natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Ukraine WTO commitment
Dajatev Ukrajine pri izvozu v EU
Year (Agreement)
Leto (STO)
EIF+2
Obseg uporabe: nerjavno jeklo v obliki ingotov in drugih primarnih oblikah, uvrščeno pod naslednjo carinsko oznako Ukrajine: 7218 10 00 00.
EIF+3
Dajatev Ukrajine pri izvozu v EU
EIF+10
EIF+1
EIF+11
EIF+1
EIF+12
EIF+1
EIF+13
Obveznosti Ukrajine v okviru STO
EIF+14
Leto (Prostotrgovinski sporazum)
Council Decision (EU) 2018/157
Sklep Sveta (EU) 2018/157
Having regard o the proposal of the Italian Government,
ob upoštevanju predloga italijanske vlade,
On 11 July 2017, by Council Decision (EU) 2017/1334, Mr Augusto ROLLANDIN was replaced by Mr Pierluigi MARQUIS as a member.
Pierluigi MARQUIS je 11. julija 2017 s Sklepom Sveta (EU) 2017/1334 kot član zamenjal Augusta ROLLANDINA.
A member's seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Mr Pierluigi MARQUIS,
Zaradi konca mandata Pierluigija MARQUISA se je sprostilo mesto člana Odbora regij.
25).
Sklep Sveta (EU) 2015/994 z dne 23. junija 2015 o imenovanju članov in nadomestnih članov Odbora regij za obdobje od 26. januarja 2015 do 25. januarja 2020 (UL L 159, 25.6.2015, str.
Council Decision (EU) 2018/158
Sklep Sveta (EU) 2018/158
appointing a member, proposed by the Republic of Finland, of the Committee of the Regions
o imenovanju člana Odbora regij na predlog Republike Finske
A member's seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Mr Antti LIIKKANEN,
Zaradi konca mandata Anttija LIIKKANENA se je sprostilo mesto člana Odbora regij –
Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2018/159
Sklep Sveta (EU, Euratom) 2018/159
appointing two members of the Court of Auditors
o imenovanju dveh članov Računskega sodišča
Having regard to the proposals by Ireland and the Kingdom of Sweden,
ob upoštevanju predlogov Irske in Kraljevine Švedske,
The terms of office of Mr Kevin CARDIFF and Mr Hans Gustaf WESSBERG as members of the Court of Auditors are due to expire on 28 February 2018.
Mandata Kevina CARDIFFA in Hansa Gustafa WESSBERGA kot članov Računskega sodišča se iztečeta 28. februarja 2018.
Two new members should therefore be appointed to the Court of Auditors,
Zato bi bilo treba čim prej imenovati dva nova člana Računskega sodišča –
The following are hereby appointed members of the Court of Auditors for the period from 1 March 2018 to 29 February 2024:
Za člana Računskega sodišča se za obdobje od 1. marca 2018 do 29. februarja 2024 imenujeta:
Mr Tony MURPHY,
Tony MURPHY in
Commission Decision (EU) 2018/160
Sklep Komisije (EU) 2018/160
on the State aid SA.44351 (2016/C) (ex 2016/NN) implemented by Poland for the tax on the retail sector
o državni pomoči SA.44351 (2016/C) (ex 2016/NN), ki jo je Poljska izvedla za davek za maloprodajni sektor
(notified under document C(2017) 4449)
(notificirano pod dokumentarno številko C(2017) 4449)
Having called on interested parties to submit their comments pursuant to the provision(s) cited above,
po pozivu vsem zainteresiranim stranem, naj predložijo svoje pripombe v skladu z navedenima določbama,
By press articles published in February 2016, the Commission became aware that Poland was considering to adopt a law that would introduce a turnover tax on the retail sector featuring a progressive rate structure.
Komisija se je na podlagi člankov v tisku, objavljenih februarja 2016, seznanila s tem, da Poljska razmišlja o sprejetju zakona, s katerim bi za maloprodajni sektor uvedla prometni davek s progresivnimi davčnimi stopnjami.
On 11 February and 30 May 2016, the Commission services sent letters to the Polish authorities by which they requested more information on the planned law and invited Poland to consult with them before the adoption of that law.
