natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In light of the foregoing, the Commission considers that the reference system against which the contested tax rulings should be examined is the ordinary rules of taxation of corporate profit in Ireland, as set out in recital 228 and further elaborated in Section 2.3, which have as their intrinsic objective the taxation of profit of all companies subject to tax in Ireland.
Nazadnje, kar zadeva vztrajanje Irske pri tem, da irska davčna zakonodaja ne dopušča, da se davki naložijo na podlagi splošnih načel [179], Komisija opozarja, da neodvisno tržno načelo, ki ga uporablja, izhaja iz člena 107(1) Pogodbe, kot ga razlaga Sodišče, ki je za države članice zavezujoč, nacionalna davčna pravila pa niso izključena z njegovega področja uporabe [180].
As explained in recitals 229 and 235, that reference system includes both non-integrated and integrated companies and, as explained in recitals 237 to 241, both resident and non-resident companies.
To načelo se torej uporablja ne glede na to, ali je zadevna država članica neodvisno tržno načelo vključila v svoj nacionalni pravni sistem ali ne.
Section 25 TCA 97 should therefore be considered to form an integral and necessary part of that reference system, but not a separate reference system unto itself.
Sklep: standard za presojo, ali sporni davčni stališči družbama ASI in AOE dajeta selektivno prednost
That the ordinary rules of taxation of corporate profit in Ireland constitute the appropriate reference system in this case is confirmed by the contested tax rulings themselves.
Glede na navedeno bi bilo treba sporni davčni stališči – če je mogoče pokazati, da je posledica metod razporejanja dobička, ki jih je z njima odobrila Irish Revenue, ta, da obdavčljivi dobiček družb ASI in AOE odstopa od zanesljivega približka tržno naravnanega izida, skladnega z neodvisnim tržnim načelom – obravnavati, kot da dajeta tema družbama selektivno prednost za namene člena 107(1) Pogodbe, saj privedeta do znižanja njune obveznosti glede plačila davka od dohodkov pravnih oseb na podlagi običajnih pravil obdavčitve dobička pravnih oseb na Irskem v primerjavi z neintegiranimi družbami, katerih davčno osnovo določa dobiček, ki ga dosegajo pod tržnimi pogoji.
The purpose of those rulings is to determine ASI's and AOE's annual taxable profit in Ireland for the purpose of levying corporation tax on that profit under those rules.
Komisija bo v oddelkih 8.2.2.2 in 8.2.2.3 pokazala, da sporni davčni stališči odstopata od običajnih pravil obdavčitve dobička pravnih oseb na Irskem, ker z njima odobrene metode omogočajo, da družbi ASI in AOE svoj letni obdavčljivi dobiček na Irskem določita na način, ki odstopa od zanesljivega približka tržno naravnanega izida, skladnega z neodvisnim tržnim načelom.
Indeed, ASI's and AOE's yearly taxable profit in Ireland, which results from the application of the contested tax rulings, is taxed on the basis of Section 21(1) TCA 97 at the standard corporate tax rate of 12,5 % for trading income and 25 % for non-trading income, just like the profit of every other company subject to tax in Ireland, whether non-integrated or integrated, resident or non-resident.
Prvič, Komisija zlasti meni, da je to, da je Irish Revenue sprejela neutemeljeno domnevo, da bi bilo treba licence za intelektualno lastnino skupine Apple, katerih imetnici sta družbi ASI in AOE, razporediti zunaj Irske, pri čemer na tej domnevi temeljijo metode razporejanja dobička, odobrene s spornima davčnima stališčema, privedlo do letnega obdavčljivega dobička družb ASI in AOE na Irskem, ki odstopa od zanesljivega približka tržno naravnanega izida, skladnega z neodvisnim tržnim načelom [181].
Thus, the ultimate goal of the exercise conducted for the purpose of the contested tax rulings is to arrive at an annual taxable profit for ASI and AOE that ensures that those non-resident companies are taxed on their locally-sourced income in a similar manner to non-integrated resident companies under the ordinary rules of taxation of corporate profit in Ireland.
