družbi ASI in AOE kot družbi nerezidentki, ki se razlikujeta od irskih družb rezidentk, v skladu z mednarodnim davčnim načelom teritorialnosti.
Apple claims that even under the Authorised OECD Approach, the Irish branches of ASI and AOE would not be entitled to be allocated profits based on their limited access to the licensed IP, just as an independent enterprise would not be paid a return on similar licensed IP.
Družbi ASI in AOE torej nista v pravnem in dejanskem položaju, ki bi bil primerljiv s položajem irskih družb rezidentk.
Apple concludes that the IP rights that drive mark-ups — such as the rights relating to hardware and software design and engineering — are not the rights on which the Irish branches rely to conduct procurement, distribution or assembly activities, which can therefore not be attributed to the Irish branches.
Poleg tega v skladu s tem mnenjem ne intelektualne lastnine skupine Apple ne dobička, ki izhaja iz intelektualne lastnine skupine Apple, ni mogoče pripisati irskima podružnicama, ker se vse „funkcije osebja, pristojnega za odločanje“ v zvezi z intelektualno lastnino, izvajajo zunaj Irske.
Apple also does not agree that by mentioning the fact that ‘no rights in relation to the IP concerned are attributed to the Irish branch of AOE/ASI’ in the descriptive part of the Opening Decision, the Commission was not endorsing that fact.
V skladu s tem mnenjem je za pripis dohodka podružnicama potrebna primerjava s hipotetično družbo rezidentko, ki se ukvarja samo z lokalnimi dejavnostmi, ne da bi imela v zakoniti ali ekonomski lasti pravice intelektualne lastnine oziroma ne da bi te pravice zakonito ali ekonomsko koristila.
According to Apple, the Commission did not dispute that fact in the assessment part of the Opening Decision.
Zato bi morala razdelitev dohodka upoštevati funkcije, tveganja in finančno premoženje irskih podružnic, ne pa v skladu z načelom „sile privlačnosti“ – ki ga je OECD izrecno zavrnila – privesti do pripisa dohodka, ki ne izhaja iz irskih virov.
As an undisputed fact, it remains relevant and parties can rely on such factual and legal statements set forth in an Opening Decision.
Zato je bila razporeditev dobička irskima podružnicama izključno na podlagi dejavnosti, ki se odvijajo v podružnicah, torej brez upoštevanja dejavnosti, ki se odvijajo zunaj podružnic, in sicer znotraj družb ASI/AOE ali drugih družb skupine Apple, povsem v skladu z razporeditvijo dobička podružnicam, kot izhaja iz mednarodnega javnega prava in mednarodnih davčnih načel, vključno s sodno prakso iz poročila OECD o pripisovanju dobička iz leta 2010.
Apple also disputes that the Commission used the OECD TP Guidelines merely as a reference document, given that the Commission relied heavily on the guidelines in the Opening Decision.
Poleg tega [svetovalec skupine Apple] meni, da irski podružnici nimata v lasti nobene intelektualne lastnine in nista v ničemer povezani z nobenim vidikom upravljanja intelektualne lastnine.
EXCHANGE OF LETTERS AFTER THE MEETING BETWEEN THE COMMISSION AND IRELAND ON 7 MAY 2015
Vse upravljanje intelektualne lastnine, vključno z vsemi dejavnostmi, ki jih zahtevajo financiranje, ustvarjanje, uveljavitev in zaščita intelektualne lastnine, se odvija zunaj Irske.
THE MEETING ON 7 MAY 2015
Vse „funkcije osebja, pristojnega za določanje“ so zunaj Irske in tako se tudi vsa vrednost ustvarja zunaj Irske.
At the request of Ireland, a meeting was held between the Commission's services and Ireland on 7 May 2015.
Trditev Komisije, da upravna odbora družb ASI in AOE, aktivno ne upravljata intelektualne lastnine, ni pravilna.
During that meeting the following topics were discussed: (i) the interpretation of Section 25 TCA97 and the question of territoriality; (ii) the tax treatment of resident and non-resident companies; (iii) the identification of the reference framework; (iv) the private market operator test; (v) the role of the arm's length principle in Irish and Union law; (vi) and the significance of activities in other companies of the Apple group besides ASI and AOE on the profit allocation within ASI and AOE.
