natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
According to Ireland, the examples set out in Table 1 can be explained as follows:
Odhod v okviru postanka v Corku je izvzet iz plačila te takse, ker je potnik na letališču v Corku tranzitni ali transferni potnik;
The final destination is New York (over 300 km from Dublin airport), so the flight is subject to the EUR 10 rate of ATT.
velja enako kot v točki (e), razen da se v tem obdobju uporablja enotna stopnja v višini 3 EUR;
The departure from the stopover in Shannon is exempt from ATT, as the passenger is a transit or transfer passenger at Shannon airport;
destinacija je Cardiff (od letališča v Dublinu oddaljen manj kot 300 km), zato se za let uporablja stopnja takse na letalska potovanja v višini 2 EUR;
As (a), except that the single rate of EUR 3 applies during this period;
velja enako kot v točki (g), razen da se v tem obdobju uporablja enotna stopnja v višini 3 EUR;
The final destination is New York (over 300 km from Dublin airport), so the flight is subject to the EUR 10 rate of ATT;
za to potovanje ni treba plačati takse na letalska potovanja.
As (c), except that the single rate of EUR 3 applies during this period;
Letališče odhoda (New York) ni na Irskem, odhod v okviru postanka v Shannonu pa je izvzet, ker je potnik na navedenem letališču tranzitni ali transferni potnik.
The final destination is Cardiff (under 300 km from Dublin airport), so the flight is subject to the EUR 2 rate of ATT.
To je veljalo pred spremembo stopenj leta 2011 in po njej;
The departure from the stopover in Cork is exempt from ATT, as the passenger is a transit or transfer passenger at Cork airport;
Letališče odhoda ni na Irskem.
As (e), except that the single rate of EUR 3 applies during this period;
Navedeni primeri ne vključujejo potovanj, ki se začnejo in končajo zunaj Irske, vendar vključujejo postanek na Irskem, na primer potovanje iz Londona v New York s postankom na letališču v Dublinu.
The destination is Cardiff (under 300 km from Dublin airport), so the flight is subject to the EUR 2 rate of ATT;
Glede na vsa pojasnila Irske pa ni dvoma, da za takšno potovanje ne bi bilo treba plačati nobene takse na letalska potovanja.
As (g), except that the single rate of EUR 3 applies during this period;
Za odhod iz Londona se taksa na letalska potovanja ne bi zaračunala, ker letališča v Londonu niso letališča v skladu z opredelitvijo iz razdelka 55(1) Zakona o financah, saj so zunaj Irske, za odhod iz Dublina pa se taksa ne bi zaračunala, če potnik izpolnjuje pogoje transfernega ali tranzitnega potnika.
ATT is not payable on this journey.
Glede na informacije, ki jih je predložila Irska, je bila taksa na letalska potovanja uvedena kot odziv na finančne izzive zaradi svetovne finančne in gospodarske krize, da bi se povečali prihodki.
The departure airport (New York) is not in Ireland and the departure from the stopover in Shannon is exempt, as the passenger is a transit or transfer passenger at that airport.
Irska ni navedla drugih ciljev, na primer varstvo okolja.
This position applied before and after the amendment of the rates in 2011;
Sklep iz leta 2011
The departure airport is not in Ireland.
Kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 6, je bil sklep iz leta 2011 sprejet ob koncu predhodne preiskave, ki se je začela 21. julija 2009.
Those examples do not include the situation of a journey that starts and ends outside Ireland but involves a stopover in Ireland, for instance London-New York with a stopover at Dublin Airport.
Da bi Komisija ocenila, ali je bila neuporaba takse na letalska potovanja za tranzitne in transferne potnike selektivna, je najprej opredelila zadevni referenčni davčni sistem.
However, from all the explanations provided by Ireland, there is no doubt that no ATT would be due for such a journey.
Menila je, da sta bila cilj in struktura sistema takse na letalska potovanja usmerjena v obdavčitev potnikov, ki odhajajo z irskega letališča, da bi se povečali prihodki v državni proračun.
