natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In this respect, the Authority again refers to the fact that, if the special characteristic of the training provided at NAC is the fact that the entire course takes place in Norway and that this is the ‘general interest’ element of the service, nothing in the budget or in other documents submitted to the Authority makes the grant conditional on such a feature.
V tej zvezi se Nadzorni organ spet sklicuje na dejstvo, da če je posebna značilnost usposabljanja, ki ga izvaja NLA, dejstvo, da cel program poteka na Norveškem in da je to element storitve, ki pomeni „splošni pomen“, Nadzorni organ ugotavlja, da v proračunu ali drugi dokumentaciji, predloženi Nadzornemu organu, ni ničesar, kar bi nakazovalo, da je pomoč pogojena s tako značilnostjo.
Thus, even if it were clear that the Norwegian authorities had a specific public service mission in mind when they decided to grant funding to the airline pilot education sector, the Authority cannot see any evidence of that mission having been specifically entrusted to NAC.
Torej tudi, če bi bilo jasno, da so norveški organi pri odobritvi financiranja sektorju za izobraževanje za letalske pilote imeli v mislih posebno poslanstvo javne službe, Nadzorni organ ne vidi nobenega dokaza, da je bilo to poslanstvo posebej poverjeno NLA.
As a result, Article 59(2) EEA cannot be applied to the situation at hand.
Zato v obravnavanem primeru ni mogoče uporabljati člena 59(2) EGP.
The final two elements of Article 59(2) EEA amount, together, to a proportionality assessment.
Zadnja dva elementa člena 59(2) EGP se skupaj ocenjujeta glede sorazmernosti.
In considering whether the measures adopted exceed what is necessary to guarantee effective fulfilment of the public service mission, the Authority notes, first, that the necessity of the funding is questionable in the absence of any conditions attaching thereto and, second, that no objective evaluation of how much funding would be required appears to have been undertaken.
Nadzorni organ pri odločanju, ali sprejeti ukrepi presegajo tisto, kar je potrebno za zagotavljanje učinkovitega izpolnjevanja poslanstva javne službe, ugotavlja, da je, prvič, nujnost financiranja vprašljiva, če ni nobenih z njim povezanih pogojev, in drugič, zdi se, da ni bila narejena nobena objektivna ocena, koliko sredstev bo potrebnih.
The Authority therefore concludes that, even if the other criteria had been satisfied, this element of Article 59(2) EEA is not fulfilled in the present case.
Nadzorni organ zato ugotavlja, da tudi, če bi bila druga merila izpolnjena, ta element člena 59(2) EGP v tem primeru ni izpolnjen.
The Authority concludes that neither the direct grant (I-2.1(a) above) nor the loan guarantee (I-2.1(d) above) fulfil the conditions for Article 59(2) EEA to apply and that both measures are therefore incompatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement.
Nadzorni organ ugotavlja, da neposredna pomoč (I.2.1(a) zgoraj) in jamstvo za posojilo (I.2.1(d) zgoraj) ne izpolnjujeta pogojev za uporabo člena 59(2) EGP in zato sta oba ukrepa nezdružljiva z delovanjem Sporazuma EGP.
The Authority finds that the following measures do not amount to State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) EEA:
Nadzorni organ ugotavlja, da naslednji ukrepi niso državna pomoč v smislu člena 61(1) EGP:
project funding from Troms County (I-2.1(b) above),
financiranje projektov s strani okrožja Troms (I.2.1(b) zgoraj),
remission of a loan from Troms County (I-2.1(c) above), and
odpust posojila okrožja Troms (I-2.1(c) zgoraj), in
loan from the Municipality of Målselv (I-2.1(e) above).
posojilo občine Målselv (I.2.1(e) zgoraj).
However, the Authority concludes that the Norwegian authorities have unlawfully implemented the following aid measures:
Nadzorni organ pa ugotavlja, da so norveški organi nezakonito izvajali naslednje ukrepe pomoči:
loan guarantee granted by Troms County without payment of a premium (I-2.1(d) above),
jamstvo za posojilo, ki ga je odobrilo okrožje Troms brez plačila premije (I.2.1(d) zgoraj),
in breach of Article 1(3) of Part I of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement.
in s tem kršili člen 1(3) dela I Protokola 3 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču.
