natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
This Chapter updates the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s approach to state aid granted in the form of guarantees and aims to give EFTA States more detailed guidance about the principles on which the EFTA Surveillance Authority intends to base its interpretation of Articles 61 and 62 of the EEA Agreement, as well as Protocol 3 of the Surveillance and Court Agreement, and their application to state guarantees.
To poglavje posodablja pristop Nadzornega organa Efte do državne pomoči, dodeljene v obliki poroštev, namenjeno pa je tudi, da državam Efte zagotovi podrobnejše smernice o načelih, po katerih namerava Nadzorni organ Efte razlagati člena 61 in 62 Sporazuma EGP ter Protokol 3 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču ter njihovo uporabo glede državnih poroštev.
These principles are currently laid down in the existing Chapter of the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s State Aid Guidelines on state guarantees [2].
Ta načela so trenutno določena v poglavju Smernic Nadzornega organa o državni pomoči o državnih poroštvih [2].
Experience gained in the application of the existing Chapter since 2000 suggests that the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s policy in this area should be reviewed.
Izkušnje, pridobljene z uporabo veljavnega poglavja od leta 2000 kažejo, da bi bilo treba ponovno proučiti politiko Nadzornega organa Efte na tem področju.
In this connection, the EFTA Surveillance Authority wishes to recall for instance the recent practice of the European Commission in various specific decisions [3] with respect to the need to undertake an individual assessment of the risk of losses related to each guarantee in the case of schemes.
V tej zvezi želi Nadzorni organ Efte opozoriti na primer na nedavno prakso Evropske komisije pri različnih posebnih odločbah [3] glede potrebe po posamičnem ocenjevanju tveganja izgub v zvezi z vsakim poroštvom v primeru shem.
The EFTA Surveillance Authority intends to further make its policy in this area as transparent as possible so that its decisions are predictable and that equal treatment is ensured.
Nadzorni organ Efte želi dodatno poskrbeti za čim večjo preglednost svoje politike na tem področju ter zagotoviti predvidljivost svojih odločitev in enako obravnavo.
In particular, the EFTA Surveillance Authority wishes to provide small and medium-sized enterprises (hereafter ‘SMEs’) and EFTA States with safe harbours predetermining, for a given company and on the basis of its financial rating, the minimum margin that should be charged for a state guarantee in order to be deemed as not constituting aid within the scope of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement.
Nadzorni organ Efte želi zlasti majhnim in srednje velikim podjetjem (v nadaljnjem besedilu: MSP) ter državam Efte zagotoviti „varen pristan“ in glede na finančno bonitetno oceno določenega podjetja vnaprej določiti najnižjo premijo, ki jo je treba zaračunati za državno poroštvo, da slednje ne bo štelo za državno pomoč v okviru obsega uporabe člena 61(1) Sporazuma EGP.
Likewise, any shortfall in the premium charged in comparison with that level could be deemed as the aid element.
Nasprotno pa lahko morebitna razlika med zaračunano in najnižjo premijo pomeni, da poroštvo vsebuje element pomoči.
Types of guarantee
Vrste poroštev
In their most common form, guarantees are associated with a loan or other financial obligation to be contracted by a borrower with a lender; they may be granted as individual guarantees or within guarantee schemes.
Najbolj običajna oblika poroštev je povezana s posojilom ali drugo finančno obveznostjo, ki jo posojilojemalec sklene s posojilodajalcem; dodelijo se lahko kot posamezna poroštva ali v okviru poroštvenih shem.
