natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
According to the Danish authorities, in its opening decision the Commission simply stated the extent of Denmark's trade in agricultural products and it has therefore not sufficiently justified its view that the tax scheme threatens to distort competition and trade on the internal market.
Menijo tudi, da ista logika prevlada, kadar se upošteva uporaba zgornje meje 25000 m3.
To illustrate the exemption's limited value, the Danish authorities point out that an enterprise that was granted a tax exemption for the maximum volume (6000 m3) received aid in the amount of DKK 610 (approximately EUR 81) in 2009, DKK 630 (approximately EUR 84) in 2010 and DKK 620 (approximately EUR 83) in 2011 as compared to enterprises that received a reduction under Section 24b.
Brez te zgornje meje bi se z dodatno pristojbino, ki bi jo bilo treba plačati, proizvodni stroški povišali za od 1,25 % do 2,20 %.
All amounts are below the threshold laid down in the de minimis regulations for both primary agricultural production and food processing and therefore do not distort competition.
Po njihovem mnenju bi bili kmetje primorani zmanjšati svoje črpanje vode, če bi morali plačati polno pristojbino, zaradi česar bi se zmanjšal njihov pridelek in znižali prihodki, to pa bi skupaj s posledicami gospodarske krize, zaradi katerih so kmetijska gospodarstva še bolj občutljiva na povišanja proizvodnih stroškov, povzročilo izkrivljanje konkurence med kmetijskimi gospodarstvi z velikimi potrebami po namakanju in tistimi z manjšimi potrebami ali brez potreb po namakanju.
Compatibility
Sorazmernost pomoči (točka 159 okoljskih smernic)
Primary production
Danski organi poudarjajo, da mora biti v skladu s točko 159 okoljskih smernic izpolnjen eden od treh pogojev, navedenih v tej točki, da bi bilo merilo sorazmernosti izpolnjeno, in dodajajo, da se bodo osredotočili na pogoj iz točke 159(b), saj naknadno preverjanje izpolnjevanja pogojev iz točke (a) ali (c) ni mogoče.
The Danish authorities state in its analysis that any aid in relation to the tax schemes in Sections 24b and 24c is in any case compatible with the internal market.
V skladu s pogojem iz točke 159(b) morajo upravičenci do pomoči plačati vsaj 20 % nacionalne dajatve, razen če je lahko nižja stopnja upravičena z vidika omejenega izkrivljanja konkurence.
With regard to the tax reduction in Section 24b, the Danish authorities are of the opinion that points 151 to 159 of the Environmental Guidelines have been complied with, insofar as the tax is an environmental tax a reduction of which is necessary and proportionate in all scenarios (i.e. regardless of whether the reference system for the analysis is constituted by the tax scheme in Section 24a or by the tax scheme in Section 24b, in which case the ceiling of 25000 m3 can be considered to favour holders of an extraction permit for more than 25000 m3.
Danski organi navajajo, da so, če se upoštevata dejstvo, da pristojbina iz člena 24b prečiščenega besedila zakona predstavlja tretjino pristojbine iz člena 24a, in zgornja meja 25000 m3, na podlagi katere so podjetja oproščena pristojbine za vse količine, ki presegajo to zgornjo mejo, podjetja z dovoljenjem za črpanje najmanj 41666 m3 vode plačala vsaj 20 % pristojbine iz člena 24a prečiščenega besedila zakona.
Environmental tax (point 151 of the Environmental Guidelines)
Vendar pa trdijo, da dobavitelji vode niso podjetja v smislu pravil o državni pomoči ter da ne more biti konkurence med kmetijskimi gospodarstvi in živilskopredelovalnimi podjetji na eni strani ter lastniki splošnih sistemov za oskrbo z vodo na drugi strani.
To show that the tax has the characteristics of an environmental tax, the Danish authorities refer to the tax scheme's overall objective, namely protecting drinking water.
Primerjavo bi bilo treba opraviti med podjetji z dovoljenjem za črpanje vode in tistimi, ki se morajo, ker takega dovoljenja nimajo, oskrbovati iz splošnega sistema.