Službe Komisije so 11. februarja in 30. maja 2016 poljskim organom poslale dopisa, s katerima so zahtevale več informacij o načrtovanem zakonu in pozvale Poljsko, naj se pred sprejetjem navedenega zakona posvetuje z njimi.
Those letters also emphasised the similarities of that law with the Hungarian food chain inspection fee, on which the Commission had opened a formal State aid investigation, and explained the preliminary State aid assessment of that fee by the Commission in its opening decision.
V navedenih dopisih so tudi poudarile podobnosti navedenega zakona z madžarsko pristojbino za inšpekcijski nadzor v prehranski verigi, v zvezi s katero je Komisija začela formalno preiskavo državne pomoči, in pojasnile, kako je Komisija v svojem sklepu o začetku postopka predhodno ocenila navedeno pristojbino z vidika državne pomoči.
Finally, they informed Poland that if a measure entailing State aid is put into effect without prior Commission approval, the Commission might issue a suspension injunction.
Nazadnje so Poljsko obvestile, da bi lahko Komisija, če bi se ukrep, ki vključuje državno pomoč, začel izvajati brez predhodne odobritve Komisije, izdala odredbo o začasnem odlogu.
The Polish authorities replied to those letters on 2 March and 27 June 2016 respectively.
Poljski organi so na navedena dopisa odgovorili 2. marca oziroma 27. junija 2016.
By letter of 2 March 2016, the Polish authorities committed to communicate to the Commission the draft law once finalised.
Z dopisom z dne 2. marca 2016 so se zavezali, da bodo Komisiji poslali osnutek zakona, ko bo dokončno pripravljen.
By letter of 27 June 2016, the Polish authorities informed the Commission that the draft law had already been submitted to the Polish Parliament and that its adoption was imminent.
Z dopisom z dne 27. junija 2016 so Komisijo obvestili, da je bil osnutek zakona že predložen poljskemu parlamentu in da bo zakon kmalu sprejet.
They also provided the Commission services with the text of the draft law.
Službam Komisije so tudi predložili besedilo osnutka zakona.
On 6 July 2016, the Polish Parliament adopted the Act on retail sales tax (USTAWA z dnia 6 lipca 2016 r. o podatku od sprzedaży detalicznej, hereinafter: ‘the Act’).
Poljski parlament je 6. julija 2016 sprejel zakon o davku na maloprodajo (USTAWA z dnia 6 lipca 2016 r. o podatku od sprzedaży detalicznej, v nadaljnjem besedilu: zakon).
The Act entered into force on 1 September 2016.
Veljati je začel 1. septembra 2016.
By letter of 8 July 2016, the Commission informed Poland of its preliminary view that the retail tax under the Act (hereinafter: the ‘retail tax’) constituted State aid and requested the Polish authorities to express their views on the possibility of the Commission issuing a suspension injunction.
Komisija je z dopisom z dne 8. julija 2016 Poljsko obvestila o svojem predhodnem stališču, da maloprodajni davek na podlagi zakona (v nadaljnjem besedilu: maloprodajni davek) pomeni državno pomoč, in poljske organe pozvala, naj izrazijo svoje stališče glede možnosti, da Komisija izda odredbo o začasnem odlogu.
A reply was received on 22 July 2016.
Odgovor je prejela 22. julija 2016.
On 4 August 2016, the Commission received a State aid complaint against the same measure.
Komisija je 4. avgusta 2016 prejela pritožbo v zvezi z državno pomočjo zoper isti ukrep.
By letter of 19 September 2016, the Commission informed Poland that it had decided to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 108(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (hereinafter: ‘the Treaty’) in respect of the aid measure (the ‘Opening Decision’).
Komisija je z dopisom z dne 19. septembra 2016 Poljsko obvestila o svoji odločitvi, da v zvezi z ukrepom pomoči začne postopek iz člena 108(2) Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Pogodba) (v nadaljnjem besedilu: sklep o začetku postopka).
The Commission also required the immediate suspension of the measure in accordance with Article 13(1) of Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589.
