natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In conclusion, notwithstanding the fact that the Apple Group is organised in different legal personalities, that group should nevertheless be considered as a single economic unit benefitting from the State aid granted by Ireland by way of the contested tax rulings [351].
V zvezi s trditvijo iz skupnega dopisa o domnevni novosti pristopa v tem primeru, zaradi česar naj bi bilo kršeno načelo legitimnega pričakovanja, kar naj bi preprečevalo vračilo [374], Komisija opozarja, da je mogoče načelo legitimnega pričakovanja uporabiti le za posameznika, ki mu je institucija Unije s tem, da mu je dala natančna zagotovila, vzbudila legitimna pričakovanja [375].
COMPATIBILITY OF THE CONTESTED MEASURES
Niti Irska niti skupna izjava nista dokazali, da je Komisija kadar koli dala natančno zagotovilo, da sta bili sporni davčni stališči skladni s pravili o državni pomoči ali da se člen 107(1) Pogodbe ne uporablja za davčna stališča ali podoben davčni ukrep, s katerim se potrdi metoda, ki povezani družbi omogoča določitev njenega obdavčljivega dobička.
State aid is deemed compatible with the internal market if it falls within any of the grounds listed in Article 107(2) of the Treaty [352] and it may be deemed compatible with the internal market if it is found by the Commission to fall within any of the grounds listed in Article 107(3) of the Treaty [353].
Ravno nasprotno, Komisija je v Obvestilu o uporabi pravil o državni pomoči za ukrepe, ki zadevajo neposredno obdavčitev ustvarjenega dohodka, iz leta 1998 [376] davčna stališča opredelila kot davčne ukrepe, ki lahko pomenijo državno pomoč, od takrat pa je pravila o državni pomoči v vrsti sklepov uporabljala za davčne ukrepe, ki povezanim družbam omogočajo določitev obdavčljivega dobička [377].
However, it is the Member State granting the aid which bears the burden of proving that State aid granted by it is compatible with the internal market pursuant to Article 107(2) or (3) of the Treaty [354].
Zato ni podlage, da bi se Irska za preprečitev vračila lahko sklicevala na načelo legitimnega pričakovanja.
Ireland has not invoked any of the grounds for a finding of compatibility in either of those provisions for the State aid it has granted by way of the contested tax rulings.
Kar zadeva domnevno težavo pri količinski opredelitvi zneska pomoči, se v tem primeru obravnava razmeroma preprost položaj, v katerem je upravičencu z davčnim ukrepom odobreno znižanje njegove davčne osnove in torej njegove obveznosti glede plačila davka od dohodkov pravnih oseb.
Moreover, as noted in recitals 222 and 415, the contested tax rulings should be considered as granting operating aid to ASI, AOE and the Apple group as a whole.
Komisija ne vidi težav pri določitvi zneska, ki ga je v takem primeru treba vrniti, prav tako pa ne vidi vzporednic z ukrepom pomoči iz sklepa v zvezi z družbo France Télécom, ki se je nanašal na položaj, v katerem je bila pomoč dodeljena na podlagi javne izjave vladnega ministra, s katero se je povečala kreditna sposobnost te družbe na trgu.
In particular, such aid cannot normally be considered compatible with the internal market under Article 107(3)(c) of the Treaty in that it does not facilitate the development of certain activities or of certain economic areas, nor are the tax incentives in question limited in time, digressive or proportionate to what is necessary to remedy a specific economic handicap of the areas concerned.
NAČIN IZTERJAVE
Consequently, the State aid granted by Ireland through the contested tax rulings is incompatible with the internal market.
Obveznost države, da ukine pomoč, za katero Komisija meni, da ni združljiva z notranjim trgom, je namenjena ponovni vzpostavitvi prejšnjega konkurenčnega položaja na trgu.
UNLAWFULNESS OF THE AID
V zvezi s tem je Sodišče EU menilo, da je ta cilj dosežen, ko upravičenec vrne zneske, dodeljene z nezakonito pomočjo, in se tako odpove prednosti, ki jo je imel v primerjavi s konkurenti na trgu, ter ko se ponovno vzpostavi stanje pred izplačilom pomoči.
