natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
HFF is not directly funded by the State, but is financed through returns on its own equity (i.e. instalments, interest and price indexation payments on extended loans), through interests paid on issuing and sale of HFF bonds (íbúðarbréf) which are listed on the Icelandic Stock Exchange, and through service fees from its customers.
SFS ne financira neposredno država, ampak se financira iz donosov lastnega kapitala (to je z obroki, obrestmi in plačili za podaljšana posojila zaradi indeksacije cen), iz obresti, plačanih za izdajo in prodajo obveznic SFS (íbúðarbréf), ki kotirajo na islandski borzi, ter iz pristojbin za storitve, ki jih plačajo njegove stranke.
HFF also benefits from a State guarantee which follows from the State’s unlimited liability for the HFF’s debts as its owner [7].
SFS ima tudi državno jamstvo, ki izhaja iz neomejene odgovornosti države za dolgove SFS, za katere odgovarja kot lastnica SFS [7].
Furthermore, HFF receives interest support directly from the State budget to cover losses resulting from lending below market rates to entities that construct and provide rental housing.
Poleg tega SFS prejema podporo v obliki subvencioniranih obrestnih mer neposredno iz državnega proračuna za kritje izgub, ki nastanejo zaradi posojil pod tržno obrestno mero subjektom, ki gradijo stanovanja in jih dajejo v najem.
For a more detailed description of the HFF system under the Housing Act, reference is made to the Authority’s Decision No 405/08/COL.
Podrobnejši opis sistema SFS na podlagi stanovanjskega zakona je naveden v Odločbi Nadzornega organa št. 405/08/COL.
HFF is a State institution governed by public law (cf. Article 4 of the Housing Act) and as such, under the general unwritten rules of Icelandic public law applicable to State institutions, it enjoys a State guarantee on all its obligations.
SFS je državna institucija javnega prava (glej člen 4 stanovanjskega zakona) in kot taka na podlagi splošnih nepisanih pravil islandskega javnega prava, ki veljajo za državne institucije, uživa državno jamstvo glede vseh svojih obveznosti.
The guarantee is applicable to all State institutions, regardless of when they were established or the type of their activities.
Jamstvo se uporablja za vse državne institucije, ne glede na to, kdaj so bile ustanovljene ali kakšna je njihova dejavnost.
As mentioned above, such guarantee follows from the State’s unlimited liability for the HFF’s debts as its owner.
Kot je bilo navedeno zgoraj, tako jamstvo izhaja iz neomejene odgovornosti države za dolgove SFS, za katere odgovarja kot njegova lastnica.
That means that the State is liable for the entirety of the HFF’s obligations, since the guarantee is neither linked to any specific financial transaction of the HFF, nor limited to any fixed maximum amount.
To pomeni, da je država odgovorna za vse obveznosti SFS, saj jamstvo ni vezano na nobeno finančno transakcijo SFS niti ni omejeno na noben določen maksimalni znesek.
This is also reflected in paragraph 3 of Article 5 of the Insolvency Act No 21/1991 (lög um gjaldþrotaskipti o.fl.) which rules out the applicability of bankruptcy or other insolvency procedures to institutions such as the HFF.
To je razvidno tudi iz odstavka 3 člena 5 zakona o plačilni nesposobnosti št. 21/1991 (lög um gjaldþrotaskipti o.fl.), ki ureja uporabo postopka stečaja ali drugih postopkov plačilne nesposobnosti za institucije, kot je SFS.