The aid measures described do not satisfy the conditions for applying Article 59(2) EEA and are therefore not compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement.
Opisana ukrepa ne izpolnjujeta pogojev za uporabo člena 59(2) EGP in zato nista združljiva z delovanjem Sporazuma EGP.
It follows from Article 14 of Part II of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement that the Authority shall decide that unlawful aid which is incompatible with the State aid rules under the EEA Agreement must be recovered from the beneficiaries,
Iz člena 14 dela II Protokola 3 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču izhaja, da Nadzorni organ odloči, da morajo upravičenci vrniti nezakonito pomoč, ki ni združljiva s pravili o državni pomoči iz Sporazuma EGP –
The project funding granted to NLH by Troms County and the loan to that entity by the Municipality of Målselv, together with the remission by Troms County of a loan granted by it to NAC do not constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) EEA.
Financiranje projektov, ki ga je NLH dodelilo okrožje Troms, in posojilo, ki ga je navedenemu subjektu odobrila občina Målselv, skupaj z odpustom posojila, ki ga je NLA odobrilo okrožje Troms, ni državna pomoč v smislu člena 61(1) EGP.
The direct grant of NOK 4,5 million from the State budget and the loan guarantee granted by Troms County constitute State aid in favour of NAC which is not compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement within the meaning of Article 61(1) EEA.
4,5 milijona NOK neposredne pomoči iz državnega proračuna in jamstvo za posojilo, ki ga je odobrilo okrožje Troms, je državna pomoč v korist NLA, ki ni združljiva z delovanjem Sporazuma EGP v smislu člena 61(1) EGP.
The Norwegian authorities shall take all necessary measures to recover the aid referred to in Article 2 and unlawfully made available to NAC.
Norveški organi sprejmejo vse potrebne ukrepe, da se izterja pomoč, ki je navedena v členu 2 in ki je bila nezakonito dodeljena NLA.
Recovery shall be effected without delay and in accordance with the procedures of national law provided that they allow the immediate and effective execution of the decision.
Vračilo se izvede nemudoma in v skladu s postopki nacionalnega prava, če ti omogočajo takojšnjo in učinkovito izvršitev te odločbe.
The aid to be recovered shall include interest and compound interest from the date on which it was at the disposal of NAC until the date of its recovery.
Pomoč, ki jo je treba vrniti, vključuje obresti in obrestne obresti od datuma, ko je bila pomoč NLA na voljo, do datuma njenega vračila.
Interest shall be calculated on the basis of Article 9 in Decision No 195/04/COL.
Obresti se izračunajo na podlagi člena 9 Odločbe št. 195/04/COL.
The Norwegian authorities shall inform the EFTA Surveillance Authority, within 2 months of notification of this Decision, of the measures taken to comply with it.
Norveški organi v dveh mesecih po uradnem obvestilu o tej odločbi Nadzorni organ Efte obvestijo o ukrepih, ki jih je sprejela za uskladitev s to odločbo.
OJ L 139, 25.5.2006, p. 37 and EEA Supplement No 26, 25.5.2006, p. 1.
UL L 139, 25.5.2006, str. 37, in Dopolnilo EGP št. 26, 25.5.2006, str. 1.
Hereinafter referred to as the Decision to open the formal investigation.
V nadaljnjem besedilu: Odločba o začetku formalnega postopka preiskave.
OJ C 77, 5.4.2007, p. 35, and EEA Supplement No 17, 5.4.2007, p. 16.
UL C 77, 5.4.2007, str. 35, in Dopolnilo EGP št. 17, 5.4.2007, str. 16.
For more detailed information on the correspondence between the Norwegian authorities and the Authority, reference is made to the Decision to open the formal investigation procedure.
Za podrobnejše informacije o različnih dopisih med norveškimi organi in Nadzornim organom se navaja Odločba Nadzornega organa o začetku formalnega postopka preiskave.
The Norwegian authorities appear to refer to the winding up proceedings initiated by the board of NAC as support for this proposition.
Zdi se, da se norveški organi v podporo temu predlogu sklicujejo na stečajni postopek, ki ga je sprožila uprava NLA.
The fact that NAC is currently the subject of bankruptcy proceedings is used to support this statement.
Dejstvo, da je NLA trenutno v stečajnem postopku, se uporablja kot podpora tej izjavi.