Podredno in ne da bi to vplivalo na sklep iz uvodne izjave 260, Komisija meni, da metode razporejanja dobička, odobrene s spornima davčnima stališčema – tudi če bi Irish Revenue upravičeno sprejela neutemeljeno domnevo, da bi bilo treba licence za intelektualno lastnino skupine Apple, katerih imetnici sta družbi ASI in AOE, razporediti zunaj Irske, kar Komisija izpodbija –, kljub temu privedejo do letnega obdavčljivega dobička družb ASI in AOE na Irskem, ki odstopa od zanesljivega približka tržno naravnanega izida, skladnega z neodvisnim tržnim načelom, saj te metode vsekakor temeljijo na neustreznih metodoloških izbirah [182].
As Ireland itself explained in the course of the administrative procedure: ‘Revenue, in the course of its normal operations, engages with tax payers, in order to provide clarity as to the application of tax law […].
Komisija pred nadaljnjo preučitvijo obeh utemeljitev ugotavlja, da sta bili sporni davčni stališči izdani, ne da bi skupina Apple pripravila poročilo o razporejanju dobička ali določanju transfernih cen.
The objective is to ensure that the correct Irish tax is paid by these companies on that portion of their profits that is within the scope of Irish corporation tax, including, in relation to non-resident companies, that portion of their profits that is attributable to their Irish branch operations.
Irish Revenue je imela pri preučitvi prošenj za davčno stališče na voljo zgolj dokumentacijo, povzeto v oddelku 2.2.3.
It is in this context that Revenue engages with Apple Operations Europe and Apple Sales International to ensure that the profits attributed to their Irish branches were commensurate with the activities undertaken by those branches.’ [166]
Komisija je v sklepu o začetku postopka izrazila pomisleke glede neobstoja poročila o razporejanju dobička ali določanju transfernih cen, ki niso bili odpravljeni.
SELECTIVE ADVANTAGE RESULTING FROM A DEROGATION FROM THE ORDINARY RULES OF TAXATION OF CORPORATE PROFIT IN IRELAND GIVING RISE TO A REDUCTION OF THE TAXABLE BASE
Šele po tem, ko je Komisija sprejela sklep o začetku postopka, sta Irska in skupina Apple predložila vsak svoje ad hoc poročilo o razporejanju dobička, ki sta ju pripravila družba PwC oziroma [davčni svetovalec skupine Apple], da bi tako ex post facto utemeljili metode razporejanja dobička, odobrene s spornima davčnima stališčema.
The function of a tax ruling is to establish in advance the application of the ordinary tax system to a particular case in view of its specific facts and circumstances.
Komisija bo zaradi popolnosti obravnavala tudi pojasnila iz teh poročil – kolikor so upoštevna –, čeprav Irish Revenue v času izdaje teh stališč ni razpolagala z njima.
However, like any other fiscal measure, the granting of a tax ruling must respect the State aid rules.
Nazadnje Komisija še ugotavlja, da je Irska sicer trdila, da oddelek 25 TCA 97 od Irish Revenue ne zahteva, da se pri izdaji davčnih stališč ravna po smernicah iz okvira OECD, vendar metode razporejanja dobička, odobrene s spornima davčnima stališčema, določajo plačilo za vse dejavnosti, ki sta jih opravili ti podružnici, na podlagi odhodkov iz poslovanja irskih podružnic namesto plačila od ločenih transakcij, v katere sta ti podružnici vstopili vsaka s svojo upravo.
Where a tax ruling endorses a result that does not reflect in a reliable manner what would result from a normal application of the ordinary tax system, without justification, that ruling may confer a selective advantage upon the addressee, in so far as that selective treatment results in a lowering of that taxpayer's tax liability in the Member State as compared to companies in a similar factual and legal situation.