They stress that the Danish measure goes further than the obligations under the Water Framework Directive and might not have an equivalent in any other Member State.
Prva so obdavčena na podlagi količine, ki jo lahko načrpajo, druga pa na podlagi svoje dejanske porabe, zaradi česar je težko preveriti plačilo 20 % pristojbine.
They add that the scheme was set up in such a way that the largest contributors (owners of water utilities) could pass the tax on to users on the basis of their consumption, thereby giving them an incentive to consume less.
Vendar če se skupaj upoštevajo stopnja dejanske izkoriščenosti dovoljenj na kmetijskih gospodarstvih (34 %) in v predelovalnih podjetjih (48 %) ter povprečna velikost dovoljenj (37000 m3 oziroma 243000 m3) in stopnja izkoriščenosti možnosti črpanja za splošne sisteme za oskrbo z vodo (80 %), se izkaže, da je primarni proizvajalec na podlagi svoje dejanske porabe v povprečju plačal približno 45 % pristojbine, ki jo plačajo podjetja brez dovoljenja za črpanje vode, medtem ko ta delež pri predelovalnih podjetjih pade na 6 %.
By introducing tax reductions and exemptions for those who extract their own water, the Danish authorities believe that they have been able to tax more effectively the largest consumers of drinking water.
Poleg tega, če se kot referenčni scenarij uporabi pristojbina iz člena 24b prečiščenega besedila zakona ter se opravi primerjava med imetniki dovoljenja za črpanje do največ 25000 m3 vode in imetniki dovoljenja za črpanje več kot 25000 m3 vode, se izkaže, da je 97,5 % upravičencev plačalo vsaj 20 % običajne pristojbine.
Necessity of the aid (point 158 of the Environmental Guidelines)
Danski organi priznavajo, da je treba merilo 20 % izpolnjevati na ravni posameznega gospodarskega subjekta, vendar menijo, da bi morala Komisija pri oceni izpolnjevanja merila sorazmernosti upoštevati povprečja in dejstvo, da do leta 2009 ni bilo pristojbine za črpanje vode.
Regarding the criterion in point 158(a) of the Environmental Guidelines (according to which the choice of beneficiaries must be based on clear and objective criteria, and the aid must be granted in principle in the same way for all competitors in the same sector/relevant market if they are in a similar factual situation), the Danish authorities dispute the Commission's argument that they should have made a distinction between economic operators outside the agricultural sector with water extraction permits and economic operators within the agricultural sector.
Po njihovem mnenju bi shema obdavčitve brez določitve zgornje meje pristojbine povzročila precej večje izkrivljanje konkurence v kmetijskem sektorju, saj bi morala podjetja, ki so pred uvedbo pristojbine pridobila dovoljenje za velike količine vode, plačati polno pristojbino za to količino, ne glede na svojo dejansko porabo.
The aim of the tax scheme is not to distinguish between enterprises within or outside certain sectors; but for the tax in Section 24b to apply to all owners of non-public water supply systems with permits to extract more than 6000 m3 of groundwater per year, regardless of their economic sector.
Nazadnje, kmetijska podjetja v drugih državah članicah niso zavezana enakim dajatvam kot danska podjetja, zato je težko določiti, kako bi lahko zadnjenavedena pridobila konkurenčno prednost.
If the ceiling of 25000 m3 is considered to favour holders of extraction permits for more than 25000 m3, the criterion of objectivity and clarity in the selection of beneficiaries is clearly met, given that the tax reduction is applied in the same way for all enterprises in the same sector that are in the same factual situation (holders of an extraction permit for more than 25000 m3 of water).
Danski organi na splošno sklenejo, da je znižanje pristojbine sorazmerno, čeprav niso vsa podjetja plačala vsaj 20 % pristojbine.
With reference to the criterion of objectivity and clarity prior to the selection of beneficiaries, the Danish authorities query why the Commission is looking at enterprises in other Member States that do not have the same advantage as the Danish enterprises receiving a reduction or exemption, given that those foreign enterprises are not subject to the Danish tax scheme.