[Svetovalec skupine Apple] meni, da je iz zapisnikov upravnih odborov družb ASI in AOE ter iz drugih dopisov, ki jih je skupina Apple poslala Komisiji, razvidno, da se je vse odločanje v zvezi z zadevami, ki so za družbo ASI/AOE ključnega strateškega pomena, vključno (i) s finančnimi zadevami, kot so odločitve o naložbah ter vprašanja v zvezi s pooblastilom za upravljanje bančnih računov in ohranjanjem kapitala; (ii) pregledom in odobritvijo računovodskih izkazov ter (iii) prenosom pristojnosti znotraj nekaterih parametrov, kar zadeva poslovne dejavnosti, odvijalo v ZDA in ne na Irskem.
By email of 9 July 2015, the Commission sent the draft minutes of the meeting on 7 May 2015 to Ireland and invited Ireland to agree or propose changes to those minutes.
Po mnenju [svetovalca skupine Apple] je treba za namene ugotavljanja višine dobička, ki se lahko razporedi stalni poslovni enoti družbe nerezidentke na podlagi vzorčne konvencije OECD (skupaj z nacionalnimi davčnimi pravili številnih držav), potem ko se s funkcijsko analizo ugotovi, kaj se dejansko dogaja znotraj stalne poslovne enote, izvesti primerjavo z (fiktivno) družbo rezidentko.
LETTERS FROM IRELAND OF 17 JULY 2015 (WITH EXPERT OPINION) AND 14 AUGUST 2015
Ta primerjava („kot da“) se naredi, ker v primerih, ko ni pravno ločenega subjekta, ni na voljo nobeno pravno merilo, po katerem bi znotraj družbe nerezidentke izolirali višino dobička, za katerega se ve, da ga je družba nerezidentka ustvarila na lokalni ravni.
In its letter of 17 July 2015, Ireland expressed its opinion on several of the topics discussed during the meeting on 7 May 2015.
Kadar se dela ta primerjava, je nadvse pomembna naslednja točka: (fiktivna) družba rezidentka, s katero se dela primerjava, je zelo posebna; je družba rezidentka, katere dohodek izhaja samo iz dejavnosti ali finančnega premoženja v državi, v kateri je davčna rezidentka.
In Ireland's opinion, the Commission allegedly acknowledged during that meeting that, in line with the applicable rules on residency, ASI and AOE were at all material times non-resident companies and that their tax liability fell to be assessed by reference to Section 25 TCA 97.
Medtem ko je družba rezidentka v državi, v kateri ima sedež, na splošno zavezanka za davek na dohodek, ki ga ustvari na svetovni ravni, ustvarja družba rezidentka, s katero se dela primerjava, dohodek samo z dejavnostmi ali finančnim premoženjem v državi, v kateri ima sedež.
This means that Irish Revenue, in line with the principle of territoriality which was not disputed by the Commission, cannot tax the worldwide profits of ASI and AOE, but that the Irish branches are liable to tax only in respect of Irish-source profits.
Z drugimi besedami, v primerjavo lahko vključimo samo družbo rezidentko, katere dejavnosti in finančno premoženje sta omejena na državo, v kateri družba nerezidentka posluje prek svoje stalne poslovne enote.
Related to this, Ireland does not agree, as was suggested during the meeting on 7 May 2015, that the reference framework consists of the ordinary corporate tax system.
V primeru skupine Apple irskih podružnic družb ASI in AOE ne moremo obravnavati, kot da sta ekonomski lastnici takih pravic.
The TCA 97 does not have a single overarching objective.
Zato je treba za primerjavo vzeti družbo, ki prav tako ni ne pravna ne ekonomska lastnica takih pravic intelektualne lastnine, vendar ima do intelektualne lastnine dostop v omejenem obsegu, kolikor je potrebno za izvajanje njenih dejavnosti (sestavljanje/nabavo izdelkov, prodajo in distribucijo).
Given that the functions performed by ASI's and AOE's Irish branches were essentially routine operational and logistical activities, while the key strategic and commercial decisions were taken by senior management executives in the US, given that the development and exploitation of Apple's IP as main driver of the company's profitability was undertaken outside of Ireland, and given that the decision to participate in the CSA as well as the management and control of the risks under the CSA were located outside of Ireland, the income resulting from the CSA and the economic rights created as a result of the CSA cannot, in any way, be attributed to the Irish branches of ASI and AOE.
Iz funkcijske analize irskih podružnic je razvidno, da so funkcije, ki se izvajajo prek stalnih poslovnih enot in v stalnih poslovnih enotah na Irskem, omejene na nabavne, prodajne in distribucijske dejavnosti (ASI) ter sestavljanje izdelkov (AOE).