Povedano drugače, zdi se, da so enostranske metode razporejanja dobička, odobrene s spornima davčnima stališčema, podobne sporazumu o določanju transfernih cen na podlagi TNMM z odhodki iz poslovanja kot kazalnikom ravni dobička, kot je opisan v smernicah OECD za določanje transfernih cen.
The contested tax rulings endorse methods for allocating the profit of ASI and of AOE to their respective Irish branches, which allow those companies to determine their taxable profit and thus their corporation tax liability in Ireland on a yearly basis for the period during which those rulings were in force.
Selektivna prednost, ki izhaja iz tega, da je Irish Revenue sprejela neutemeljeno domnevo, da bi bilo treba licence za intelektualno lastnino skupine Apple, katerih imetnici sta družbi ASI in AOE, razporediti zunaj Irske
Having determined that the ordinary rules of taxation of corporate profit in Ireland, including but not limited to Section 25 TCA 97, constitute the reference system against which the contested tax rulings should be assessed, it is necessary to establish whether those rulings constitute a derogation from that reference system, leading to unequal treatment between companies that are factually and legally in a similar situation.
Kot je bilo pojasnjeno v uvodnih izjavah 265 do 321, Komisija meni, da je to, da je Irish Revenue sprejela neutemeljeno domnevo, da bi bilo treba licence za intelektualno lastnino skupine Apple, katerih imetnici sta družbi ASI in AOE, razporediti zunaj Irske, na kateri temeljijo metode razporejanja dobička, ki jih je predlagala skupina Apple in so bile odobrene s spornima davčnima stališčema, privedlo do letnega obdavčljivega dobička družb ASI in AOE na Irskem, ki odstopa od zanesljivega približka tržno naravnanega izida, skladnega z neodvisnim tržnim načelom.
As explained in recital 224, the Commission's assessment whether the contested tax rulings derogate from that reference system will coincide with its identification of the economic advantage conferred on ASI and AOE as a result of those rulings.
Razporejanje dobička znotraj družbe vključuje razporeditev sredstev, funkcij in tveganj med različnimi deli te družbe.
The applicability of the arm's length principle in the application of Sections 21(1) and 25 TCA 97
Irish Revenue je v spornih davčnih stališčih odobrila enostranske metode razporejanja dobička za razporeditev dobička k irskima podružnicama družb ASI in AOE.
Section 25 TCA 97 requires the use of a profit allocation method
Podlaga za te metode je neutemeljena domneva, da bi bilo treba licence za intelektualno lastnino skupine Apple, katerih imetnici sta družbi ASI in AOE, v celoti razporediti zunaj Irske [183].
According to Section 21(1) TCA 97, corporation tax in Ireland is charged on the profit of companies.
Na podlagi te domneve se obdavčljivi dobiček družb ASI in AOE na Irskem določi po metodi določanja transfernih cen, podobni TNMM, pri čemer se irski podružnici obravnavata kot „testni stranki“, preostali dobiček družb ASI in AOE pa se razporedi zunaj Irske [184].
Section 25 TCA 97 provides that a company not resident in Ireland that carries on a trade through a branch or agency in Ireland is subject ‘to corporation tax on all its chargeable profits wherever arising’.
Irska trdi, da je na podlagi oddelka 25 TCA 97 pristojna zgolj za obdavčitev deleža dobička družbe, sorazmernega z dejavnostmi irskih podružnic, in da to pomeni, da mora Irish Revenue za namene razporejanja dobička upoštevati zgolj dejavnosti, ki se izvedejo v irskih podružnicah [185].
To determine a non-resident company's tax liability in Ireland under Section 21(1) TCA 97, it is therefore first necessary to determine its chargeable profits within the meaning of Section 25 TCA 97.
Ta država meni, da licenc za intelektualno lastnino skupine Apple, katerih imetnici sta družbi ASI in AOE, za davčne namene ne bi smeli razporediti k irskima podružnicama, saj v njiju ne potekajo nobeni tekoči posli, povezani s temi licencami [186].