Case 202/88 Commission v France (Telecommunications Terminal Equipment) [1991] ECR I-1223, paragraph 12.
Zadeva 202/88, Komisija proti Franciji (Telecommunications Terminal Equipment), [1991] Recueil I-1223, točka 12.
The Norwegian authorities cite Case C-159/94 Commission v France [1997] ECR I-5815, paragraphs 112 and 113, in support of this statement.
Norveški organi v podporo tej trditvi navajajo zadevo C-159/94, Komisija proti Franciji, [1997] Recueil I-5815, točki 112 in 113.
Troms County submitted evidence that two other, privately owned companies with outstanding loans of NOK 200000 each also granted remission of the debt to NAC as part of the restructuring exercise.
Okrožje Troms je predložilo dokaze, da sta, kot del prestrukturiranja, tudi dve drugi gospodarski družbi v zasebni lasti NLA odobrili odpust neodplačanih posojil, vsaka v znesku 200000 NOK.
The complainant notes that students at NEAR are offered the possibility to carry out their entire training in Norway but that most choose to take up the opportunities offered abroad.
Pritožnik ugotavlja, da imajo študenti v NEAR možnost celotno usposabljanje opraviti na Norveškem, vendar večina izkoristi priložnosti, ki jih imajo v tujini.
The difference is that NAC does not offer these foreign placements and so all students carry out their training only in Norway.
Razlika je v tem, da NLA ne nudi te delovne prakse v tujini in zato vsi njihovi študenti opravljajo usposabljanje samo na Norveškem.
The complainant refers, in this respect, to Cases C-41/90 Höfner [1991] ECR I-1979 and C-244/94 Fédération Française des Sociétés d’Assurance [1995] ECR I-4013.
Pritožnik se v tej zvezi sklicuje na zadevi C-41/90, Höfner, [1991] Recueil I-1979 in C-244/94, Fédération Française des Sociétés d’Assurance, [1995] Recueil I-4013.
On the other hand, the purely social function of the entity in Case C-159/91 Poucet et Pistre [1993] ECR I-637 is used as an example of classification as other than an undertaking.
Po drugi strani se čisto socialna funkcija subjekta v zadevi C-159/91, Poucet et Pistre, [1993] Recueil I-637 uporablja kot primer drugačne razvrstitve in ne kot podjetje.
Based on an estimated cost of education per student at NAC of NOK 937500, the complainant submits that NAC is over-compensated, the cost of education at NEAR and exclusively in Norway being NOK 512000.
Na podlagi predvidenih stroškov izobraževanja v NLA v znesku 937500 NOK na študenta, pritožnik trdi, da NLA dobiva previsoko nadomestilo, ker stroški v NEAR in izključno na Norveškem znašajo 512000 NOK.
Article 37 EEA is framed in identical terms.
Besedilo člena 37 EGP je enako.
See Case C-109/92 Wirth [1993] ECR I-6447, paragraphs 14-17.
Glej zadevo C-109/92, Wirth, [1993] Recueil I-6447, točke 14–17.
The EFTA Court has recently confirmed this view in Case E-5/07 Private Barnehagers Landsforbund, judgment of 21 February 2008 not yet reported, at paragraphs 80 et seq.
Sodišče Efte je nedavno potrdilo to stališče v zadevi E-5/07, Private Barnehagers Landsforbund, sodba z dne 21. februarja 2008 še ni objavljena, točka 80 in naslednje.
Case E-5/07 Private Barnehagers Landsforbund, cited above, at paragraph 80.
Zadeva E-5/07, Private Barnehagers Landsforbund, navedena zgoraj, v točki 80.
Case C-205/03 P FENIN [2006] ECR I-6295, paragraph 25.
Zadeva C-205/03 P, FENIN, [2006] ZOdl. I-6295, točka 25.
Case E-5/07 Private Barnehagers Landsforbund, cited above, at paragraph 81.
Zadeva E-5/07, Private Barnehagers Landsforbund, navedena zgoraj, v točki 81.
Case E-5/07 Private Barnehagers Landsforbund, cited above, at paragraph 83.
Zadeva E-5/07, Private Barnehagers Landsforbund, navedena zgoraj, v točki 83.
See, for example, Case C-179/90 Merci convenzionali porto di Genova [1991] ECR I-5889, paragraph 28.