Indeed, the departure from London would not be subject to ATT, as London airports are not airports as defined in the Section 55(1) of the Finance Act given that they are outside Ireland, and the departure from Dublin would not taxed to the extent that the passenger qualifies as a transfer or transit passenger.
Komisija je na podlagi informacij, ki jih je predložila Irska, ugotovila, da je bila prva etapa potovanja, ki je zajemalo več etap, vedno izključena iz plačila takse na letalska potovanja.
According to information provided by Ireland, the ATT was introduced as a response to financial challenges in the wake of the global financial and economic crisis in order to raise revenues.
Irska je navedla tudi primere potovanj iz New Yorka v Dublin in iz Dublina v New York s postankom v Shannonu in brez njega ter stopnje takse na letalska potovanja, ki so se uporabljale.
Ireland mentioned no other objective such as environmental protection.
Zato se je referenčni sistem štel za takso, ki se zaračuna za vsak odhod potnika na letalu z letališča na Irskem.
The 2011 Decision
Komisija je tudi menila, da so transferni in tranzitni potniki potniki, ki odhajajo z irskega letališča, kar pomeni, da so del navedenega referenčnega sistema.
As indicated in recital 6, the 2011 Decision was adopted at the end of a preliminary investigation stage that had commenced on 21 July 2009.
Zato je izključitev transfernih in tranzitnih potnikov odstopala od običajne uporabe navedenega splošnega davčnega okvira.
In order to assess whether the non-application of the ATT to transit and transfer passengers was selective, the Commission first identified the relevant tax system of reference.
Komisija je nato proučila, ali je bilo izvzetje transfernih in tranzitnih potnikov iz plačila takse na letalska potovanja utemeljeno z naravo ali splošnimi načeli davčnega sistema v državi članici.
The Commission considered that the objective and structure of the ATT system was to tax passengers departing from an airport located in Ireland in order to raise revenue for the State budget.
Ugotovila je, da je bil namen te takse nepristranskost glede izbrane proge do končne destinacije, ne glede na to, ali vključuje vmesni postanek ali ne, in preprečevanje dvojne obdavčitve.
The Commission had understood from the information provided by Ireland that the first leg of a journey comprising several legs was always exempted from the ATT.
Na podlagi sklepa iz leta 2011 bi moral letalski prevoznik, če bi se taksa na letalska potovanja uporabljala za tranzitne in transferne potnike, za potovanje s postankom navedeno takso morda plačati dvakrat.
Ireland also provided the examples of journeys from New York to Dublin and from Dublin to New York with and without a stopover in Shannon and applicable ATT rates.
Zato je sklenila, da je bilo izvzetje iz plačila takse na letalska potovanja za tranzitne in transferne potnike, na podlagi katerega je bila obdavčitev potnikov enotna, ne glede na progo potovanja, v skladu z naravo in logiko zadevnega davčnega sistema.
Thus, the reference system was understood as a tax that is charged in respect of every departure of a passenger on an aircraft from an airport in Ireland.
Komisija je na podlagi navedenih elementov sklenila, da je bilo izvzetje transfernih in tranzitnih potnikov iz plačila takse na letalska potovanja v skladu z naravo in logiko opredeljenega davčnega sistema.
The Commission also considered that transfer and transit passengers were passengers departing from an Irish airport and thus would appear to be part of that reference system.
Sodba Splošnega sodišča v zadevi T-512/11
Hence the exclusion of transfer and transit passengers departed from the normal application of that general tax framework.
Kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 10, je Splošno sodišče s sodbo v zadevi T-512/11 sklep iz leta 2011 v delu, v katerem je ugotovljeno, da neuporaba takse na letalska potovanja za transferne in tranzitne potnike ne pomeni državne pomoči v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU, razglasilo za ničen.