In the preamble to the bill which became Act No 121/1997 on State Guarantees (lög um ríkisábyrgðir) the following was stated:
V preambuli k zakonskemu osnutku, ki je postal zakon št. 121/1997 o državnih jamstvih (lög um ríkisábyrgðir), je bilo navedeno naslednje:
‘This is based on the unequivocal rule of Icelandic law that the State is liable for the obligations of its institutions and undertakings, unless the guarantee is limited by an explicit legal provision […] or the liability of the State in a limited liability company is limited to the share capital contribution.’ [8]
„To temelji na nedvoumnem pravilu islandskega prava, da je država odgovorna za obveznosti svojih institucij in podjetij, razen če je jamstvo omejeno z izrecno zakonsko določbo […] ali pa je odgovornost države v družbi z omejeno odgovornostjo omejena na njen kapitalski delež [8].“
The State guarantee was also available to the predecessors of HFF: the State Housing Agency, the State Building Fund and the Workers’ Housing Fund operated by the State Housing Agency, as well as the State Housing Board (cf. Act No 97/1993 on the State Housing Agency (lög um Húsnæðisstofnun ríkisins)).
Državno jamstvo so imeli tudi predhodniki SFS: državna stanovanjska agencija, državni gradbeni sklad in delavski stanovanjski sklad, ki ga je upravljala državna stanovanjska agencija, ter državni stanovanjski svet (glej zakon št. 97/1993 o državni stanovanjski agenciji (lög um Húsnæðisstofnun ríkisins)).
The State guarantee premium
Premija za državno jamstvo
At the moment of the establishment of HFF and its predecessors, the unlimited State guarantee provided in their favour and covering the entirety of their obligations was not made subject to a risk premium or a guarantee premium.
V času ustanovitve SFS in njegovih predhodnikov za neomejeno državno jamstvo, ki jim je bilo zagotovljeno in je zajemalo vse njihove obveznosti, ni bilo treba plačati premije za tveganje ali za jamstvo.
Provisional Act No 68/1987 on Fiscal Measures introduced for the first time a general obligation to pay a guarantee premium to the State for State guarantees that were not subject to the risk premium.
Začasni zakon št. 68/1987 o fiskalnih ukrepih je prvič uvedel splošno obveznost plačila jamstvene premije državi za državna jamstva, za katera ni bilo treba plačati jamstva za tveganje.
Subsequently, Article 8 of the Act No 37/1961 on State Guarantees (lög um ríkisábyrgðir), as amended by Act No 65/1988 on State Guarantees (lög um breyting á lögum nr. 37/1961, um ríkisábyrgðir, með síðari breytingum), required banks, credit funds, financial institutions, enterprises and other such entities that, according to law, enjoy a State guarantee whether through the ownership of the State or other reasons, to pay a guarantee premium to the State as regards their commitments towards foreign entities.
Nato je člen 8 zakona št. 37/1961 o državnih jamstvih (lög um ríkisábyrgðir), kot je bil spremenjen z zakonom št. 65/1988 o državnih jamstvih (lög um breyting á lögum nr. 37/1961, um ríkisábyrgðir, með síðari breytingum), zahteval od bank, kreditnih skladov, finančnih institucij, podjetij in drugih takih subjektov, ki v skladu z zakonom uživajo državno jamstvo, bodisi ker so v lasti države ali iz drugih razlogov, da plačajo jamstveno premijo državi za svoje obveznosti do tujih subjektov.
The premium was set at 0,0625 % per quarter on the principal of foreign commitments based on their average for each period (cf. paragraph 2 of Article 8 of Act No 37/1961) [10].
Premija je bila določena na 0,0625 % na četrtino glavnice tujih obveznosti na podlagi njihovega povprečja za vsako obdobje (glej odstavek 2 člena 8 zakona št. 37/1961) [10].
Originally, no similar premium was imposed on domestic commitments.
Sprva za domače obveznosti ni bila naložena nobena podobna premija.
However, Act No 121/1997 on State Guarantees [11] introduced an obligation to pay a premium amounting to 0,0375 % in respect of domestic commitments.
Vendar je bila z zakonom št. 121/1997 o državnih jamstvih [11] uvedena obveznost plačila premije za domače obveznosti v višini 0,0375 %.
This rate was later raised to 0,0625 % by means of Act No 180/2000 [12].
Ta odstotek je bil pozneje z zakonom št. 180/2000 [12] zvišan na 0,0625%.