Glej na primer zadevo C-179/90, Merci convenzionali porto di Genova, [1991] Recueil I-5889, točka 28.
See, for example, Commission Communication on services of general economic interest in Europe, cited above at footnote 25, paragraph 14.
Glej na primer Sporočilo Komisije o storitvah splošnega gospodarskega interesa v Evropi, navedeno zgoraj v opombi 25, odstavek 14.
Commission Decision 2006/225/EC of 2 March 2005 on the aid scheme implemented by Italy for the reform of the training institutions (OJ L 81, 18.3.2006, p. 25) expressly acknowledges that the institutions in question ‘assured institutional, social targeted vocational training … delivered in the framework of the public education system’ (paragraph 48) and that they were therefore ‘entrusted with a public service mission, within the framework of the relevant national and regional rules, by means of binding acts’ (paragraph 57).
Odločba Komisije 2006/225/ES z dne 2. marca 2005 o programu pomoči, ki ga izvaja Italija za prestrukturiranje ustanov poklicnega usposabljanja (UL L 81, 18.3.2006, str. 25) izrecno potrjuje, da zadevne ustanove „zagotavljale institucionalne storitve usposabljanj s socialnim namenom […] ki so bili del sistema javnega izobraževanja“ (odstavek 48) in da jim je bila zato „v okviru ustreznih nacionalnih in regionalnih predpisov zaupana naloga javnih storitev z obvezujočimi akti“ (odstavek 57).
The Authority called on interested parties to submit their comments [9].
Nadzorni organ je pozval zainteresirane stranke, naj predložijo svoje pripombe [9].
According to the Norwegian Government, Parliament introduced a grant of NOK 4,5 million for ‘airline pilot education located in Tromsø/Bardufoss’ in June 2005.
Po navedbah norveške vlade je parlament junija 2005 uvedel pomoč v znesku 4,5 milijona NOK za „izobraževanje za letalske pilote v regiji Tromsø/Bardufoss“.
The Ministry of Education and Research allocated this grant directly to NAC on 8 July 2005.
Ministrstvo za izobraževanje in raziskave je 8. julija 2005 to pomoč dodelilo neposredno NLA.
A further NOK 4,5 million was written into the 2006 State Budget and was proposed again in the draft budget for 2007.
V državni proračun za leto 2006 je bilo vključenih nadaljnjih 4,5 milijona NOK in nato spet predlaganih v predlog proračuna za leto 2007.
However, according to the Norwegian Government, Parliament was notified of the complaint and further allocations to NAC were suspended pending resolution of the matter.
Vendar pa je bil po navedbah norveške vlade parlament obveščen o pritožbi in nadaljnje dodelitve sredstev NLA so bile do rešitve zadeve ustavljene.
The Municipality of Målselv stated that, by decision of 19 July 2006, it granted a subordinate loan of NOK 1,3 million to NAC at an interest rate of 8,5 % per annum, the full amount plus interest falling due no later than end 2007.
Občina Målselv je navedla, da je s sklepom z dne 19. julija 2006 NLA odobrila podrejeno posojilo v znesku 1,3 milijona NOK po 8,5 % letni obrestni meri, in celotni znesek z obrestmi zapade najpozneje konec leta 2007.
By decision of 24 April 2008, the Municipality of Målselv extended the repayment deadline until 31 December 2008.
Občina Målselv je s sklepom z dne 24. aprila 2008 podaljšala rok povračila do 31. decembra 2008.
The Norwegian authorities have since confirmed that the loan was in favour of and paid out to NLH.
Norveški organi so od takrat potrdili, da je bilo posojilo v korist NLH in je bilo NLH izplačano.
Grant
Pomoč
According to the Norwegian Government, both the capacity of the Air Force to train pilots for service outwith the armed forces and the financial support for airline pilot education provided by the SAS airline have been declining in recent years.
Po navedbah norveške vlade se je v zadnjih letih zmanjšala tako zmogljivost vojaškega letalstva za usposabljanje pilotov za službo zunaj oboroženih sil kot finančna podpora za izobraževanje za letalske pilote, ki jo zagotavlja letalska družba SAS.
NAC is a limited liability company registered in Norway since 1993.
NLA je družba z omejeno odgovornostjo, registrirana na Norveškem od leta 1993.