According to Article 108(3) of the Treaty, Member States are obliged to inform the Commission of any plan to grant aid (notification obligation) and they may not put into effect any proposed aid measures until the Commission has taken a final position on the aid in question (standstill obligation).
Z nobeno določbo prava Unije se ne zahteva, da Komisija ob odreditvi vračila pomoči, razglašene za nezdružljivo z notranjim trgom, opredeli natančen znesek pomoči, ki jo je treba vrniti [378].
The notification obligation is repeated in Article 2 of Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 [355], and the standstill obligation in Article 3 of that regulation.
Nasprotno, zadostuje, da so v sklepu Komisije podatki, ki njegovemu naslovniku omogočajo, da ta znesek brez večjih težav opredeli sam [379].
Article 1(f) of that regulation defines new aid put into effect in contravention of Article 108(3) of the Treaty as unlawful aid.
Pravo Unije zahteva le, da se nezakonito dodeljena pomoč vrne, da se ponovno vzpostavi prejšnje stanje in da se vračilo izvede v skladu s pravili nacionalnega prava [380].
The Commission notes that Ireland did not notify the Commission of any plan to issue the contested tax rulings, nor did it respect the standstill obligation.
Zato se Komisija lahko omeji samo na ugotovitev obveznosti vračila zadevnih pomoči, nacionalnim organom pa prepusti izračun natančnih zneskov pomoči, ki jih je treba vrniti [381].
Therefore, in accordance with Article 1(f) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589, the contested tax rulings constitute unlawful aid, put into effect in contravention of Article 108(3) of the Treaty.
V primeru nezakonite državne pomoči v obliki davčnega ukrepa je treba znesek, ki ga je treba vrniti, izračunati na podlagi primerjave med dejansko plačanim davkom in davkom, ki bi ga bilo treba plačati na podlagi splošno veljavnega pravila.
ALLEGED PROCEDURAL IRREGULARITIES
Kot je ugotovljeno v oddelku 8.2.2.2 in predvsem v uvodni izjavi 319, bi morala biti pravilna razporeditev sredstev, funkcij in tveganj ob izdaji spornih davčnih stališč odločilna, kar zadeva razporeditev dobička v družbah ASI in AOE, tako da bi bilo treba vse dobičke iz prodajnih dejavnosti teh družb, ko sta veljali sporni davčni stališči, razporediti k irskima podružnicama družb ASI in AOE.
Both Ireland and Apple claim that the Commission has infringed their right to be heard, since the focus of the Commission's investigation had allegedly changed since the adoption of the Opening Decision, as evidenced by the letter of 17 April 2015, and they were allegedly not afforded the opportunity to properly make their views known on the position expressed by the Commission in that letter.
Ob upoštevanju 10-letnega zastaralnega roka, ki ga določa člen 17 Uredbe (EU) 2015/1589, bi moralo vračilo zajemati pomoč, ki je bila odobrena od 12. junija 2003, ker pa je davčno leto 2014 po trditvah skupine Apple zadnje leto, ko sta družbi ASI in AOE za izračun obdavčljivega dobička na Irskem uporabili stališče iz leta 2007, bi se moralo nadaljevati do 27. septembra 2014, ko se je za družbi ASI in AOE končalo davčno leto 2014.
As a consequence, Ireland and Apple argue that the Commission should have extended the Opening Decision or adopted a new decision opening the formal investigation procedure, setting out the allegedly new focus of the investigation.
Zato bi bilo treba vse dobičke iz poslovnih dejavnosti družb ASI in AOE za obdobje od 12. junija 2003 do 27. septembra 2014 kot izhodišče razporediti k njunima irskima podružnicama za namene izračuna obveznosti družb ASI in AOE glede plačila davka od dohodkov pravnih oseb v skladu z običajnimi pravili za obdavčitev dobička pravnih oseb na Irskem.
The Commission considers that the procedural rights of Ireland and Apple have been fully respected in this case.