Sektor predelave kmetijskih proizvodov
They refer to the Commission's decision in case C-30/2009, in which the Commission found the criteria to be objective and clear.
Danski organi priznavajo, da ne morejo dokazati, da pomoč, ki so jo predelovalna podjetja z lastnim dovoljenjem za črpanje vode prejela zaradi znižanja pristojbine iz člena 24b prečiščenega besedila zakona, v vseh primerih izpolnjuje merilo nujnosti, opredeljeno v točki 158 okoljskih smernic.
Regarding the criterion in point 158(b) of the Environmental Guidelines (which provides that the environmental tax without reduction must lead to a substantial increase in production costs for each sector or category of individual beneficiaries), the Danish authorities quote tax administration figures showing that enterprises in the primary sector paid a total of DKK 26 million in tax per year under Section 24b in the period 2009-2010; they argue that these enterprises would have paid approximately DKK 138 million per year if they had been subject to the same tax as owners of public water utilities, i.e. 430 % more for the sector as a whole.
Vendar pa so predložili podatke, iz katerih je razvidno, da je pet podjetij z največjimi dovoljenji za črpanje zaradi znižanja pristojbine prejelo pomoč, katere povprečni letni ekvivalent dotacije znaša od 245417 DKK (približno 32700 EUR) do 456217 DKK (približno 60000 EUR), v primerjavi s podjetji, ki se z vodo oskrbujejo iz splošnega sistema za oskrbo z vodo, pri čemer poudarjajo, da te številke ne zagotavljajo natančne slike o dejanski prednosti, ki jo ta pomoč daje upravičencem, in da bi jih bilo treba popraviti glede na dejansko porabo vode s strani predelovalnih podjetij (stopnja izkoriščenosti dovoljenj je bila ocenjena na 48 %).
The Danish authorities provide a numerical example of production costs, which shows that the additional costs per hectare amount to approximately DKK 347, i.e. an increase in production costs of between 4,3 % and 7,7 % depending on the crop.
Ob upoštevanju tega tehtanja ekvivalent dotacije znaša od 143337 DKK (približno 19100 EUR) do 267369 DKK (približno 35650 EUR) na leto in je še nižji, če se kot referenčni scenarij uporabi pristojbina iz člena 24b prečiščenega besedila zakona.
This calculation is based on a hypothetical agricultural holding of 100 hectares with an extraction permit for 1200 m3 per hectare and that pays a tax of DKK 0,31 per hectare, which, assuming the full tax is paid, would result in a total tax of DKK 37200 (100 × 1200 × 0,31), i.e. additional costs of DKK 34700, or DKK 347 per hectare, as the holding would have to pay DKK 2500 with a ceiling of 25000 m3 (see Section 24b).
Te določbe omogočajo, da se podjetjem za predelavo kmetijskih proizvodov dodeli pomoč, ki lahko doseže 500000 EUR, vendar danska vlada te možnosti ni izkoristila.
They are of the opinion that an increase in production costs of up to 8 % is substantial (here they refer to Commission Decision on State aid N 327/2008, in which an increase in production costs of 3 % was considered substantial) and gives reason to conclude that the criterion in point 158(b) of the Environmental Guidelines has been met.
Po mnenju danskih organov lahko torej podjetje, ki je že prejelo 200000 EUR iz naslova pomoči de minimis, prejme še 300000 EUR na podlagi začasnega okvira za krizno pomoč.
Moreover, the Danish authorities are of the opinion that the same logic can be followed in the context of the 25000 m3 ceiling.
Oprostitev
Without this ceiling, the tax would have resulted in an increase in production costs of between 1,25 % and 2,20 %.
Danski organi v podporo svojemu stališču trdijo, da podjetja, ki imajo pravico do črpanja do 6000 m3 vode, niso prejela več kot 250 EUR pomoči, če se oprostitev šteje za odstopanje od določb člena 24b, in ne več kot 750 EUR, če se oprostitev šteje za odstopanje od določb člena 24a (pristojbina iz člena 24b prečiščenega besedila zakona je le ena tretjina pristojbine iz člena 24a).