However, various forms of guarantee may exist, depending on their legal basis, the type of transaction covered, their duration, etc. Without the list being exhaustive, the following forms of guarantee can be identified:
Obstajajo lahko različne oblike poroštev glede na njihovo pravno podlago, vrsto zajete transakcije, trajanje itd. Poroštva so lahko v naslednjih oblikah (seznam ni popoln):
general guarantees, i.e. guarantees provided to undertakings as such as opposed to guarantees linked to a specific transaction, which may be a loan, an equity investment, etc;
splošna poroštva, tj. poroštva, zagotovljena podjetjem kot takim v nasprotju s poroštvi, ki so povezana z določeno transakcijo, ki je lahko posojilo, naložba zasebnega kapitala itd.;
guarantees provided by a specific instrument as opposed to guarantees linked to the status of the undertaking itself;
poroštva, ki jih zagotavlja določen instrument v nasprotju s poroštvi, ki so povezana s statusom samega podjetja;
guarantees provided directly or counter guarantees provided to a first level guarantor;
poroštva, ki se zagotovijo neposredno, ali zavarovanje poroštev, ki se zagotovi poroku prve stopnje;
The same applies to the acquisition by a State of a holding in an enterprise if unlimited liability is accepted instead of the usual limited liability;
Enako velja za državni odkup deleža v podjetju, če se sprejme neomejena odgovornost namesto običajne omejene odgovornosti;
guarantees clearly originating from a contractual source (such as formal contracts, letters of comfort) or another legal source as opposed to guarantees whose form is less visible (such as side letters, oral commitments), possibly with various levels of comfort that can be provided by this guarantee.
poroštva, ki jasno izvirajo iz pogodbenih virov (kot npr. uradne pogodbe, priporočilna pisma) ali iz drugega pravnega vira v nasprotju s poroštvi, ki so težje prepoznavna (kot npr. spremni dopisi, ustni dogovori), pri čemer je obseg zavarovanja, ki ga poroštvo lahko nudi, verjetno različen.
Especially in the latter case, the lack of appropriate legal or accounting records often leads to very poor traceability.
Zlasti v slednjem primeru je pomanjkanje ustreznih pravnih ali računovodskih zapisov pogosto vzrok zelo slabe sledljivosti.
This is true both for the beneficiary and for the State or public body providing it and, as a result, for the information available to third parties.
To velja za prejemnika in državo ali javni organ, ki poroštvo zagotavlja, in posledično tudi za informacije, dostopne tretjim osebam.
Structure and scope of the Chapter
Zgradba in področje uporabe poglavja
‘guarantee scheme’ means any tool on the basis of which, without further implementing measures being required, guarantees can be provided to undertakings respecting certain conditions of duration, amount, underlying transaction, type or size of undertakings (such as SMEs);
„poroštvena shema“ pomeni vsak instrument, na podlagi katerega se lahko, ne da bi bili potrebni nadaljnji izvedbeni ukrepi, zagotovijo poroštva podjetjem, ki izpolnjujejo določene pogoje glede trajanja, zneska, zadevne transakcije, vrste ali velikosti podjetja (kot so MSP);
‘individual guarantee’ means any guarantee provided to an undertaking and not awarded on the basis of a guarantee scheme.
„posamezno poroštvo“ pomeni vsako poroštvo, ki se zagotovi podjetju in se ne dodeli na podlagi poroštvene sheme.
Sections 3 and 4 of this Chapter are designed to be directly applicable to guarantees linked to a specific financial transaction such as a loan.
Oddelka 3 in 4 tega poglavja sta namenjena neposredni uporabi za poroštva, ki so povezana z določeno finančno transakcijo, kot je posojilo.
The EFTA Surveillance Authority considers that, owing to their frequency and the fact that they can usually be quantified, these are the cases where guarantees most need to be classed as constituting state aid or otherwise.
Po mnenju Nadzornega organa Efte je zaradi pogostosti in dejstva, da je poroštva navadno mogoče številčno ovrednotiti, treba predvsem v teh primerih ugotoviti, ali pomenijo državno pomoč ali kaj drugega.
As in most cases the transaction covered by a guarantee would be a loan, the Chapter will further refer to the principal beneficiary of the guarantee as the ‘borrower’ and to the body whose risk is diminished by the state guarantee as the ‘lender’.