It was owned by SAS (60 %), Norsk Luftfartshøgskole (29 %), and other smaller shareholders.
Bila je v lasti SAS (60 %), Norsk Luftfartshøgskole (29 %) in drugih manjših delničarjev.
Norsk Luftfartshøgskole is a foundation registered in Norway since 1997.
Norsk Luftfartshøgskole je sklad, ki je na Norveškem registriran od leta 1997.
Its founding members are Troms fylkeskommune, SAS Flight Academy and the Municipalities of Bardu and Målselv.
Njegovi ustanovni člani so Troms fylkeskommune, Letalska akademija SAS in občini Bardu in Målselv.
As a preliminary remark, the complainant refutes the description of the pilot education system given by the Norwegian authorities and maintains that both it and NAC have the same licence (granted by the Norwegian Civil Aviation Authority) and both offer integrated education in Norway to become an Airline Transport Pilot [15].
Uvodoma je treba pripomniti, da pritožnik zavrača opis sistema izobraževanja za pilote, ki so ga navedli norveški organi, in trdi, da ima enako dovoljenje kot NLA (izdala ga je Norveška uprava za civilno letalstvo) in oba izvajata integrirano izobraževanje na Norveškem za prometne pilote [15].
According to the Norwegian authorities, the loan from Troms County was granted under the Regional Loan Scheme notified to and authorised by the Authority in 1999.
Norveški organi navajajo, da je bilo posojilo okrožja Troms odobreno v skladu s shemo za regionalno posojilo, ki je bila v letu 1999 Nadzornemu organu prijavljena in jo je le-ta odobril.
Remission of a loan also lessens the financial burden which the recipient would otherwise have to bear.
Odpis posojila tudi zmanjšuje finančno breme, ki bi ga sicer moral nositi prejemnik.
Guidelines on the application and interpretation of Articles 61 and 62 of the EEA Agreement and Article 1 of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement, adopted and issued by the EFTA Surveillance Authority on 19 January 1994, published in the Official Journal of the European Union (hereinafter referred to as OJ) L 231, 3.9.1994, p. 1 and EEA Supplement No 32, 3.9.1994.
Smernice o uporabi in razlagi členov 61 in 62 Sporazuma EGP in člena 1 Protokola 3 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču, ki jih je sprejel in izdal Nadzorni organ Efte 19. januarja 1994, objavljene v Uradnem listu Evropske unije (v nadaljnjem besedilu: UL) L 231, 3.9.1994, str. 1, in Dopolnilu EGP št. 32, 3.9.1994.
The Guidelines were last amended on 25 April 2007.
Smernice so bile nazadnje spremenjene 25. aprila 2007.
The complainant notes that the County did not comment on the initial granting of the loan, nor on the postponement of repayment in 2003.
Pritožnik ugotavlja, da okrožje ni dalo pripomb o začetni odobritvi posojila, niti o odlogu odplačila v letu 2003.
It maintains its claim that these elements also amount to State aid.
Še naprej trdi, da so tudi ti elementi državna pomoč.
The Authority therefore concludes that the airline pilot education provided by NAC before it went bankrupt was an economic activity and that NAC is an undertaking for the purposes of Article 61 EEA.2.1. Presence of state resources
Nadzorni organ zato ugotavlja, da je bilo izobraževanje za letalske pilote, ki ga je izvajal NLA, preden je šel v stečaj, gospodarska dejavnost in da je NLA podjetje za namene člena 61 EGP.2.1 Prisotnost državnih sredstev
HAVING REGARD to the Agreement on the European Economic Area [2], in particular to Articles 61 to 63 and Protocol 26 thereof,
OB UPOŠTEVANJU Sporazuma o Evropskem gospodarskem prostoru [2] in zlasti členov 61 do 63 Sporazuma ter Protokola 26 k Sporazumu,
281, post 1).
281, postavka 1).