Poleg tega bi bilo treba k irskima podružnicama družb ASI in AOE razporediti dohodek od obresti iz premoženja irskih podružnic, ki sta ga skupina Apple in Irska opredelili v obveznih računovodskih izkazih [382].
The Commission notes, first and foremost, that the scope of the Commission's State aid investigation has remained the same between the Opening Decision and the adoption of this Decision.
Skupina Apple lahko ob zadostnih dokazih uveljavlja naslednje odbitke od dobička, ki ga je treba razporediti k irskima podružnicama družb ASI in AOE:
Both Decisions concern the same measures (the 1991 and 2007 tax rulings issued by Irish Revenue), the same beneficiaries (ASI, AOE and the Apple Group) and the same State aid concerns (whether the profit allocation methods endorsed by those rulings result in an appropriate allocation of profits to ASI's and AOE's Irish branches or confer a selective advantage upon those companies in that it allows them to determine their taxable profit in a manner that departs from an arm's length outcome).
dohodek od obresti in naložb, ki ga je mogoče pripisati sedežema družb ASI in AOE in izhaja iz pasivnega upravljanja likvidnosti, ki ga je upravni odbor družb ASI in AOE oddal v zunanje oddajanje družbi Braeburn, kot je razvidno iz zapisnikov s sestankov upravnega odbora [383]; to ne vključuje dohodka od obresti iz premoženja irskih podružnic, ki sta ga Irska in skupina Apple opredelili v obveznih računovodskih izkazih [384];
In the Opening Decision, the Commission expressed its initial doubts on the compliance of the profit allocation methods endorsed by the contested tax rulings with the State aid rules, in particular the arm's length principle as flowing from Article 107(1) of the Treaty.
predpisano amortizacijo v skladu s stališčem iz leta 1991, če je omejitev koriščenja predpisane amortizacije privedla do manj ugodnega položaja za družbo Apple [385]; in
The purpose of an in-depth investigation phase following an Opening Decision is to bring additional elements of fact and law to the Commission's attention.
dobičke singapurske podružnice družbe AOE, ki so bili obdavčeni v Singapurju [386].
Those elements can further develop or address the Commission's initial doubts as set out in an opening decision.
Dobički iz poslovanja, ki se obdavčijo na Irskem, se prav tako lahko prilagodijo po dejanskem prenovljenem prikazu obveznih računovodskih izkazov ali davčnih napovedi družb ASI in AOE po ustreznih plačilih in prilagoditvah obveznih računovodskih izkazov drugih družb skupine Apple v skladu s splošnimi pravili, ki se na Irskem uporabljajo za retroaktivni prenovljeni prikaz finančnih poročil ali davčnih napovedi, če lahko skupina Apple predloži zadostne dokaze o kakršni koli dejanski obveznosti do družbe Apple Inc. ali drugih družb skupine Apple v drugih jurisdikcijah za opravljene dejavnosti ali storitve, kot so raziskave in razvoj ter tržne dejavnosti.
Accordingly, at the end of that procedure, the Commission's analysis may have changed, which implies that the final decision may differ somewhat from the opening decision, without those differences affecting the legality of the final decision [356].
Do takega prenovljenega prikaza bi lahko privedla retroaktivna sprememba SODS ali sporazuma o trženjskih storitvah.
It is as a consequence of the extensive written submissions that were provided by Ireland and Apple on the State aid concerns raised by the Commission in the Opening Decision that the Commission's analysis further developed in this case.
Irish Revenue v okviru spornih stališč ni pregledala pogojev iz teh sporazumov in, če finančni prispevki za raziskave in razvoj ali stroške trženja, ki sta jih v skladu s temi sporazumi nosili družbi ASI in AOE, niso bili skladni z ravnjo prispevka, o kateri bi se dogovorile neodvisne družbe, ki se pogajajo pod običajnimi tržnimi pogoji, na primer ker so uslužbenci družbe Apple Inc. opravljali dejavnosti za družbi ASI in AOE, ki presegajo plačane prispevke iz SODS in sporazuma o trženjskih storitvah, bi bilo z obstojem takih dejavnosti, če so pravilno dokumentirane, mogoče upravičiti retroaktivno spremembo SODS in/ali sporazuma o trženjskih storitvah, privedel pa bi tudi do povečanih naknadnih plačil družb ASI in AOE družbi Apple Inc., če so takšna plačila skladna z neodvisnim tržnim načelom.