V skladu s členom 13(1) Uredbe Sveta (EU) 2015/1589 je zahtevala tudi takojšen začasni odlog izvajanja ukrepa.
The Opening Decision was published in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Sklep o začetku postopka je bil objavljen v Uradnem listu Evropske unije.
Poland submitted its observations to the Opening Decision by letter of 7 November 2016.
Poljska je z dopisom z dne 7. novembra 2016 predložila svoje pripombe k sklepu o začetku postopka.
The Commission did not receive comments from interested parties.
Komisija ni prejela pripomb zainteresiranih strani.
On 15 November 2016, the Polish Parliament adopted a law, which entered into force on 22 December 2016, which suspends the application of the retail sales tax until 1 January 2018.
Videokonferenčni sestanek je potekal 14. marca 2017.
By letter of 11 January 2017 the Commission informed Poland that no comments from interested parties had been received and invited the Polish authorities to discuss with the Commission services their own comments as well as any amendments to the Act possibly envisaged.
PODROBEN OPIS UKREPA POMOČI
A video-conference meeting was held on 14 March 2017.
Zakon določa davek za maloprodajni sektor na Poljskem.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE AID MEASURE
Na podlagi člena 5 zakona se davek plača od prometa, ustvarjenega s prodajo blaga fizičnim osebam, ki ne opravljajo gospodarske dejavnosti (potrošniki).
The Act lays down a tax on the retail sector in Poland.
V skladu s členom 4 zakona je davčni zavezanec trgovec na drobno, ki je fizična oseba, civilnopravna družba (spółka cywilna), organizacijska enota brez pravne osebnosti in pravna oseba, kot so osebne družbe (spółki osobowe) in druge družbe, urejene z zakonom o gospodarskih družbah (kodeks spółek handlowych) (družbe z omejeno odgovornostjo (d. o. o.) in delniške družbe (d. d.).
Article 5 of the Act subjects to tax turnover received from the sale of goods to natural persons not carrying out any economic activity (consumers).
V skladu s členom 8 zakona obveznost plačila prometnega davka nastane, ko davčni zavezanec ustvari mesečni promet, večji od 17 milijonov PLN.
In accordance with Article 4 of the Act, the taxable person is the retailer being a natural person, company of civil law (spółka cywilna), organisational unit without legal personality and moral person, such as personal companies (spółki osobowe) and other companies regulated under kodeks spolek handlowych (companies with limited responsibility (z.o.o.) and joint-stock companies (S.A.).
V skladu s členom 6(1) zakona je davčna osnova znesek prometa, ustvarjenega z maloprodajo v enem mesecu, ki presega 17 milijonov PLN.
In accordance with Article 8 of the Act, the obligation to pay the turnover tax arises when the taxable person achieves a monthly turnover in excess of PLN 17 million.
Maloprodajni davek se plačuje mesečno do 25. dneva v mesecu, ki sledi mesecu, v katerem je bil ustvarjen obdavčljivi prihodek.
According to Article 6(1) of the Act, the taxable base is the amount of turnover exceeding PLN 17 million from retail sales conducted during one month.
V členu 9 zakona sta določeni dve davčni stopnji:
The retail tax is payable on a monthly basis by the twenty-fifth day of the month following the month in which the taxed revenue was generated.
davek se obračuna po 0,8-odstotni stopnji za del mesečnega prometa podjetja od maloprodaje, ki presega 17 milijonov PLN (≈ 4 milijone EUR), vendar ne presega 170 milijonov EUR (≈ 40 milijonov EUR), in
Article 9 of the Act lays down two tax rates:
davek se obračuna po 1,4-odstotni stopnji za del mesečnega prometa podjetja od maloprodaje, ki presega 170 milijonov PLN.