For this purpose, Section 25 TCA 97 specifies that chargeable profits are equal to ‘any trading income arising directly or indirectly through or from the branch or agency, and any income from property or rights used by, or held by or for, the branch or agency, but this paragraph shall not include distributions received from companies resident in the State’.
V zvezi s tem trdi, da je Irish Revenue z odobritvijo metode izračuna obdavčljivega dobička irskih podružnic zgolj na podlagi perspektive teh podružnic pravilno uporabila oddelek 25 TCA 97 in da s tem družbi ASI ali AOE ni dala selektivne prednosti.
The indication of trading income implies that non-trading, that is to say, passive income, such as interest income and dividends, is excluded from its scope.
Komisija se ne strinja s to utemeljitvijo.
However, Section 25 TCA 97 applies in situations where, in principle, no separate ownership of assets can be established on the basis of contracts between the various parts of the same non-resident company and where risks and functions cannot be contractually delineated to provide guidance on the chargeable profit of an Irish branch as opposed to the other parts of that company.
Kot je bilo pojasnjeno v oddelku 8.2.2.1, se je treba ob uporabi oddelka 25 TCA 97 opreti na metodo razporejanja dobička, ki temelji na neodvisnem tržnem načelu.
Section 25 TCA 97 also does not contain any reference as to how to distinguish between trading income recorded in the accounts of the Irish branch (directly or indirectly) as opposed to income which is generated by the other parts of the company outside of Ireland and not directly or indirectly by the Irish branch.
Ko neodvisni družbi druga z drugo poslujeta, je cena, zaračunana za to transakcijo, nadomestilo za funkcije, ki jih posamezna družba opravlja v tem razmerju, ob upoštevanju vloženih sredstev in prevzetih tveganj, ki se jim zavežeta ti družbi.
The wording and purpose of Section 25 TCA 97 thus reveal that that provision can only be applied in connection with a method to allocate profit.
Da bi ugotovili, ali je v primeru medsebojnih transakcij med povezanimi družbami cena transakcije znotraj skupine neodvisna tržna cena, je treba torej primerjati vložena sredstva, opravljene funkcije in prevzeta tveganja, ki se jim zaveže vsaka od teh družb [187].
Ireland itself acknowledges that Section 25 TCA 97 does not provide guidance on how to determine the chargeable profit of an Irish branch, but requires the use of a profit allocation method [167], as does Apple [168].
V nasprotju s položajem, ko se določanje transfernih cen uporabi za vzpostavitev komercialnih pogojev med ločenimi družbami, ki pripadajo isti skupini podjetij, v primeru razporejanja dobička med različnimi deli iste družbe razporeditev sredstev, funkcij in tveganj ni dana, ampak se tudi ta določi prek razporejanja dobička.
This is also confirmed by the contested tax rulings themselves, the purpose of which is to establish a profit allocation method so that the chargeable profits of ASI's and AOE's respective Irish branches can be determined for the purposes of Section 25 TCA 97 and subsequently taxed under the ordinary rules of taxation of corporate profit in Ireland.
Razlog za to je dejstvo, da v primeru razporejanja dobička znotraj družbe nobeden od sestavnih delov te družbe nima ločene pravne osebnosti in torej za nobenega od teh delov ni mogoče trditi, da ima ločeno v lasti sredstva ali da je ločeno zavezan za poravnavo obveznosti te družbe.
Article 107(1) of the Treaty requires the profit allocation method to be based on the arm's length principle
Nasprotno, sredstva in obveznosti do upnikov pripadajo družbi kot celoti, ki jo tvorijo njeni sestavni deli.
According to settled case-law, any fiscal measure a Member State adopts, including a tax ruling endorsing a profit allocation method for determining a branch's taxable base, must comply with the State aid rules, which bind the Member States and enjoy primacy over their national legislation [169].