In response to a request by Ireland to further clarify its State aid assessment in light of those elements and in light of the allegation made by Ireland that the Commission's assessment appeared to be based on a misapprehension by the Commission as to the applicable national law, the Commission's services sent the letter of 17 April 2015 to Ireland in the interest of transparency, which the latter transmitted to Apple.
Do takega prenovljenega prikaza bi lahko privedla tudi retroaktivna sprememba jurisdikcije, v kateri je evidentirana prodaja družbe ASI v regiji EMEIA, če skupina Apple meni, da ta evidentirana prodaja ni povzročila dejanskega prevzemanja tveganja pri distribuciji proizvodov skupine Apple in da so se taka tveganja dejansko nosila v jurisdikcijah, v katerih je potekala bistvenejša gospodarska dejavnost kot na Irskem.
However, since the adoption of the Opening Decision the subject matter of the Commission's State aid investigation has never changed (the profit allocation methods endorsed by the contested tax rulings), nor has its principal doubts as to the compliance of the contested measures with the State aid rules (whether those methods produced a taxable profit for ASI and AOE that complies with the arm's length principle).
To lahko na primer velja za katerega koli od dobičkov družbe ASI, za katerega se plača italijanski davek od dohodkov pravnih oseb [387], če je družba ASI oceno italijanske davčne uprave evidentirala v ustreznih zneskih v prenovljenih obveznih računovodskih izkazih družbe in če se dobički, ki se obdavčijo na Irskem, ne znižajo več kot sorazmerno z ustreznimi zneski dobičkov, ki se obdavčijo v Italiji.
In any event, since the letter of 17 April 2015, Ireland has been given ample opportunity to make its views known to the Commission on the position expressed in that letter and it has effectively made use of that opportunity on multiple occasions, both in writing and orally [357].
SKLEP
As regards Apple, the Commission recalls that, as an interested party, it only has the right to submit observations in response to the Opening Decision.
Komisija ugotavlja, da je Irska s spornima davčnima stališčema, ki sta družbama ASI in AOE omogočili določiti njune letne obveznosti glede plačila davka od dohodkov pravnih oseb na Irskem v letih, ko sta bili v veljavi, družbama ASI in AOE ter skupini Apple nezakonito dodelila državno pomoč v nasprotju s členom 108(3) Pogodbe, ki jo mora Irska v skladu s členom 16 Uredbe (EU) 2015/1589 izterjati od družb ASI in AOE –
Nevertheless, Apple was given and has effectively made use of the opportunity to submit its observations to the Commission on numerous occasions, both in writing and orally, since the letter of 17 April 2015 was transmitted to it [358].
SPREJELA NASLEDNJI SKLEP:
Consequently, the Commission considers that Ireland's and Apple's procedural rights have been respected in this case.
Člen 1
RECOVERY
Davčni stališči, ki ju je Irska sprejela 29. januarja 1991 in 23. maja 2007 v korist družbe Apple Sales International in ki tej družbi omogočata, da določi svojo letno davčno obveznost na Irskem, pomenita pomoč v smislu člena 107(1) Pogodbe.
THE RECOVERY OBLIGATION
To pomoč, ki ni združljiva z notranjim trgom, je Irska izvedla nezakonito, s čimer je kršila člen 108(3) PDEU.
Article 16(1) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 establishes an obligation on the Commission to order recovery of unlawful and incompatible aid.
Davčni stališči, ki ju je Irska sprejela 29. januarja 1991 in 23. maja 2007 v korist družbe Apple Operations Europe International in ki tej družbi omogočata, da določi svojo letno davčno obveznost na Irskem, pomenita pomoč v smislu člena 107(1) Pogodbe.