Act No 121/1997 also provided for an exemption from payment of any premium for State guarantee in respect of housing bonds issued by the Housing Bond Division of the State Housing Agency.
Z zakonom št. 121/1997 je bila prav tako določena oprostitev plačila kakršne koli premije za državno jamstvo glede stanovanjskih obveznic, ki jih je izdal oddelek državne stanovanjske agencije za stanovanjske obveznice.
As regards other HFF’s obligations, the Supplementary Budget Act for the year 2001 retroactively cancelled HFF’s debts relating to unpaid premiums that HFF has accrued under Act No 121/1997.
Kar zadeva obveznosti SFS, so bili z Aktom o dodatnem proračunu za leto 2001 retroaktivno odpisani njegovi dolgovi glede neplačanih premij, ki so mu nastali na podlagi zakona št. 121/1997.
Finally, a general exemption of HFF from payment of a State guarantee premium in respect of all commitments was stipulated in Act No 70/2000 which entered into force on 26 May 2000.
Zatem je bila v zakonu št. 70/2000, ki je začel veljati 26. maja 2000, za SFS določena splošna oprostitev plačila premije za državno jamstvo glede vseh obveznosti.
For a more detailed description of the legislation on State guarantees and subsequent changes to the generally applicable premium rates and the special provisions on HFF, reference is made to the Authority’s Decision No 406/08/COL.
Podrobnejši opis zakonodaje o državnih jamstvih in naknadnih sprememb splošno veljavnih premijskih stopenj ter posebnih določb za SFS je naveden v Odločbi Nadzornega organa št. 406/08/COL.
In Decision No 406/08/COL, the Authority explained that the State guarantee in favour of HFF, that existed before the EEA Agreement entered into force on 1 January 1994, as such was not being dealt with under the procedure on the guarantee premium concerning new aid but under a separate procedure for existing aid (Case No 64865, now Case No 70382).
Nadzorni organ je v Odločbi št. 406/08/COL pojasnil, da državna jamstva v korist SFS, ki so obstajala, preden je 1. januarja 1994 začel veljati Sporazum EGP, kot taka niso bila obravnavana v okviru postopka o jamstveni premiji glede nove pomoči ampak v okviru ločenega postopka za obstoječo pomoč (zadeva št. 64865, zdaj zadeva št. 70382).
The Decision No 406/08/COL dealt with the fact that HFF is exempted from paying a guarantee premium which other undertakings organised in a similar way as HFF are obliged to pay.
V Odločbi št. 406/08/COL je bilo upoštevano dejstvo, da je SFS oproščen plačevanja jamstvene premije, ki jo druga podjetja, organizirana podobno kot SFS, morajo plačati.
In this context, in the Authority’s preliminary view, it was not relevant for the assessment of the classification of the aid as new or existing whether or not the Act on State Guarantees, as a matter of fact, changed the situation of HFF as regards the payment of guarantee premium.
V tem okviru po predhodnem stališču Nadzornega organa za oceno razvrstitve pomoči kot nove ali obstoječe ni relevantno, ali je Akt o državnih jamstvih dejansko spremenil položaj SFS glede plačila jamstvene premije.
What was considered decisive was that the new Act No 121/1997 on State Guarantees introduced a new system where, for the first time, HFF was being treated more favourably than provided for under the general rule for undertakings benefiting from the implicit State guarantee.
Za odločilno je štelo to, da je novi zakon št. 121/1997 o državnih jamstvih uvedel nov sistem, v katerem je bil SFS prvič obravnavan ugodneje, kot je določeno v splošnem pravilu za podjetja, ki uživajo implicitno državno jamstvo.
It was therefore the Authority’s preliminary opinion that any advantage to HFF following from the exemption granted to the Housing Bond Division introduced by Article 7 of Act No 121/1997 would constitute new aid.
Zato je bilo predhodno mnenje Nadzornega organa, da bi vsaka ugodnost za SFS, ki izhaja iz oprostitve, odobrene oddelku za stanovanjske obveznice, ki je bila uvedena s členom 7 zakona št. 121/1997, pomenila novo pomoč.