The Commission then examined whether the exclusion of transfer and transit passengers from the ATT was justified by the nature or the general principles of the tax system in the Member State.
Splošno sodišče je ugotovilo, da je predhodna preiskava, ki je trajala približno dve leti, znatno presegla obdobje, ki je običajno potrebno za izvedbo predhodne preiskave v skladu s členom 108(3) PDEU.
It found that the purpose of the ATT was to be neutral with regard to the route selected for reaching the final destination, whether there was a stopover or not, and to avoid double taxation.
Menilo je tudi, da je bila ocena Komisije nepopolna in nezadostna.
According to the 2011 Decision, if the ATT had been applied to transit and transfer passengers, the airline might have had to pay that tax twice for a journey with a stopover.
Splošno sodišče je zlasti ugotovilo neskladnosti med vsebino dopisa Irske z dne 15. oktobra 2009 iz uvodne izjave 4 in sklepom iz leta 2011.
Therefore, it was concluded that the ATT exemption for transit and transfer passengers, which resulted in passengers being taxed in the same way independently of the route travelled, fell within the nature and logic of the relevant tax system.
V zvezi s tem je Splošno sodišče menilo, da je Komisija potrdila stališče Irske, da je prva etapa tisti del potovanja, ki je izvzet iz plačila takse na letalska potovanja, čeprav tega sklepa ni bilo mogoče podpreti s primeri, predstavljenimi v preglednici iz uvodne izjave 9 sklepa iz leta 2011.
The Commission inferred from those elements that the exclusion of transfer and transit passengers from the ATT was in the nature and logic of the identified tax system.
Čeprav to mogoče velja v primeru potnikov, ki potujejo iz Dublina v New York s postankom v Shannonu in jim je zaračunana taksa na letalska potovanja, pa po mnenju Splošnega sodišča ni bilo jasno in Komisija ni obrazložila, zakaj potnikom, ki so potovali v obratni smeri, torej iz New Yorka v Dublin z enakim postankom, ni bila zaračunana taksa na letalska potovanja za odhod z letališča postanka v Shannonu.
Judgment of the General Court in Case T-512/11
Poleg tega je Splošno sodišče s sklicevanjem na dejstvo, da so razlogi nepristranskosti po navedbah irskih organov spodbudili tudi izvzetja enakih kategorij potnikov, odobrena v okviru drugih sistemov obdavčitve letalskih potovanj v drugih državah članicah, pri čemer so se irski organi izrecno sklicevali na Združeno kraljestvo, ugotovilo, da se dajatev za letalske potnike, ki se uporablja v Združenem kraljestvu, v obravnavanem primeru ne bi mogla uporabiti kot ustrezen referenčni model, ker določa, da se vedno obdavči prva etapa potovanja, kar ni bilo v skladu s stališčem, ki so ga irski organi podprli v svojem dopisu z dne 15. oktobra 2009 in ki ga je Komisija potrdila v sklepu iz leta 2011.
As indicated in recital 10, by its the judgment in Case T-512/11 the General Court annulled the 2011 Decision in so far as the 2011 Decision found that the non-application of the ATT to transfer and transit passengers did not constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU.
Splošno sodišče je tudi poudarilo, da se dopis z dne 15. oktobra 2009 ni izrecno skliceval na potrebo po preprečitvi dvojne obdavčitve.
The General Court found that a preliminary investigation of around two years considerably exceeded the period normally required for a preliminary investigation carried out pursuant to Article 108(3) TFEU.
Poleg tega je upoštevalo, da je bila Irska pripravljena razmisliti o prilagoditvi zakonodaje v zvezi s transfernimi in tranzitnimi potniki, pri čemer bi iz opredelitve transfernega potnika odstranila zahtevo glede ene rezervacije, ter da Komisija ni zavzela stališča glede te izjave.
It also considered that the Commission's examination was incomplete and insufficient.