While it is true that this is a smaller increase than the one discussed in the Decision in case N 327/2008, it must be seen in light of the fact that it is impossible to pass it on to consumers (see the following recital).
Nadalje opozarjajo, da je treba ukrep oceniti na podlagi veljavnega pravila de minimis in da je treba združljivost nezakonite pomoči oceniti na podlagi predpisov, veljavnih v času dodelitve pomoči.
According to the Danish authorities, the farmers would have been forced to extract less water if they had had to pay the full tax, resulting in a smaller crop yield and lost income.
Menijo, da bi, če bi Komisija strogo upoštevala ta formalna merila, načela, na katerih temelji ocenjevanje nezakonite pomoči, izgubila vsak smisel, saj je lastnost nepriglašene pomoči prav ta, da ne izpolnjuje formalnih pogojev za zakonitost.
Together with the fallout from the financial crisis, which made farmers even more vulnerable to increasing production costs, this would have distorted competition between farmers with a high need for irrigation and those with a lower or no need for irrigation.
V zvezi s tem dodajajo, da nepriglašena pomoč ne bi nikoli mogla biti razglašena za združljivo z notranjim trgom, kar še toliko bolj drži za pomoči, oproščene priglasitve na podlagi uredbe o skupinskih izjemah.
Proportionality of the aid (section 159 RFG)
Danski organi na podlagi teh argumentov sklenejo, da je treba oprostitev razglasiti za združljivo z notranjim trgom, če je dokazano, da zgornje meje pomoči, določene v začasnem okviru za krizno pomoč (500000 EUR za predelovalna podjetja in 15000 EUR za primarne proizvajalce, vključno s pomočjo de minimis), niso bile presežene, in da bi morala Komisija de facto zvišati zgornjo mejo de minimis pri presoji združljivosti oprostitve.
They rely particularly on point 159(b), given that it is not possible to carry out an ex post inquiry into whether the conditions in sub-points (a) and (c) have been met.
Danski organi priznavajo, da formalni pogoji za dodelitev pomoči de minimis ali združljive pomoči na podlagi začasnega okvira za krizno pomoč resda niso bili izpolnjeni, vendar ker Danska takrat ni izkoristila možnosti, ki jih ponuja okvir, in ker prejeti zneski pomoči ne presegajo 750 EUR, ni tveganja, da bi bile zgornje meje, določene z začasnim okvirom, presežene v primeru naknadne uporabe njegovih določb.
According to point 159(b), aid beneficiaries have to pay at least 20 % of the national tax, unless a lower rate can be justified in view of a limited distortion of competition.
Vračilo
The Danish authorities argue that since the tax in Section 24b constitutes one third of the tax in Section 24a and enterprises were exempted from paying tax on volumes exceeding the ceiling of 25000 m3, enterprises with an extraction permit for at least 41666 m3 paid at least 20 % of the tax in Section 24a.
Danski organi trdijo, da tudi če Komisija ne bi sprejela pojasnil glede neobstoja nezakonitih in nezdružljivih pomoči v shemi obdavčitve, ne bi smela zahtevati vračila pomoči od upravičencev, ker je njihov vpliv na konkurenco minimalen, ker z vračilom ne bi bilo znova vzpostavljeno običajno stanje, ker so imeli upravičenci legitimna pričakovanja in ker je povsem nemogoče izvesti vračilo, s katerim bi bila vsa podjetja znova postavljena v enak položaj.
However, they also take the view that the water supply companies cannot be considered undertakings under the State aid rules, and that agricultural holdings do not compete either with food processing enterprises or with owners of public water utilities.
V podporo prvi trditvi navajajo, da so bila vsa podjetja v enakem dejanskem položaju obravnavana enako, zato je tveganje izkrivljanja konkurence minimalno in povsem teoretično.
A comparisons can only be made between enterprises with a permit for water extraction and enterprises that, lacking such a permit, must connect to public utilities.