The same would apply to the exemption/relief from paying the premium relating to other operations of HFF, cf. Act No 70/2000 amending Act No 121/1997 and Supplementary Budget Act 2001.
Enako bi veljalo za oprostitev/olajšavo glede plačila premije v zvezi z drugimi posli SFS, glej zakon št. 70/2000, ki je spremenil zakon št. 121/1997, in akt o dodatnem proračunu za leto 2001.
In the preliminary view of the Authority, the exemption of HFF from paying a guarantee premium amounted to State aid in the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement.
V skladu s predhodnim stališčem Nadzornega organa pomeni oprostitev plačila jamstvene premije za SFS državno pomoč v smislu člena 61(1) Sporazuma EGP.
The following State aid elements were identified in the decision to initiate a formal investigation procedure:
V odločbi o začetku formalnega postopka preiskave so bili ugotovljeni naslednji elementi državne pomoči:
exemption (either originally or ex post facto) from payment of State guarantee premium amounting to 0,0625 % per quarter of the value of foreign commitments relating both to housing bonds and other commitments in the period from 1 January 1998 to date;
oprostitev (bodisi od začetka ali naknadno) plačila premije za državno jamstvo, ki znaša 0,0625 % na četrtino vrednosti tujih obveznosti v zvezi s stanovanjskimi obveznicami in drugimi obveznostmi v obdobju od 1. januarja 1998 do zdaj;
exemption (either originally or ex post facto) from payment of State guarantee premium amounting to 0,0375 % per quarter of the value of domestic commitments relating both to housing bonds and other commitments in the period from 1 January 1998 to 10 January 2001;
oprostitev (bodisi od začetka ali naknadno) plačila premije za državno jamstvo, ki znaša 0,0375 % na četrtino vrednosti domačih obveznosti v zvezi s stanovanjskimi obveznicami in drugimi obveznostmi v obdobju od 1. januarja 1998 do 10. januarja 2001;
exemption from payment of State guarantee premium amounting to 0,0625 % per quarter of the value of all HFF’s domestic commitments in the period from 11 January 2001 to date.
oprostitev plačila premije za državno jamstvo, ki znaša 0,0625 % na četrtino vrednosti vseh domačih obveznosti SFS v obdobju od 11. januarja 2001 do zdaj.
Moreover, the Authority doubted that the above State aid elements can be considered compatible with the EEA Agreement.
Poleg tega je Nadzorni organ dvomil, da je zgoraj navedene elemente državne pomoči mogoče šteti za združljive s Sporazumom EGP.
The Authority explained that, while certain lending for house financing may be defined to be a service of general economic interest in the meaning of Article 59(2) of the EEA Agreement and therefore possibly eligible for aid, the Authority’s preliminary view was that the general loans system of the HFF is too broadly set up to comply with the conditions of Article 59(2).
Nadzorni organ je pojasnil, da je del posojil za financiranje stanovanj sicer mogoče opredeliti kot storitev splošnega gospodarskega pomena v smislu člena 59(2) Sporazuma EGP in bi bil zato upravičen do pomoči, vendar pa je po predhodnem stališču Nadzornega organa splošna shema posojil SFS zastavljena preširoko, da bi lahko izpolnjevala pogoje iz člena 59(2).
The Authority had not been presented with any information that would give it reason to believe that the market would not be able to provide for housing finance on manageable terms in general.
Nadzorni organ ni prejel nikakršnih informacij, iz katerih bi izhajalo, da trg na splošno ni sposoben zagotoviti financiranja stanovanj pod primernimi pogoji.
Under the general loans scheme of HFF, loans are available to anyone irrespective of income and assets and irrespective of cost and size limitations of the dwelling to be financed.
Po splošni shemi posojil SFS so posojila dostopna vsem ne glede na prihodke in premoženje ter brez omejitve vrednosti in velikosti stanovanja, ki se financira.