the tax is levied at a rate of 0,8 % on the part of the undertaking's monthly turnover from retail sales over PLN 17 million (≈ EUR 4 million) but not exceeding PLN 170 million (≈ EUR 40 million) and;
Glede na člen 6(1) in člen 8 zakona, s katerima je izključen del mesečnega prometa podjetja od maloprodaje, ki ne presega 17 milijonov PLN, je torej za shemo maloprodajnega davka mogoče reči, da temelji na strukturi progresivnih stopenj, ki vključuje tri različne razrede mesečnega prometa, za katere veljajo tri različne davčne stopnje: 0-odstotna davčna stopnja za znesek mesečnega prometa od maloprodaje, ki ne presega 17 milijonov PLN, 0,8-odstotna davčna stopnja za znesek mesečnega prometa, ki presega 17 milijonov PLN, vendar ne presega 170 milijonov PLN, in 1,4-odstotna davčna stopnja za znesek mesečnega prometa od maloprodaje, ki presega 170 milijonov PLN.
the tax is levied at a rate of 1,4 % on the part of the undertaking's monthly turnover from retail sales above PLN 170 million.
FORMALNI POSTOPEK PREISKAVE
In light of Articles 6(1) and 8 of the Act, which exclude the part of the undertaking's monthly turnover from retails sales not exceeding PLN 17 million, the retail tax scheme can therefore be said to be based on a progressive rate structure comprising three different monthly turnover brackets subject to three different tax rates: a tax rate of 0 % on the amount of monthly turnover from retail sales not exceeding PLN 17 million; a tax rate of 0,8 % on the amount of monthly turnover over PLN 17 million but not exceeding PLN 170 million; and a tax rate of 1,4 % on the amount of monthly turnover from retail sales above PLN 170 million.
Razlogi za začetek formalnega postopka preiskave
FORMAL INVESTIGATION PROCEDURE
Komisija je začela formalni postopek preiskave, ker je na takratni stopnji menila, da struktura progresivnih stopenj poljskega davka za maloprodajni sektor pomeni nezakonito in nezdružljivo državno pomoč.
Grounds for initiating the formal investigation procedure
Zlasti je menila, da zakon razlikuje med podjetji, ki se ukvarjajo s trgovino na drobno, glede na njihov promet in s tem glede na njihovo velikost ter daje selektivno prednost podjetjem z majhnim prometom in s tem manjšim podjetjem.
The Commission opened the formal investigation procedure because it considered at that stage that the progressive rate structure of the Polish tax on the retail sector constituted unlawful and incompatible State aid.
Poljska ni predložila preprečljivega pojasnila, zakaj so pri obračunavanju davka na maloprodajo večji in manjši trgovci na drobno v različnem dejanskem in pravnem položaju.
In particular, the Commission considered that the Act differentiates between undertakings engaged in the retail trade based on their turnover and therefore on their size and grants a selective advantage to undertakings with low turnover and thus smaller undertakings.
Poljska torej ni dokazala, da je ukrep utemeljen z naravo ali splošno shemo davčnega sistema.
Poland had advanced no convincing explanation why larger and smaller retail operators are in a different factual and legal situation when it comes to levying the tax on retail sales.
Zato je Komisija začasno menila, da je zakon privedel do državne pomoči, ker so bili vsi drugi pogoji iz člena 107(1) Pogodbe očitno izpolnjeni.
Poland had therefore not demonstrated that the measure was justified by the nature or general scheme of the tax system.
Nazadnje je Komisija izrazila pomisleke glede združljivosti zakona z notranjim trgom.
Therefore, the Commission provisionally considered that the Act gave rise to State aid, since all the other conditions laid down by Article 107(1) of the Treaty appeared to have been met.
Navedla je, da se ne zdi, da bi se uporabljala katera od izjem iz člena 107(2) ali (3) Pogodbe, prav tako ni Poljska predložila nobenega argumenta, zakaj bi bil maloprodajni davek združljiv z notranjim trgom.
Finally, the Commission raised doubts as to the compatibility of the Act with the internal market.
Nadalje je opozorila, da ukrepa državne pomoči, ki vključuje neločljivo povezano kršitev drugih pravil prava Unije, kot so temeljne svoboščine, določene s Pogodbo, ali določbe uredb in direktiv Unije, ne more razglasiti za združljivega.
The Commission observed that none of the exceptions laid down in Article 107(2) or (3) of the Treaty seemed to apply, nor did Poland advance any argument why the retail tax would be compatible with the internal market.