Ker je v večini primerov transakcija, ki jo zajema poroštvo, posojilo, se bo poglavje še naprej sklicevalo na glavnega prejemnika poroštva, kot „posojilojemalca“, na organ, katerega tveganje se zmanjšuje z državnim poroštvom pa kot na „posojilodajalca“.
The use of these two specific terms also aims to facilitate understanding of the rationale underpinning the text, since the basic principle of a loan is broadly understood.
Namen uporabe teh dveh izrazov je tudi olajšati razumevanje načela, na katerem temelji to besedilo, saj so osnovni pojmi o posojilu splošno znani.
However, it does not ensue that sections 3 and 4 are only applicable to a loan guarantee.
Vendar to ne pomeni, da se oddelka 3 in 4 uporabljata samo za poroštva za posojila.
They apply to all guarantees where a similar transfer of risk takes place such as an investment in the form of equity, provided the relevant risk profile (including the possible lack of collateralisation) is taken into account.
Uporabljata se namreč za vsa poroštva s podobnim prenosom tveganja, kot npr. naložba v obliki lastniškega kapitala, če se upošteva obseg zadevnega tveganja (morda vključno z manjkajočim zavarovanjem s premoženjem).
The Chapter applies to all economic sectors, including the transport sector, without prejudice to specific rules relating to guarantees in the sector concerned.
Poglavje se uporablja za vse gospodarske sektorje, vključno s prometnim, ne glede na posebna pravila, ki veljajo za poroštva za zadevne sektorje.
This Chapter does not apply to export credit guarantees.
To poglavje se ne uporablja za poroštva za izvozna posojila.
Other types of guarantee
Druge vrste poroštev
Where certain forms of guarantee (see point 1.2) involve a transfer of risk to the guarantor and where they do not display one or more of the specific features referred to in point 1.3, for instance insurance guarantees, a case-by-case analysis will have to be made for which, as far as is necessary, the applicable sections or methodologies described in this Chapter will be applied.
Kadar nekatere vrste poroštev (glej točko 1.2) zajemajo prenos tveganja na poroka ter ne kažejo ene ali več posebnih lastnosti iz točke 1.3, npr. poroštva za zavarovanje, je treba opraviti analizo vsakega primera posebej, pri kateri se po potrebi uporabljajo primerni oddelki ali metode, opisani v tem poglavju.
Neutrality
Nevtralnost
This Chapter applies without prejudice to Article 125 of the EEA Agreement and thus does not prejudice the rules in the EFTA States governing the system of property ownership.
To poglavje se uporablja brez poseganja v člen 125 Sporazuma EGP in torej ne posega v predpise o sistemu lastništva v državah Efte.
The EEA Agreement is neutral as regards public and private ownership.
Sporazum EGP je nevtralen do javnega ali zasebnega lastništva.
In particular, the mere fact that the ownership of an undertaking is largely in public hands is not sufficient in itself to constitute a state guarantee provided there are no explicit or implicit guarantee elements.
Zlasti zgolj dejstvo, da je lastništvo podjetij v veliki meri v javni lasti, samo po sebi ne pomeni državnega poroštva, če elementi poroštva niso eksplicitno ali implicitno izraženi.
APPLICABILITY OF ARTICLE 61(1)
UPORABA ČLENA 61(1)
Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement states that any aid granted by EC Member States, EFTA States or through state resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, in so far as it affects trade between Contracting Parties, be incompatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement.
Člen 61(1) Sporazuma EGP določa, da je vsaka pomoč, ki jo dodelijo države članice ES, države Efte, ali kakršna koli vrsta pomoči iz državnih sredstev, ki izkrivlja ali bi lahko izkrivljala konkurenco z dajanjem prednosti določenim podjetjem ali proizvodnji določenega blaga, če to vpliva na trgovino med pogodbenicami, nezdružljiva z delovanjem Sporazuma EGP.
These general criteria equally apply to guarantees.
Ta splošna merila veljajo tudi za poroštva.