Moreover, loans may also be granted anywhere irrespective of whether local housing finance may be readily available or not.
Poleg tega se posojila lahko dodelijo povsod ne glede na to, ali je lokalno financiranje stanovanj lahko dostopno.
The comments of the Icelandic Government are focused on the fact that any aid element involved derives directly from the implicit State guarantee in favour of HFF, which has already been established to constitute existing aid.
Pripombe islandske vlade se osredotočajo na dejstvo, da vsak prisoten element pomoči izhaja neposredno iz implicitnega državnega jamstva v korist SFS, za katero je bilo že ugotovljeno, da pomeni obstoječo pomoč.
In view of the Icelandic authorities, any fee payment is an integral part of the State guarantee as such.
Po mnenju islandskih organov je vsako plačilo pristojbine sestavni del samega državnega jamstva.
Therefore, in view of lack of severable and substantive changes to the State guarantee and the payment of the fee, there is no new aid present and the issue should be dealt within the existing aid case.
Zato glede na to, da ni bilo ločenih in bistvenih sprememb državnega jamstva in plačila pristojbine, ni prisotna nova pomoč in je treba zadevo obravnavati v okviru zadeve obstoječe pomoči.
The Icelandic Government also expressed its view that in the case any new aid was considered to exist it was compatible aid, due to the social character of HFF and the fact that the aid granted to HFF fulfilled the conditions established in Altmark case-law [13].
Islandska vlada je še izrazila stališče, da če bi štelo, da je prisotna nova pomoč, bi bila to združljiva pomoč zaradi socialnega značaja SFS in dejstva, da je pomoč, dodeljena SFS, izpolnjevala pogoje iz sodne prakse v okviru sodbe v zadevi Altmark [13].
As regards the fact of introducing an obligation to pay a premium on State guarantees for foreign commitments of certain financial institutions by Act No 68/1987, the Icelandic authorities argue that HFF has in fact never paid any premium, as it did not have any foreign commitments.
Islandski organi glede dejstva uvajanja obveznosti plačila premije za državna jamstva za tuje obveznosti nekaterih finančnih institucij z zakonom št. 68/1987 trdijo, da SFS dejansko nikoli ni plačal nobene premije, saj ni imel nobenih tujih obveznosti.
Furthermore, in view of the Icelandic authorities, liability to pay premium on other domestic commitments than housing bonds, based on Act 121/1997, was ‘based on questionable legal basis’, as it was never intended that the predecessors of the HFF pay a guarantee premium.
Poleg tega islandski organi menijo, da je obveznost plačila premije za domače obveznosti razen stanovanjskih obveznic na podlagi zakona št. 121/1997 „temeljila na vprašljivi pravni podlagi“, saj ni bilo nikoli mišljeno, da predhodniki SFS plačajo jamstveno premijo.
Icelandic authorities also point to the fact that HFF’s debts relating to any unpaid guarantee premium were retroactively cancelled in the 2001 Supplementary Budget Act, as an indication of the legislator’s intention that HFF should have been exempted from paying a guarantee premium at all times.
Islandski organi navajajo še dejstvo, da so bili dolgovi SFS glede katere koli neplačane jamstvene premije retroaktivno odpisani z Aktom o dodatnem proračunu za leto 2001, kar navajajo kot namen zakonodajalca, da bi bilo treba SFS vselej oprostiti plačila jamstvene premije.
And finally, the exemption from the State guarantee premium for HFF was due to the fact that HFF collected an interest margin of 0,0375 % of mortgage instruments guaranteeing commitments relating to housing bonds [14].
In nazadnje, SFS je oproščen plačila premije za državno jamstvo zato, ker je zbiral obrestno maržo, ki znaša 0,0375 % hipotekarnih instrumentov, s katerimi se jamčijo obveznosti glede stanovanjskih obveznic [14].
The Icelandic authorities call it a ‘special State guarantee fee’.
Islandski organi to imenujejo „posebna pristojbina za državno jamstvo“.