Komisija na takratni stopnji ni mogla izključiti, da je bil ukrep namenjen predvsem podjetjem v tuji lasti, kar bi lahko pomenilo kršitev člena 49 Pogodbe, ki določa temeljno pravico do ustanavljanja.
It further recalled that it cannot declare compatible a State aid measure which entails an indissoluble breach of other rules of Union law, such as the fundamental freedoms established by the Treaty or the provisions of Union regulations and directives.
Pripombe Poljske
At that stage, the Commission could not exclude that the measure predominantly targeted foreign-owned undertakings, which could entail a breach of Article 49 of the Treaty establishing the fundamental freedom of establishment.
Poljski organi menijo, da opis maloprodajnega davka v sklepu o začetku postopka, v skladu s katerim naj bi vključeval tri različne razrede in stopnje, ni pravilen.
Comments from Poland
Po njihovem mnenju ima maloprodajni davek samo dve stopnji, saj prihodki, ki ne presegajo 17 milijonov PLN, sploh niso predmet davka, ne glede na vrsto podjetja, ki ustvarja prihodke, in skupni znesek prihodkov, ustvarjenih v zadevnem mesecu.
The Polish authorities consider that the description of the retail tax in the opening decision as involving three different brackets and rates is incorrect.
Poleg tega se po njihovem mnenju oprostitev davka razlikuje od ničelne davčne stopnje, pragovi pa se uporabljajo za vse davčne zavezance „enako in objektivno“.
In the view of the Polish authorities, the retail tax has only two rates, given that revenues not exceeding PLN 17 million are not subject to the tax at all, regardless of the type of enterprise generating the revenue and of the total amount of revenues generated in the month concerned.
Kar zadeva namen davka, poljski organi poudarjajo, da bi bili prihodki, ustvarjeni z maloprodajnim davkom, namenjeni financiranju programa otroških dodatkov Družina 500+.
In their opinion, a tax exemption is different from a zero tax rate and the thresholds apply to all taxable persons ‘on equal and objective terms’.
Vendar bi glede na ocenjeni proračun tega programa (tj. približno 16 milijard PLN leta 2016 in približno 22 milijard PLN v naslednjih letih) maloprodajni davek le delno prispeval k njegovemu financiranju (tj. pričakovani prihodki za polno leto naj bi leta 2017 znašali približno 1,6 milijarde PLN).
Regarding the purpose of the tax, the Polish authorities stress that the revenues to be generated by the retail tax would be assigned to financing the 500+ child benefit programme.
Poljska tudi trdi, da bi imel program otroških dodatkov Družina 500+ poleg tega, da pomeni odhodke, tudi pozitiven učinek na gospodarstvo, saj bi povečal potrošnjo in s tem neposredno vplival na prihodke trgovcev na drobno.
However, given the estimated budget of this programme (i.e. approx.
Kar zadeva financiranje ukrepa z državnimi sredstvi, Poljska trdi, da zasnova davka ne pomeni odpovedi prihodkom, ki bi se v običajnih okoliščinah pobrali od trgovcev na drobno.
PLN 16 billion in 2016 and approx.
Poljski organi zlasti trdijo, da davka oproščeni znesek in znižana 0,8-odstotna davčna stopnja veljata za vsa podjetja ter da se poljska država odpoveduje sredstvom, ki bi jih sicer pridobila od vseh podjetij in ne samo manjših.
PLN 22 billion in subsequent years), its financing would be achieved only in part through the retail tax (i.e. expected proceeds on a full year basis of approx.
Poljska tudi meni, da je treba razlikovati med „splošno progresivnostjo“, pri kateri se različne stopnje uporabljajo za celotni promet podjetij glede na višino takega prometa, in „progresivnostjo po razredih“, pri kateri se različne stopnje uporabljajo za različne dele (razrede) prometa vseh podjetij.
PLN 1,6 billion in 2017).
Po njenem mnenju progresivnost po razredih ne pomeni selektivne prednosti, ker se za vsa maloprodajna podjetja uporablja isti sistem stopenj.
Poland also argues that, besides representing an expenditure, the 500+ child benefit programme would also have a positive effect on the economy, by increasing consumption and, thus, having a direct impact on retailers' revenues.