Na podlagi teh neskladij je bilo mogoče skleniti, da Komisija pri sprejetju sklepa iz leta 2011 ni imela na voljo informacij, na podlagi katerih bi lahko opravila ustrezno analizo selektivnosti ukrepa in oblikovala sklep, da pravila o uporabi izvzetja ne vzbujajo pomislekov.
In particular, the General Court found that there were inconsistencies between the content of the letter from Ireland dated 15 October 2009, referred to in recital 4, and the 2011 Decision.
Splošno sodišče je sklenilo, da bi morala Komisija ob odsotnosti kakršne koli analize morebitne združljivosti spornega ukrepa z notranjim trgom začeti formalni postopek preiskave, da bi zbrala vse ustrezne informacije za preveritev, ali je sporni ukrep selektiven, in da bi lahko sklenila, da zadevni ukrep ne pomeni državne pomoči, ter da bi vložniku in drugim zadevnim stranem omogočila predložitev pripomb o zadevnem postopku.
In that respect, the General Court considered that the Commission endorsed Ireland's view that the part of the journey exempted from payment of the ATT was the first leg, even though the examples reproduced in the table set out in recital 9 of the 2011 Decision were not capable of supporting such conclusion.
RAZLOGI ZA ZAČETEK FORMALNEGA POSTOPKA PREISKAVE
According to the General Court, whilst this might be the case as regards the example relating to passengers going from Dublin to New York and making a stopover in Shannon, who were subject to payment of the ATT, by contrast, it was not clear, and the Commission did not explain, why passengers taking the opposite route, that is from New York to Dublin with the same stopover, were not subject to payment of the ATT for the departure from the stopover airport of Shannon.
Komisija je v skladu s sodbo v zadevi T-512/11 začela formalni postopek preiskave, da bi zbrala informacije za preveritev, ali je neuporaba takse na letalska potovanja za transferne in tranzitne potnike selektivna, ter da bi vložniku in drugim zadevnim stranem omogočila predložitev pripomb o zadevnem postopku.
In addition, by referring to the fact that, according to the Irish authorities, reasons of neutrality also prompt the exemptions for the same categories of passengers granted by other systems of air travel taxation existing in other Member States, whereas explicit reference was made to the United Kingdom, the General Court found that the Air Passenger Duty in force in the United Kingdom could not constitute a relevant reference model in the present case because it provides that it is always the first leg of the journey that is subject to payment of the tax, which did not correspond to the view supported by the Irish authorities in their letter dated 15 October 2009 and confirmed by the Commission in the 2011 Decision.
V sklepu o začetku postopka je navedla, da je neuporaba takse na letalska potovanja za odhode transfernih in tranzitnih potnikov povzročila izgubo davčnega prihodka v državi ter se je torej financirala z državnimi sredstvi in očitno zagotavljala prednost letalskim prevoznikom, ki so bili do nje upravičeni.
The General Court also stressed that the letter dated 15 October 2009 did not refer explicitly to the need to avoid double taxation.
Poleg tega Komisija v fazi začetka formalnega postopka preiskave ni mogla izključiti, da je neuporaba takse na letalska potovanja za transferne in tranzitne potnike selektivna.
Additionally, the General Court noted that Ireland had offered to consider adjusting the law on transfer and transit passengers, by removing the requirement for a single booking as part of the definition of a transfer passenger and that the Commission did not take a position on that statement.
Ker bi lahko bila a priori izpolnjena vsa merila iz člena 107(1) PDEU, je Komisija predhodno sklenila, da bi ukrep lahko pomenil državno pomoč letalskim prevoznikom, ki so izvajali lete na progah, upravičenih do izvzetja iz plačila takse na letalska potovanja za transferne in tranzitne potnike.
Those inconsistencies gave grounds for concluding that, when the Commission adopted the 2011 Decision, it did not have the information with which to carry out a sufficiently complete analysis of the selectivity of the measure and to conclude that the rules for the application of the exemption did not raise doubts.