That provision also provides that the Member State concerned must take all necessary measures to recover unlawful aid that is found to be incompatible with the internal market.
To pomoč, ki ni združljiva z notranjim trgom, je Irska izvedla nezakonito, s čimer je kršila člen 108(3) PDEU.
Article 16(2) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 establishes that the aid is to be recovered, including interest from the date on which the unlawful aid was at the disposal of the beneficiary until the date of its effective recovery.
Člen 2
Commission Regulation (EC) No 794/2004 [359] sets out the methods to be used for the calculation of recovery interest.
Irska od družbe Apple Sales International izterja pomoč iz člena 1(1).
Finally, Article 16(3) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 states, that ‘recovery shall be effected without delay and in accordance with the procedures under the national law of the Member State concerned, provided that they allow the immediate and effective execution of the Commission's decision’.
Irska od družbe Apple Operations Europe izterja pomoč iz člena 1(2).
NEW AID
Zneskom, ki se izterjajo, se prištejejo obresti od datuma, ko so bili dani na voljo upravičencem, do njihovega dejanskega vračila.
According to Article 1(c) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 ‘‘new aid’ means all aid, that is to say, aid schemes and individual aid, which is not existing aid, including alterations to existing aid’.
Obresti se izračunajo na podlagi obrestnoobrestnega računa v skladu s poglavjem V Uredbe (ES) št. 794/2004.
In accordance with Article 17 of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589, the power of the Commission to recover aid is subject to a limitation period of 10 years.
Člen 3
The limitation period begins on the day on which the unlawful aid is awarded to the beneficiary either as individual aid or as aid under an aid scheme.
Izterjava pomoči iz člena 1 se izvede takoj in učinkovito.
Any action taken by the Commission or by a Member State, acting at the request of the Commission, with regard to the unlawful aid interrupts the limitation period.
Irska zagotovi, da se ta sklep izvede v štirih mesecih od datuma uradnega obvestila o tem sklepu.
Each interruption starts time running afresh.
Člen 4
The limitation period is suspended for as long as the decision of the Commission is the subject of proceedings pending before the Court of Justice.
Irska v dveh mesecih od datuma uradnega obvestila o tem sklepu Komisiji predloži informacije o metodi, uporabljeni za izračun točnega zneska pomoči.
Finally, any aid with regard to which the limitation period has expired is deemed to be existing aid.
Irska obvešča Komisijo o napredku glede nacionalnih ukrepov, sprejetih za izvajanje tega sklepa, dokler pomoč iz člena 1 ni v celoti izterjana.
The 1991 tax ruling was issued more than 10 years ago.
Na zahtevo Komisije takoj predloži informacije o že sprejetih in načrtovanih ukrepih za uskladitev s tem sklepom.
In the present case, the limitation period laid down by Article 17 of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 was interrupted on 12 June 2013, the date on which the Commission sent a letter to Ireland requesting that it provide the Commission with information on its tax ruling practice and, in particular, information on any rulings granted by Ireland in favour of AOI, ASI and AOE.
Člen 5
This means that any aid granted under the 1991 tax ruling before 12 June 2003 must be deemed to be ‘existing’ aid within the meaning of Article 1(b)(iv) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589.
Ta sklep je naslovljen na Irsko.
By contrast, any aid granted after that date, either under the 1991 tax ruling or under the 2007 tax ruling, constitutes ‘new’ aid within the meaning of Article 1(c) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589.
V Bruslju, 30. avgusta 2016
Ireland argues that any aid granted in this case could only be existing aid, since it arises from Irish Revenue's failure to apply the arm's length principle, which was not applicable in Ireland when it joined the Union on 1 January 1973, and has not been applicable at any time since.
Za Komisijo
According to Ireland, Section 25 TCA 97 merely replicates Section 201 of the Income Tax Act 1967, which was in force at the time Ireland acceded to the Union, and neither provision refers to the arm's length principle or the OECD framework.