As for other forms of potential aid, guarantees given directly by the State, namely by central, regional or local authorities, as well as guarantees given through state resources by other state-controlled bodies such as undertakings and imputable to public authorities [4], may constitute state aid.In order to avoid any doubts, the notion of state resources should thus be clarified as regards state guarantees.
Enako kot druge oblike morebitne pomoči pomenijo državno pomoč tudi neposredna poroštva države, in sicer državnih, regionalnih ali lokalnih organov, ter poroštva, ki jih odobrijo drugi organi pod nadzorom države, kot so podjetja, in ki se lahko pripišejo javnim organom [4].V izogib vsakršnim dvomom je treba izraz „državna sredstva“ opredeliti v povezavi z državnimi poroštvi.
The benefit of a state guarantee is that the risk associated with the guarantee is carried by the State.
Ugodnosti državnega poroštva izhajajo iz tega, da tveganje, povezano s poroštvom, nosi država.
Such risk-carrying by the State should normally be remunerated by an appropriate premium.
Tovrstni državni prevzem tveganja se navadno plača z ustrezno premijo.
Where the State forgoes all or part of such a premium, there is both a benefit for the undertaking and a drain on the resources of the State.
Kadar se država odpove celotni takšni premiji ali njenemu delu, to pomeni ugodnost za podjetje ter zmanjšanje državnih prihodkov.
Thus, even if it turns out that no payments are ever made by the State under a guarantee, there may nevertheless be state aid under Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement.
Tudi če se izkaže, da država v okviru poroštva ne izvrši nikakršnih plačil, gre lahko vseeno za državno pomoč po členu 61(1) Sporazuma EGP.
The aid is granted at the moment when the guarantee is given, not when the guarantee is invoked nor when payments are made under the terms of the guarantee.
Pomoč je dodeljena v trenutku izdaje poroštva in ne v trenutku njegove uveljavitve oziroma izvršitve plačil pod pogoji poroštva.
Whether or not a guarantee constitutes state aid, and, if so, what the amount of that state aid may be, must be assessed at the moment when the guarantee is given.
Ali to poroštvo pomeni državno pomoč ali ne, in če jo, kolikšen je lahko znesek te pomoči, je treba oceniti v trenutku izdaje poroštva.
In this context the EFTA Surveillance Authority points out that the analysis under state aid rules does not prejudge the compatibility of a given measure with other provisions of the EEA Agreement.
V zvezi s tem Nadzorni organ Efte poudarja, da presoja v skladu s pravili o državni pomoči ne določa vnaprej, ali je posamezni ukrep združljiv z drugimi določbami Sporazuma EGP.
Aid to the borrower
Pomoč posojilojemalcu
Usually, the aid beneficiary is the borrower.
Navadno je do pomoči upravičen posojilojemalec.
As indicated under point 2.1, risk-carrying should normally be remunerated by an appropriate premium.
Prevzem tveganja se navadno poplača z ustrezno premijo, kakor je navedeno v točki 2.1.
When the borrower does not need to pay the premium, or pays a low premium, it obtains an advantage.
Kadar posojilojemalcu ni treba plačati premije ali plača nizko premijo, pomeni to zanj prednost.
Compared to a situation without guarantee, the state guarantee enables the borrower to obtain better financial terms for a loan than those normally available on the financial markets.
Državno poroštvo v primerjavi z razmerami brez poroštva posojilojemalcu omogoči, da posojilo najame pod finančnimi pogoji, ki so ugodnejši od običajnih na finančnih trgih.
Typically, with the benefit of the state guarantee, the borrower can obtain lower rates and/or offer less security.
Zaradi državnega poroštva so posojilojemalcu navadno na voljo nižje obrestne mere in/ali nižji stroški zavarovanja.
In some cases, the borrower would not, without a state guarantee, find a financial institution prepared to lend on any terms.
V nekaterih primerih posojilojemalec brez državnega poroštva ne bi našel finančne ustanove, ki bi mu bila pripravljena dati posojilo pod kakršnimi koli pogoji.
State guarantees may thus facilitate the creation of new business and enable certain undertakings to raise money in order to pursue new activities.