Komisija je zato pozvala Irsko, naj znova navede svoje razloge za uvedbo takse na letalska potovanja in pojasni, zakaj se ta taksa ni uporabljala za transferne in tranzitne potnike.
The General Court concluded that, in the absence of any analysis of the possible compatibility of the disputed measure with the internal market, the Commission should have initiated the formal investigation procedure, in order to gather any relevant information for verifying that the disputed measure was not selective and to possibly conclude that that measure did not constitute State aid, and to allow the applicant and the other parties concerned to present their observations in connection with that procedure.
Komisija je Irsko tudi pozvala, naj podrobno navede, kako bi bilo treba razlagati razdelek 55 Zakona o financah.
GROUNDS FOR INITIATING THE FORMAL PROCEDURE
Zahtevala je, naj Irska navede jasne primere uporabe takse na letalska potovanja za vse zadevne kategorije prog, naj pojasni, ali je iz plačila te takse izrecno izvzeta druga etapa potovanja ali pa so splošneje izvzeti vsi transferni in tranzitni potniki, ter naj predloži vse ostale informacije, ki so po njenem mnenju uporabne v zvezi s tem.
Following the judgment in Case T-512/11, the Commission initiated the formal investigation procedure in order to gather information to verify that the non-application of the ATT to transfer and transit passengers was not selective and to allow the applicant and the other parties concerned to present their observations in connection with that procedure.
Poleg tega je Komisija Irsko pozvala, naj navede primere za obdobji pred spremembo stopenj takse na letalska potovanja, ki je bila uvedena leta 2011, in po njej.
In the Opening Decision, the Commission noted that the non-application of the ATT to departures of transfer and transit passengers resulted in a loss of tax revenue for the State and was therefore financed from State resources and appeared to confer an advantage on the airlines benefitting from it.
Komisija je na podlagi predhodne predpostavke, da je referenčni sistem taksa, ki se zaračuna za vsak odhod potnika na letalu z irskega letališča, izrazila pomisleke v zvezi s tem, ali se je z neuporabo takse na letalska potovanja za transferne in tranzitne potnike odstopalo od referenčnega sistema obdavčitve, s tem ko se je razlikovalo med gospodarskimi subjekti, ki so bili z vidika cilja, določenega za davčni sistem zadevne države članice, v primerljivem dejanskem in pravnem položaju, in je bila tako nekaterim letalskim prevoznikom dodeljena prednost.
Furthermore, the Commission could not at the stage of initiating the formal investigation exclude that the non-application of the ATT to transfer and transit passengers was selective.
Vendar je Komisija ugotovila tudi, da je mogoče na podlagi poimenovanja in dejanskega besedila opredelitve takse na letalska potovanja sklepati, da je njeno vodilno načelo obdavčiti letalska potovanja z irskega letališča in ne vsak odhod z irskega letališča.
The Commission thus preliminarily concluded that since all the criteria in Article 107(1) TFEU a priori could be fulfilled, the measure might constitute State aid to airline operators that have operated the routes benefitting from the exemption from the ATT for transfer and transit passengers.
Navedla je, da naj bi neuporaba takse na letalska potovanja za transferne in tranzitne potnike glede na to predpostavko izhajala neposredno iz navedenega načela, saj lahko letalsko potovanje vključuje več kot en odhod z irskega letališča.
The Commission therefore invited Ireland to set out again its reasons for the adoption of the ATT and to explain why the ATT did not apply to transfer and transit passengers.
PRIPOMBE IRSKE K SKLEPU O ZAČETKU POSTOPKA
The Commission also invited Ireland to set out in detail how Section 55 of the Finance Act should be interpreted.
Irska je v svojih pripombah z dne 22. decembra 2015 k sklepu o začetku postopka zavrnila vsakršno navedbo, da izvzetje transfernih in tranzitnih potnikov pomeni državno pomoč.