Zgornja meja pomoči za imetnike dovoljenja za črpanje vode je prav tako prispevala k ohranjanju enotnih konkurenčnih pogojev, na primer v sektorju primarne proizvodnje, saj je preprečila nesorazmerno povišanje proizvodnih stroškov za tiste proizvajalce, ki so morali najbolj namakati.
The former were taxed on the basis of the volume they were permitted to extract, while the latter were taxed on the basis of their actual consumption, which makes it difficult to check whether 20 % of the tax was paid.
Danski organi v zvezi z drugo trditvijo poudarjajo, da vračilo ne bo omogočilo ponovne vzpostavitve konkurenčnega stanja pred letom 2009, ker primarni proizvajalci niso pridobili konkurenčne prednosti pred konkurenti iz svoje države ali drugih držav članic, ampak so pridobili le prednost pred podjetji iz drugih sektorjev, ki se z vodo oskrbujejo iz splošnega sistema za oskrbo z vodo.
However, if the utilisation rate of permits held by agricultural holdings (34 %) and by processing enterprises (48 %) are looked at together, along with the average volume for which they were issued (respectively 37000 m3 and 243000 m3) and the utilisation rate for public utilities (80 %), it emerges that a primary producer (based on actual consumption) has on average paid approximately 45 % of the tax paid by enterprises without an extraction permit, while the figure for processing enterprises is 6 %.
Vračilo bi najbolj prizadelo tiste, ki imajo največje potrebe po namakanju zaradi negotovih vremenskih razmer in stanja tal, tako da, povedano drugače, določitev zneska za vračilo ne bi bila odvisna od morebitnega vpliva pomoči na konkurenco, ampak od zunanjih dejavnikov.
If the tax scheme in Section 24b is used as a reference scenario, and a comparison is made between holders of an extraction permit for at least 25000 m3 of water and holders of an extraction permit for more than 25000 m3, it emerges that 97,5 % of beneficiaries have paid at least 20 % of the normal tax.
Vračilo bi poleg tega povzročilo izkrivljanje konkurence v korist tistih, ki lahko za iste proizvode namesto podzemne vode uporabljajo površinsko vodo (oproščeno pristojbine), kar bi bilo v nasprotju z določbami člena 14(2) Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 659/1999.
The Danish authorities acknowledge that the criterion of 20 % applies to individual enterprises, but are still of the opinion that the Commission ought to take the average into account in its assessment of the proportionality requirement and to consider that prior to 2009 there was no tax on water extraction.
Nazadnje, vračilo bi imelo nepopravljive in nesorazmerne posledice glede na omejen vpliv ukrepa na konkurenco.
According to the Danish authorities, if the tax scheme had had no ceiling it would have created a much greater distortion of competition in the agricultural sector, given that the enterprises that had received a permit for extracting large volumes before the tax was introduced would have paid the full tax for that volume, regardless of their actual consumption.
Danski organi v zvezi z legitimnim pričakovanjem upravičencev poudarjajo, da velika večina potencialnih upravičencev ni mogla dejansko pričakovati, da bodo s shemo pridobili prednost z vidika konkurenčnega prava, zlasti ker v drugih državah članicah ne obstajajo podobne dajatve.
Finally, agricultural holdings in the other Member States are not subject to the same tax as the Danish enterprises, and it is therefore difficult to determine how the latter could have gained a competitive advantage.
Poleg tega se ni nobeno dansko ali tuje podjetje nikoli pritožilo glede zadevne sheme obdavčitve.
The Danish authorities state as their general conclusion that the tax is proportionate, even if not all enterprises paid at least 20 % of the tax.
Nazadnje, ker se dovoljenja za črpanje vode običajno izdajajo za obdobje od 10 do 15 let, večina upravičencev ni imela možnosti upoštevati vprašanj obdavčitve, ko so zaprosili za dovoljenje, z vračilom na podlagi velikosti dovoljenja pa se ne bi upoštevale te nepredvidljive okoliščine.