Državna poroštva lahko tako olajšajo ustanavljanje novih podjetij in omogočijo nekaterim podjetjem zbrati sredstva za nove dejavnosti.
Likewise, a state guarantee may help a failing firm remain active instead of being eliminated or restructured, thereby possibly creating distortions of competition.
Državna poroštva lahko prav tako pomagajo propadajočemu podjetju, da ostane dejavno, namesto da bi propadlo ali bi se moralo prestrukturirati, kar bi lahko povzročilo izkrivljanje konkurence.
Aid to the lender
Pomoč posojilodajalcu
Even if usually the aid beneficiary is the borrower, it cannot be ruled out that under certain circumstances the lender, too, will directly benefit from the aid.
Čeprav je navadno do pomoči upravičen posojilojemalec, ni mogoče izključiti možnosti, da pod določenimi pogoji pomoč prinaša neposredne ugodnosti tudi posojilodajalcu.
In particular, for example, if a state guarantee is given ex post in respect of a loan or other financial obligation already entered into without the terms of this loan or financial obligation being adjusted, or if one guaranteed loan is used to pay back another, non-guaranteed loan to the same credit institution, then there may also be aid to the lender, in so far as the security of the loans is increased.
Zlasti če je na primer državno poroštvo za odobreno posojilo ali drugo finančno obveznost dodeljeno naknadno, brez prilagoditve pogojev navedenega posojila oziroma finančnih obveznosti, ali če se posojilo s poroštvom uporabi za poplačilo drugega posojila brez poroštva isti kreditni ustanovi, gre morda tudi za pomoč posojilodajalcu, če se zavarovanje posojil poveča.
Where the guarantee contains aid to the lender, attention should be drawn to the fact that such aid might, in principle, constitute operating aid.
Kadar poroštvo vsebuje pomoč posojilodajalcu, je treba opozoriti na dejstvo, da je lahko taka pomoč načeloma pomoč za tekoče poslovanje.
Guarantees differ from other state aid measures, such as grants or tax exemptions, in that, in the case of a guarantee, the State also enters into a legal relationship with the lender.
Poroštva se razlikujejo od ostalih oblik državnih pomoči, kot so dotacije ali davčne olajšave, saj pri poroštvu država prav tako vstopi v pravno razmerje s posojilodajalcem.
Therefore, consideration has to be given to the possible consequences for third parties of state aid that has been illegally granted.
Zato je treba proučiti, kakšne so morebitne posledice nezakonito dodeljene državne pomoči za tretje osebe.
In the case of state guarantees for loans, this concerns mainly the lending financial institutions.
Pri državnih poroštvih za posojila to zadeva zlasti kreditne ustanove.
In the case of guarantees for bonds issued to obtain financing for undertakings, this concerns the financial institutions involved in the issuance of the bonds.
Pri poroštvih za obveznice, izdane za zagotovitev financiranja podjetij, to zadeva finančne ustanove, vpletene v izdajo obveznic.
The question whether the illegality of the aid affects the legal relations between the State and third parties is a matter which has to be examined under national law.
Vprašanje, ali nezakonitost pomoči vpliva na pravna razmerja med državo in tretjimi osebami, je treba proučiti v skladu z nacionalno zakonodajo.
National courts may have to examine whether national law prevents the guarantee contracts from being honoured, and in that assessment the EFTA Surveillance Authority considers that they should take account of the breach of EEA law.
Nacionalna sodišča bodo morda morala proučiti, ali nacionalna zakonodaja preprečuje upoštevanje poroštvenih pogodb, ob tem pa naj bi po mnenju Nadzornega organa Efte upoštevala kršitev zakonodaje EGP.
Accordingly, lenders may have an interest in verifying, as a standard precaution, that the EEA rules on state aid have been observed whenever guarantees are granted.
Skladno s tem si bodo morda posojilodajalci ob dodeljevanju poroštev med običajnimi previdnostnimi ukrepi prizadevali preverjati spoštovanje predpisov EGP o državni pomoči.