The Commission requested that Ireland provide clear examples of how the ATT applies to all relevant categories of routes, clarify whether ATT specifically exempts the second leg of a journey or, more generally, exempts all transfer and transit passengers, and to provide all other information which Ireland considered useful in that respect.
Razlaga in uporaba razdelka 55 Zakona o financah
The Commission also invited Ireland to provide those examples in relation to the periods before and after the amendment modifying the ATT rates, introduced in 2011.
Irska je navedla, da je obveznost plačila takse na letalska potovanja določena v Zakonu o financah, ki ga je treba razlagati ozko.
Under the preliminary assumption that the reference system is a tax which is charged in respect of every departure of a passenger on an aircraft from an airport in Ireland, the Commission expressed doubts as to whether the non-application of the ATT to transfer and transit passengers derogated from the reference system of taxation by differentiating between economic operators which, in light of the objective assigned to the tax system of the Member State concerned, were in comparable factual and legal situations, and consequently conferred an advantage on certain airlines.
Ob upoštevanju sodne prakse irskega vrhovnega sodišča je poudarila, da mora davkoplačevalec v skladu z irsko zakonodajo plačati takso ali se soočiti z negativnimi učinki le, če to izrecno določa zakonodaja, pri čemer je citirala sodbo v zadevi Texaco (Ireland) Ltd proti S. Murphyju (Inspector of Taxes): „V skladu z ustaljenim pravnim pravilom se državljanu ne naloži plačilo davkov, če taka obveznost ni jasno navedena v besedilu zakonske določbe“.
The Commission also found, however, that the name, and indeed the wording, of the ATT may suggest that its guiding principle is to tax air journeys from an airport in Ireland, rather than each departure from an airport in Ireland.
Na podlagi tega je Irska navedla, da je bilo treba za določitev, ali se za potovanje uporabi taksa na letalska potovanja, upoštevati besedilo Zakona o financah.
According to the Commission, under that assumption, the non-application of the ATT to transfer and transit passengers seems to directly follow from that principle, since an air journey may involve more than one departure from an airport in Ireland.
Vsi dvomi glede uporabe Zakona o financah bi koristili davkoplačevalcu.
COMMENTS FROM IRELAND ON THE OPENING DECISION
V skladu z razdelkom 55(2)(c) Zakona o financah plačilo takse na letalska potovanja „zapade, ko letalo, na katerem je potnik, vzleti z letališča“.
In its comments dated 22 December 2015 on the Opening Decision, Ireland rejected any suggestion that the exemption of transfer and transit passengers constitutes State aid.
V zvezi s tem je Irska navedla, da:
On the interpretation and application of Section 55 of the Finance Act
opredelitev pojma „potnik“ izključuje (pod nekaterimi pogoji) invalidne osebe, osebe, mlajše od dveh let, ter transferne ali tranzitne potnike,
Ireland stated that the liability to pay the ATT was defined in the Finance Act, which must be interpreted strictly.
opredelitev pojma „letališče“ prav tako izključuje nekatera potovanja, saj se za odhod z letališča zunaj Irske in z nekaterih letališč z majhnim številom potnikov ne zaračuna nobena taksa,
Relying on jurisprudence of the Irish Supreme Court, Ireland stressed that under Irish law, a taxpayer could only be liable to pay a tax or suffer a disadvantage if this is explicit in law and quoted from the judgment Texaco (Ireland) Ltd v Murphy (Inspector of Taxes): ‘It is an established rule of law that a citizen is not to be taxed unless the language of the statute clearly imposes the obligation’.
opredelitev pojma „letalo“ izključuje letala, s katerimi ne more leteti več kot 20 potnikov, in tudi letala, ki jih uporablja država ali vojska.
On that basis, Ireland stated that in order to determine whether a journey was subject to the ATT, it was necessary to look at the wording of the Finance Act.
Ob upoštevanju uvodne izjave 50 je Irska je menila, da za transferne in tranzitne potnike ni bilo treba plačati takse na letalska potovanja, ne glede na etapo zadevnega potovanja.