Processing of farm products
Nezmožnost izvedbe učinkovitega vračila, pri katerem bi bila vsa podjetja postavljena v enak položaj
The Danish authorities acknowledge that they cannot prove that the criterion of necessity in point 158 of the Environmental Guidelines was met in all cases where food processing enterprises with extraction permits received aid as a result of the tax reduction in Section 24b.
Za učinkovito izravnavo bi bilo treba pristojbino za črpanje vode za vsa podjetja znova izračunati na podlagi dejanske porabe vsakega od njih v obdobju 2009–2011 in na podlagi enotne, vendar poljubne stopnje obdavčitve, da se preplačila vrnejo ali da podjetja, ki niso plačala dovolj, poravnajo morebitno razliko.
However, they are able to prove that by virtue of the tax reduction, the five enterprises with the largest extraction permits received average annual aid with a grant equivalent of between DKK 245417 (approximately EUR 32700) and DKK 456217 (approximately EUR 60000) as compared to the enterprises that were connected to a public water utility.
Vendar ta model ni uporaben, saj v večini primerov ni mogoče določiti natančne porabe za podjetja, ki imajo lastno zajetje.
They stress, however, that these figures do not give a realistic picture of the beneficiaries' advantage, and that they ought to be considered against the processing enterprises' actual water consumption (the permit utilisation rate was 48 %).
V. PRIPOMBE ZAINTERESIRANE STRANI
By considering them in this way, the grant equivalent is between DKK 143337 (approximately EUR 19100) and DKK 267369 (approximately EUR 35650) per year, and it is even lower if the tax in Section 24b is applied as a reference scenario.
Zainteresirana stran v svojih pripombah meni, da zadevni sistem obdavčitve ne vsebuje elementa državne pomoči za podjetja, ker odobrena znižanja ali oprostitve pristojbine niso selektivni in ne vplivajo na konkurenco.
The Danish authorities point out that all these figures are under the de minimis threshold of EUR 200000 for aid for the processing of agricultural products.
Po njenem mnenju je sistem obdavčitve, tudi če bi bilo ugotovljeno, da vsebuje element državne pomoči, združljiv z določbami okoljskih smernic.
They acknowledge that there may be enterprises that exceed the threshold if all other de minimis aid granted over three financial years is taken into account, but they are of the opinion that in that case the Commission ought to consider the aid as compatible with the internal market on the basis of the Temporary Crisis Framework.
Poleg tega bi bilo vračilo pomoči, ki bi bile razglašene za nezakonite in nezdružljive, v nasprotju s splošnimi pravnimi načeli.
This framework makes it possible to grant aid of up to EUR 500000 to enterprises that process agricultural products, but the Danish authorities have not applied it.
Kmetje niso mogli predvideti, da bodo prejeli nezakonito državno pomoč, samo vračilo pa bi bilo nesorazmeren ukrep, saj večina proizvajalcev ne načrpa celotne količine vode, vpisane v dovoljenje za črpanje.
Exemption
ODGOVOR DANSKIH ORGANOV NA PRIPOMBE ZAINTERESIRANE STRANI
The Danish authorities state that the tax exemption in Section 24c is a derogation from the provisions of Section 24b, which can be considered to constitute the reference system.
Danski organi so v svojem dopisu, poslanem z elektronsko pošto z dne 2. julija 2012, ugotovili, da je zainteresirana stran podprla njihovo stališče, in poudarili, da dejstvo, da ni pripomb predložilo nobeno drugo podjetje ali organizacija, kaže, da ni shema nikakor vplivala na pogoje konkurence na notranjem trgu.
However, if the Commission considers that Section 24c is a derogation from Section 24a, the exemption does not in any case constitute State aid under Article 107(1) TFEU, and if the Commission considers that the exemption constitutes State aid, it should be considered compatible with the internal market.
OCENA
The Danish authorities argue that enterprises entitled to extract at least 6000 m3 did not receive more than EUR 250 in aid if the exemption is considered a derogation from the provisions of Section 24b, or more than EUR 750 in aid if it is considered a derogation from the provisions of Section 24a (the tax in Section 24b is only one third of the tax in Section 24a).
Obstoj pomoči