An EFTA State should be able to provide a case number issued by the EFTA Surveillance Authority for an individual case or a scheme and possibly a non-confidential copy of the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s decision together with the relevant reference to the Official Journal of the European Union.
Država Efte bi morala zagotoviti številko zadeve, ki jo izda Nadzorni organ Efte za posamezno zadevo ali shemo, in po možnosti izvod, ki ni zaupen, odločbe Nadzornega organa Efte skupaj z zadevnim sklicem na Uradni list Evropske unije.
The EFTA Surveillance Authority for its part will do its utmost to make available in a transparent manner information on cases and schemes approved by it.
Nadzorni organ Efte bo skušal storiti vse, da bo informacije o zadevah in shemah, ki jih odobri, dal na razpolago na čim bolj pregleden način.
CONDITIONS RULING OUT THE EXISTENCE OF AID
POGOJI, KI IZKLJUČUJEJO OBSTOJ POMOČI
If an individual guarantee or a guarantee scheme entered into by the State does not bring any advantage to an undertaking, it will not constitute state aid.
Če posamezno državno poroštvo ali državna poroštvena shema ne prinaša nikakršnih prednosti določenemu podjetju, državne pomoči ni.
In this context, in order to determine whether an advantage is being granted through a guarantee or a guarantee scheme, the European Court of Justice has confirmed in its recent judgments [5] that the European Commission should base its assessment on the principle of an investor operating in a market economy (hereafter referred to as the ‘market economy investor principle’).
V tej zvezi je Sodišče Evropskih skupnosti v nedavnih sodbah [5] potrdilo, da bi morala Evropska komisija pri odločanju, ali posamezno poroštvo ali poroštvena shema prinaša prednost, svojo oceno opreti na načelo vlagatelja, ki je dejaven v tržnem gospodarstvu (v nadaljnjem besedilu: načelo vlagatelja v tržnem gospodarstvu).
Account should therefore be taken of the effective possibilities for a beneficiary undertaking to obtain equivalent financial resources by having recourse to the capital market.
Upoštevati bi bilo torej treba dejanske možnosti upravičenega podjetja, da pridobi ustrezna finančna sredstva, pri čemer ima dostop do trga kapitala.
State aid is not involved where a new funding source is made available on conditions which would be acceptable for a private operator under the normal conditions of a market economy [6].In order to facilitate the assessment of whether the market economy investor principle is fulfilled for a given guarantee measure, the EFTA Surveillance Authority sets out in this section a number of sufficient conditions for the absence of aid.
Kadar so na voljo nova sredstva za financiranje pod pogoji, ki bi bili pod normalnimi pogoji tržnega gospodarstva sprejemljivi za zasebni subjekt, ne gre za državno pomoč [6].Nadzorni organ Efte v tem oddelku za poenostavitev ocenjevanja, ali je za določen ukrep poroštva izpolnjeno načelo vlagatelja v tržnem gospodarstvu, navaja vrsto zadostnih pogojev v primeru, da ukrep ne pomeni pomoči.
Individual guarantees are covered in point 3.2 with a simpler option for SMEs in point 3.3.
V točki 3.2 so zajeta posamezna poroštva, v točki 3.3 pa enostavnejša možnost za MSP.
Guarantee schemes are covered in point 3.4 with a simpler option for SMEs in point 3.5.
V točki 3.4 so zajete poroštvene sheme, v točki 3.5 pa enostavnejša možnost za MSP.
Individual guarantees
Posamezna poroštva
Regarding an individual state guarantee, the EFTA Surveillance Authority considers that the fulfilment of all the following conditions will be sufficient to rule out the presence of state aid.
V zvezi s posameznimi državnimi poroštvi, Nadzorni organ Efte meni, da izpolnjevanje vseh naslednjih pogojev izključuje obstoj državne pomoči:
The borrower is not in financial difficulty.
Posojilojemalec ni v finančnih težavah.