Članica Komisije
Thus, given that the legal basis for profit allocation to an Irish branch has not substantially changed since Ireland acceded to the Union, the measure, if it amounts to State aid, constitutes existing aid within the meaning of Article 1(b) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 [361].
UL C 369, 17.10.2014, str. 22.
That argument cannot be accepted, since the aid granted in this case is individual aid granted to ASI, AOE and the Apple group in the form of the contested tax rulings, which endorse profit allocation methods that grant ASI and AOE a reduction of their taxable base for Irish corporation tax purposes, and not, as Ireland seems to claim, an aid scheme based on Section 25 TCA 97 and Section 201 of the Income Tax Act 1967.
Irska v svojih odgovorih napotuje na „vnaprejšnja mnenja“ namesto na „davčna stališča“.
Put differently, the aid measure granting the aid is the contested tax rulings as applied by ASI and AOE on a yearly basis to determine those companies' taxable profit for Irish corporation tax purposes and, on the basis of that determination, their yearly corporation tax liability.
Komisija bo za namene tega sklepa, da bi zagotovila skladnost s sklepom o začetku postopka, uporabljala pojem „davčna stališča“.
In other words, the aid granted by those rulings is granted annually, at the moment when the corporation tax has to be paid by ASI and AOE and those companies rely on the profit allocation methods endorsed by those rulings to calculate the amount of tax due.
Vsebinsko sta ta dva pojma enaka.
The aid granted to ASI, AOE and the Apple group by way of the contested tax rulings therefore constitutes new aid, granted annually [362].
Nekateri deli tega besedila so prikriti, da se ne razkrijejo zaupni podatki; ti deli so v oglatih oklepajih.
LEGAL CERTAINTY AND LEGITIMATE EXPECTATIONS
Ker so bila nekatera predložena stališča naslovljena na družbe iz iste skupine, spada devet družb, ki so naštete v uvodni izjavi 2, in deset družb, ki so naštete v uvodni izjavi 6, v 14 različnih večnacionalnih skupin.
Article 16(1) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 provides that the Commission must not require recovery of the aid if this would be contrary to a general principle of law.
Irska konfederacija podjetij in delodajalcev za organizacije s sedežem na Irskem.
Both Ireland and Apple raise the argument that by opening the formal investigation procedure and calling into doubt, 22 years later, the State aid compliance of the two tax rulings, the Commission has violated the principle of legal certainty.
Ta panožna združenja in podpisniki skupnega dopisa so: Information Technology Industry Council (ITI), National Foreign Trade Council (NFTC), Semiconductor Industry Association (SIA), Silicon Valley Tax Directors Group (SVTDG), Software Coalition, Software Finance and Tax Executives Council (SoFTEC), Tech America, TechNet.
According to Ireland, State aid rules must be predictable and the Commission is not entitled to develop Union law by extending the boundaries of those rules in a novel way or by reference to international developments like the OECD framework [363].
Evropsko območje vključuje evropske države ter Bližnji vzhod, Indijo in Afriko, ki se v nadaljnjem besedilu skupaj navajajo kot: regija EMEIA.
By applying the arm's length principle and the OECD framework, in particular the OECD guidance of 2010, the Commission is retrospectively imposing an external reference framework that was not part of Irish domestic law at the time [364].
V javnih finančnih poročilih družbe Apple Inc. ni opredeljeno, katere podružnice imajo ta denarna sredstva, njihove ustreznike in tržne vrednostne papirje.
Finally, Ireland argues that the Commission's retroactive application of today's principles means that Ireland is being held to a standard that it (and Apple) could not have anticipated when the rulings were issued [365].
Glej opombo 5 k Letnemu poročilu skupine Apple za leto 2015 (Javne objave komisije za vrednostne papirje in borzo ZDA K-10), v skladu s katerim „Skoraj ves [Applov] nerazporejeni mednarodni čisti dobiček, namenjen za neomejeno reinvestiranje v dejavnosti zunaj ZDA, so ustvarile podružnice, organizirane na Irskem.“ Skupina Apple je v svojih poročilih predvidela rezervacijo za morebitno prihodnjo obdavčitev dela tega dobička.