No 303/09/COL
št. 303/09/COL
on the scheme relating to maritime transport in the form of a tonnage tax scheme and a refund scheme for the employment of seafarers
o programu za pomorski promet v obliki sheme davka na tonažo in sheme za vračilo za zaposlitev pomorščakov
Having regard to Article 1(2) of Part I and Articles 4(4), 6 and 7(5) of Part II of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement [4],
ob upoštevanju člena 1(2) dela I in člena 4(4), člena 6 in člena 7(5) dela II Protokola 3 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču [4],
Having regard to the Authority’s Guidelines on the application and interpretation of Articles 61 and 62 of the EEA Agreement [5], and in particular the Chapter on Aid to Maritime Transport [6],
ob upoštevanju smernic Nadzornega organa o uporabi in razlagi členov 61 in 62 Sporazuma EGP [5] ter zlasti poglavja o pomoči za pomorski promet [6],
Having regard to the Authority’s Decision of 14 July 2004 on the implementing provisions referred to under Article 27 of Part II of Protocol 3 [7],
ob upoštevanju Odločbe Nadzornega organa z dne 14. julija 2004 o izvedbenih določbah iz člena 27 dela II Protokola 3 [7],
Having called on interested parties to submit their comments pursuant to those provisions [8],
po pozivu zainteresiranim strankam, naj predložijo svoje pripombe na podlagi teh določb [8],
By letter of 23 March 2007 (Event No 415003), the Icelandic authorities notified the Authority of planned aid to the maritime transport sector, pursuant to Article 1(3) of Part I of Protocol 3.
Z dopisom z dne 23. marca 2007 (ev. št. 415003) so islandski organi v skladu s členom 1(3) dela I Protokola 3 Nadzorni organ obvestili o načrtovani pomoči sektorju pomorskega prometa.
After various exchanges of correspondence [9], by letter dated 19 December 2007, the Authority informed the Icelandic authorities that it had decided to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 1(2) of Part I of Protocol 3 in respect of the state aid to maritime transport in Iceland in the form of a tonnage tax scheme and a refund scheme for the employment of seafarers.
Po več izmenjavah dopisov [9] je Nadzorni organ z dopisom z dne 19. decembra 2007 obvestil islandske organe, da se je odločil sprožiti postopek iz člena 1(2) dela I Protokola 3 v zvezi z državno pomočjo pomorskemu prometu v Islandiji v obliki sheme davka na tonažo in sheme za vračilo za zaposlitev pomorščakov.
The Authority’s Decision No 721/07/COL to initiate the procedure was published in the Official Journal of the European Union and the EEA Supplement thereto [10].
Odločba nadzornega organa št. 721/07/COL o sprožitvi postopka je bila objavljena v Uradnem listu Evropske unije in v Dopolnilu EGP k Uradnemu listu Evropske unije.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED MEASURES
OPIS PREDLAGANIH UKREPOV
The notification entailed two separate measures: a tonnage tax scheme and a special refund scheme for ship-owners.
S priglasitvijo sta bila posredovana dva ločena ukrepa: shema davka na tonažo in posebna shema za vračilo za lastnike ladij.
The two measures will be described here below.
Ta dva ukrepa bosta opisana v nadaljevanju.
TITLE AND OBJECTIVE OF THE NOTIFIED SCHEMES
NASLOV IN CILJ PRIGLAŠENIH SHEM
The scheme ‘Ríkisstyrkur vegan kaupskipaútgerðar á Íslandi’, i.e., state aid to maritime transport in Iceland comprises both notified measures.
Shema „Ríkisstyrkur vegan kaupskipaútgerðar á Íslandi“, tj. državna pomoč pomorskemu prometu v Islandiji, vključuje oba priglašena ukrepa.
The objective of the scheme is to support maritime transport in Iceland by giving advantages to ship-owners with a view to encouraging them to register in Iceland, rather than sailing under a convenience flag.
Cilj sheme je podpreti pomorski promet v Islandiji z dajanjem prednosti lastnikom ladij in spodbudo le-tem, da se raje registrirajo v Islandiji, kot da plujejo pod zastavo ugodnosti.
NATIONAL LEGAL BASIS FOR THE NOTIFIED MEASURES
NACIONALNA PRAVNA PODLAGA ZA PRIGLAŠENA UKREPA
The legal basis for the above mentioned measures is Act 86/2007 on the Taxation of merchant vessel operations ‘Lög um skattlagningu kaupskipaútgerðar’ (hereinafter the ‘Tonnage Tax Act’).
Pravna podlaga za zgoraj navedena ukrepa je Zakon 86/2007 o obdavčitvi dejavnosti trgovskih plovil „Lög um skattlagningu kaupskipaútgerðar“ (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Zakon o davku na tonažo).