Upnik take družbe bi namreč lahko imel kot jamstvo možnost terjatve do sredstev družbe v primeru njene nesolventnosti, in sicer ne glede na to, ali so bila ta sredstva interno ali za davčne namene razporejena k upravi ali k točno določeni podružnici.
The Court of Justice has already held that a reduction in the taxable base that results from a tax measure that enables a taxpayer to employ transfer prices in intra-group transactions that do not resemble prices which would be charged in conditions of free competition between independent undertakings negotiating under comparable circumstances at arm's length confers a selective advantage on that taxpayer for the purposes of Article 107(1) of the Treaty [170].
Poleg tega v takih primerih lastništva nad sredstvi ni mogoče neposredno in zanesljivo razbrati iz obveznih računovodskih izkazov te družbe [188].
This is because that taxpayer's tax liability, determined under the ordinary rules of taxation of corporate profit, is reduced as compared to independent undertakings whose taxable profit reflects prices determined on the market negotiated at arm's length.
Medtem ko je lahko fizični obstoj zaposlenih ali sredstev v določeni jurisdikciji, na primer obrata, v pomoč pri ustreznem razporejanju teh sredstev znotraj družbe, neopredmetenih sredstev, kot so licence za intelektualno lastnino, ki jih ima družba v lasti ali posesti, ni mogoče spremljati v fizični obliki, zato jih je za davčne namene težko razporediti.
In its judgment on the Belgian tax regime for coordination centres [171], the Court of Justice assessed a challenge to a Commission decision which concluded, inter alia, that the method for determining taxable income under that regime conferred a selective advantage on those centres [172].
Ker prav tako morda ne obstaja noben pogodbeni sporazum med dvema deloma iste družbe, lastništva nad (opredmetenimi ali neopredmetenimi) sredstvi znotraj te družbe ni mogoče pogodbeno določiti.
Under that regime, taxable profits were set at a flat-rate amount which represented a percentage of the full amount of operating costs and expenses, from which staff costs and financial charges were excluded.
Ker torej irski podružnici družb ASI in AOE nimata pravne osebnosti, ki bi bila ločena od družb, ki jima pripadata, ni mogoče za nobeno od teh podružnic niti za kateri koli drug del teh družb, še zlasti ne za upravi vsake od njiju, trditi, da ima ločeno v lasti sredstva ali da je ločeno zavezan za poravnavo obveznosti teh družb.
According to the Court, ‘in order to decide whether a method of assessment of taxable income such as that laid down under the regime for coordination centres confers an advantage on them, it is necessary, […], to compare that regime with the ordinary tax system, based on the difference between profits and outgoings of an undertaking carrying on its activities in conditions of free competition.’
Glede na navedeno ni mogoče niti za upravi družb ASI in AOE niti za irski podružnici vsake od njiju trditi, da so ločeno imetnice licenc za intelektualno lastnino skupine Apple.
The Court then held that ‘the effect of the exclusion of [staff costs and the financial costs] from the expenditure which serves to determine the taxable income of the centres is that the transfer prices do not resemble those which would be charged in conditions of free competition’, which the Court found to ‘[confer] an advantage on the coordination centres’ [173].
Nasprotno, v vsakem primeru je imetnica teh licenc za intelektualno lastnino družba kot celota, sestavljena iz svojih različnih delov.
The Court has thus accepted that a tax measure which results in an integrated group company charging transfer prices that do not reflect those which would be charged in conditions of free competition, that is prices negotiated by independent undertakings negotiating under comparable circumstances at arm's length, confers a selective advantage on that company, in so far as it results in a reduction of its taxable base and thus its tax liability as determined under the ordinary rules of taxation of corporate profit.
Da bi zagotovili, da razporeditev dobička k eni od podružnic privede do zanesljivega približka tržno naravnanega izida, skladnega z neodvisnim tržnim načelom, je treba upoštevati dejstvo, da sredstva, tveganja, kapital in pravice ter obveznosti, ki nastanejo zaradi transakcij med to podružnico in preostalimi deli iste družbe, pripadajo družbi kot celoti, ne pa kateremu koli posameznemu delu družbe [189].