It is collected into a special reserve fund.
Ta se zbira v poseben rezervni sklad.
This implies that for measures to be classified as State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement, they must involve a grant by the State or through State resources, confer an advantage on the recipient undertaking, be selective, distort competition and be liable to affect trade between the Contracting Parties.
To pomeni, da morajo ukrepi, da se opredelijo za državno pomoč v smislu člena 61(1) Sporazuma EGP, obsegati podporo s strani države ali prek državnih sredstev, dodeliti ugodnost podjetju prejemniku podpore, biti selektivni, izkrivljati konkurenco in biti taki, da lahko škodijo trgovini med pogodbenicami.
The Authority’s State aid guidelines on State guarantees [15] stipulate that guarantees given directly by the State, namely by central, regional or local authorities may constitute State aid.
Smernice Nadzornega organa o državni pomoči glede državnih jamstev [15] določajo, da jamstva, ki jih dajo neposredno države, namreč centralni, regionalni ali lokalni organi, lahko pomenijo državno pomoč.
Moreover, more favourable funding terms obtained by enterprises whose legal form rules out bankruptcy or other insolvency procedures or which benefit from an explicit State guarantee or coverage of any losses by the State provide for a benefit from an open-ended exposure of the State which is referred to as an unlimited State guarantee [16].
Poleg tega ugodnejši pogoji financiranja, ki jih pridobijo podjetja, katerih pravna narava izključuje stečaj ali druge postopke plačilne nesposobnosti ali ki jim je zagotovljeno izrecno državno jamstvo ali državni prevzem izgube, zagotavljajo ugodnost „odprte“ izpostavljenosti države, ki pomeni neomejeno državno jamstvo [16].
‘[t]he benefit of a State guarantee is that the risk associated with the guarantee is carried by the State. Such risk-carrying by the State should normally be remunerated by an appropriate premium. 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.’ [17]
„[u]godnosti državnega poroštva izhajajo iz tega, da tveganje, povezano s poroštvom, nosi država. Tovrstni državni prevzem tveganja se navadno poplača z ustrezno premijo. Kadar se država odpove celotni takšni premiji ali njenemu delu, to pomeni ugodnost za podjetje ter zmanjšanje državnih prihodkov [17].“
In Decision No 247/11/COL, the Authority concluded that the implicit and unlimited State guarantee in favour of HFF constitutes State aid in the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement as it represents a drain on State resources of the Icelandic State and gives HFF an economic advantage.
Nadzorni organ je v Odločbi št. 247/11/COL odločil, da implicitno in neomejeno državno jamstvo v korist SFS pomeni državno pomoč v smislu člena 61(1) Sporazuma AGP, ker pomeni zmanjšanje državnih sredstev islandske države in daje SFS gospodarsko prednost.
The Authority referred to the fact that, in line with the Authority’s Guidelines on State guarantees, enterprises whose legal form rules out bankruptcy or other insolvency procedures or which benefit from an explicit State guarantee or coverage of any losses by the State, can be regarded as beneficiaries of aid.
Nadzorni organ se je skliceval na dejstvo, da se v skladu s Smernicami Nadzornega organa o državnih jamstvih podjetja, katerih pravna narava izključuje stečaj ali druge postopke plačilne nesposobnosti ali ki jim je zagotovljeno izrecno državno jamstvo ali državni prevzem izgube, lahko štejejo za prejemnike pomoči.
Moreover, it is not necessary that the State makes any payments under the guarantee in question.
Poleg tega ni nujno, da država karkoli plača v okviru zadevnega jamstva.
The aid is granted continuously from the moment when the guarantee is given and not just at the moment at which the guarantee is invoked or the moment at which payments are made under the terms of guarantee [18].
Pomoč se dodeljuje neprekinjeno od trenutka, ko je jamstvo dano, in ne le od takrat, ko se jamstvo uveljavlja ali ko se izplačajo zneski pod pogoji jamstva [18].