Poljska zlasti trdi, da progresivna narava davka ne pomeni prednosti za manjša podjetja, saj se z davka oproščenim zneskom in znižano 0,8-odstotno davčno stopnjo znižujejo operativni stroški za podjetja z večjimi in manjšimi prihodki.
As far as the measure's financing through State resources is concerned, Poland argues that the design of the tax does not imply foregoing revenues which in normal circumstances would have been collected from the retailers.
Poljska namreč meni, da večji prihodki podjetja pomenijo tudi več pomoči zanj.
In particular, the Polish authorities assert that the tax-free amount and the reduced tax rate of 0,8 % apply to all companies and that the Polish State is foregoing resources which it could otherwise obtain from all enterprises and not just smaller ones.
Poljska poleg tega trdi, da Komisija ni pravilno opredelila upravičencev do prednosti, saj ne drži vedno, da so podjetja z manjšimi prihodki manjša podjetja, podjetja, ki ustvarjajo večje prihodke, pa večja.
Poland also considers that a difference must be made between ‘global progressivity’, where different rates are applied to the whole turnover of undertakings depending of the size of such turnover, and ‘bracketed progressivity’ where different rates are applied to different parts (brackets) of the turnover of all undertakings.
Po njenem mnenju namreč prihodki podjetij niso neposredno ali vsaj niso izključno povezani z njihovo velikostjo.
Bracketed progressivity would not entail, in Poland's view, any selective advantage because the same rate schedule applies to all retail undertakings.
Kar zadeva selektivnost ukrepa, Poljska izpodbija referenčni sistem, ki ga je opredelila Komisija, in trdi, da bi bilo treba za referenčni sistem šteti samo obdavčitev prihodkov v maloprodajnem sektorju, ki presegajo 17 milijonov PLN na mesec.
In particular, Poland argues that the progressive nature of the tax does not entail an advantage for smaller enterprises, given that the tax free amount and the reduced tax rate of 0,8 % reduce operational costs for both higher and lower revenue enterprises.
Nato trdi, da je razlog za to dejstvo, da prihodki, ki ne presegajo 17 milijonov PLN, niso obdavčeni z maloprodajnim davkom.
For Poland, the higher revenues an undertaking generates, the more aid that undertaking receives.
Nadalje trdi, da zasnova sistema ni niti samovoljna niti pristranska ter da oprostitev davka velja za vse davčne zavezance.
In addition, Poland claims that the Commission incorrectly identified the beneficiaries of the advantage, because it would not always be true that enterprises with lower revenues are smaller enterprises and enterprises generating higher revenues are larger enterprises.
V zvezi z uvodno izjavo 26 sklepa o začetku postopka zatrjuje tudi, da ni bilo mogoče ugotoviti, da ukrep pomeni državno pomoč, ne da bi se določila enotna referenčna stopnja, ki se uporablja kot referenčna točka.
In fact, according to Poland, enterprises' revenues are not directly, or at least not exclusively, related to their size.
Drugič, Poljska v odgovor na uvodno izjavo 32 sklepa o začetku postopka trdi, da je povprečna stopnja maloprodajnega davka, kot jo je določila Komisija, umetno konstruirana.
Regarding the selectivity of the measure, Poland contests the reference system identified by the Commission and claims that only taxation on revenues in the retail sector exceeding PLN 17 million a month should be regarded as the system of reference.
Zatrjuje, da struktura maloprodajnega davka temelji na posebnih stopnjah, ki sta predhodno dodeljeni dvema določenima razredoma in se enako uporabljata za vse davčne zavezance.
It then argues that the reason for this is the fact that revenues not exceeding PLN 17 million are not subject to the retail tax.
Poleg tega „progresivnost po razredih“ ni selektivna, ker se znižane stopnje uporabljajo po enakih pogojih za vsa podjetja, ne glede na njihovo velikost.
It further claims that the design of the system is neither arbitrary nor biased and that the tax exemption applies to all taxable persons.
Zato se po mnenju Poljske podjetja ne obravnavajo različno, ampak so v primerljivem dejanskem in pravnem položaju.