As already explained, the principle that transactions between integrated group companies should be remunerated as if they were agreed to by non-integrated standalone companies negotiating under comparable circumstances at arm's length is referred to as the ‘arm's length principle’.
Dobiček, ki ga je treba razporediti k podružnici, je tako dobiček, ki bi ga ta podružnica zaslužila neodvisno na trgu, zlasti v poslovanju s preostalimi deli družbe, če bi bila ločeno in samostojno podjetje, ki bi se ukvarjalo z enakimi ali podobnimi dejavnostmi v enakih ali podobnih razmerah ter ob upoštevanju vloženih sredstev, opravljenih funkcij in prevzetih tveganja, ki se jim je zavezala družba prek podružnice in prek preostalih delov družbe.
In its judgment on the Belgian tax regime for coordination centres, the Court of Justice endorsed the arm's length principle as the benchmark for establishing whether an integrated group company receives a selective advantage for the purposes of Article 107(1) of the Treaty as a result of a tax measure that determines its transfer pricing and thus its taxable base.
Zdi se, da Irska [190] in skupina Apple [191] priznavata, da bi morala Irish Revenue ob določanju obdavčljivega dobička družbe nerezidentke na podlagi oddelka 25 TCA 97 upoštevati sredstva, funkcije in tveganja njene irske podružnice.
The purpose of the arm's length principle is to ensure that transactions between integrated group companies are treated for tax purposes by reference to the amount of profit that would have arisen if the same transactions had been carried out by non-integrated standalone companies.
Podobno skupina Apple sprejema tudi, da se za razporejanje dobička na podlagi oddelka 25 TCA 97 zahteva, da se podružnica obravnava kot „samostojen gospodarski subjekt“ [192].
Otherwise, integrated group companies would benefit from a favourable treatment under the ordinary rules of taxation of corporate profit when it comes to the determination of their taxable base which is not available to non-integrated standalone companies, leading to unequal treatment between companies that are factually and legally in a similar situation in light of the objective of those rules, which is to tax the profits of all companies falling under its scope of taxation, since both companies' taxable profit is taxed at the same corporate income tax rate.
Vendar je bila – v nasprotju s tem, na kar napeljuje Irska v uvodni izjavi 266 – za zagotovitev, da metoda za razporejanje dobička k irski podružnici privede do zanesljivega približka tržno naravnanega izida, skladnega z neodvisnim tržnim načelom, Irish Revenue dolžna preveriti, ali je razporeditev licenc za intelektualno lastnino skupine Apple zunaj Irske namesto k ustreznima irskima podružnicama razporeditev, o kateri bi se bilo mogoče dogovoriti neodvisno na trgu.
The same principle applies to the internal dealings of different parts of the same integrated company, such as a branch that transacts with other parts of the company to which it belongs.
Natančneje, ko jo je skupina Apple zaprosila za potrditev metod, ki jih je predlagala ta skupina za razporeditev dobička k irskima podružnicama družb ASI in AOE, je bila Irish Revenue dolžna najprej ustrezno preučiti vložena sredstva, opravljene funkcije in prevzeta tveganja, ki sta se jim zavezali ti družbi prek irskih podružnic in prek svojih preostalih delov.
As explained in recitals 228 to 242, all companies subject to corporation tax in Ireland, whether resident or non-resident, non-integrated or integrated, should be considered to be in a similar factual and legal situation in light of the intrinsic objective of the ordinary rules of taxation of corporate profit in Ireland, which is to tax the profit of all companies subject to tax in Ireland.
Irska in skupina Apple ugovarjata, da je mogoče družbi ASI in AOE po načelu teritorialnosti obdavčiti le za dobiček iz njunih dejavnosti na Irskem.