natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The State would maintain its responsibility for the studios as this part of the production process was considered not sustainable on market conditions.
Država bi bila še naprej odgovorna za studie, saj se je za ta del produkcije štelo, da v tržnih pogojih ni vzdržen.
In 2001, Norsk Film AS was de-merged into two separate companies: a company for film production, named Norsk Film AS and a company for infrastructure, named Filmparken AS.
Leta 2001 se je podjetje Norsk Film AS razdelilo na dve ločeni podjetji: podjetje za filmsko produkcijo Norsk Film AS in podjetje za infrastrukturo Filmparken AS.
The remaining assets of the company stayed in Filmparken AS.
Preostala sredstva podjetja so pripadla podjetju Filmparken AS.
Norsk FilmStudio AS continued as a wholly-owned subsidiary of Filmparken AS.
Podjetje Norsk FilmStudio AS je poslovanje nadaljevalo kot hčerinsko podjetje v popolni lasti podjetja Filmparken AS.
On 25 June 2001, Norsk FilmStudio AS merged into Filmparken AS.
Dne 25. junija 2001 se je podjetje Norsk FilmStudio AS združilo s podjetjem Filmparken AS.
The State sold its shares in the production company Norsk Film AS to a private production company called Diopter AS on 4 January 2002.
Dne 4. januarja 2002 je država svoje delnice v produkcijskem podjetju Norsk Film AS prodalo zasebnemu produkcijskemu podjetju Diopter AS.
In 2002, Filmparken AS was re-named Norsk FilmStudio AS again.
Leta 2002 se je podjetje Filmparken AS znova preimenovalo v Norsk FilmStudio AS.
In 2004, ScanCam AS merged into Norsk FilmStudio AS.
Leta 2004 se je podjetje ScanCam AS združilo s podjetjem Norsk FilmStudio AS.
In 2009, Norsk FilmStudio AS and The Chimney Pot AS merged to become Storyline Studios AS.
Leta 2009 sta se podjetji Norsk FilmStudio AS in The Chimney Pot AS združili v podjetje Storyline Studios AS.
After the merger Filmparken AS owns 60 % of the business with 40 % left to the shareholders of the prior Chimney Pot AS.
Po združitvi je 60 % podjetja v lasti podjetja Filmparken AS, medtem ko je preostalih 40 % v lasti delničarjev prejšnjega podjetja The Chimney Pot AS.
Storyline Studios AS is a full spectre supplier of equipment and services to the film industry, providing film studios, grip and light, camera, post production, costumes, financing, office facilities, line production and film catalogues.
Podjetje Storyline Studios AS je ponudnik in izvajalec širokega nabora opreme in storitev za filmsko industrijo, kar vključuje filmske studie, scenografijo in osvetljavo, kamere, postprodukcijo, kostumografijo, financiranje, pisarniške prostore, izvršno produkcijo in filmske kataloge.
Description of the measures investigated
Opis ukrepov v preiskavi
The Authority investigated two different measures: the payment of the grant of NOK 36 million (see Section 3.1) and the preferential tax treatment some companies belonging to the Norsk Film group benefited from (see section 3.2).
Nadzorni organ je preiskal dva različna ukrepa, in sicer plačilo subvencije v višini 36 milijonov NOK (glej oddelek 3.1) in prednostno davčno obravnavo nekaterih podjetij, ki pripadajo skupini Norsk Film (glej oddelek 3.2).
Payment of the grant of NOK 36 million
Plačilo subvencije v višini 36 milijonov NOK
The grants were paid by the Ministry of Culture and Church Affairs.
Subvencije je plačevalo ministrstvo za kulturo in cerkvene zadeve.
The Authority, in its Decision No 491/09/COL, has taken the view that the yearly payments made by the Norwegian State since the 1970s to various entities belonging to the Norsk Film group for the production of feature films and to maintain an infrastructure necessary for the production of films were based on an existing system of aid.
Nadzorni organ je v Odločbi št. 491/09/COL ugotovil, da so letna plačila norveške države od sedemdesetih let prejšnjega stoletja različnim podjetjem iz skupine Norsk Film za produkcijo celovečernih igranih filmov in vzdrževanje infrastrukture, potrebne za filmsko produkcijo, izhajala iz obstoječega sistema pomoči.
The Norwegian authorities have indicated that in 1997, the Norwegian Parliament decided to grant NOK 36 million to Norsk Film AS for the upgrading, modernisation and development of the production facilities called “Filmparken”.
Leta 1997 so norveški organi naznanili, da se je norveški parlament odločil dodeliti 36 milijonov NOK podjetju Norsk Film AS za nadgradnjo, posodobitev in razvoj produkcijskih prostorov, imenovanih „Filmparken“.
The grant was allocated over the national budget’s section for grants to national cultural buildings.
Subvencija je bila dodeljena prek dela državnega proračuna za subvencije nacionalnim kulturnim objektom.
The Authority, in Decision No 491/09/COL, considered that as the payment of the grant of NOK 36 million was based on a different budget allocation and the specific amount was singled out for a special aim (renovation of the jar site), it could amount to new aid.
Nadzorni organ je v Odločbi št. 491/09/COL izrazil mnenje, da je plačilo subvencije v višini 36 milijonov NOK temeljilo na drugačni proračunski dodelitvi, pri čemer je bil zadevni znesek namenjen posebnemu cilju (prenova dvorane za posebne učinke) ter bi zato lahko pomenil novo pomoč.
The Authority had doubts as to whether this contribution formed part of the existing system of aid or whether it constituted a new aid measure.
Nadzorni organ je imel pomisleke glede tega, ali je bil ta prispevek del obstoječega sistema pomoči oziroma je šlo pri njem za nov ukrep pomoči.
Preferential tax treatment
Prednostna davčna obravnava
Norsk Film AS and Norsk FilmStudio AS benefited from a tax exemption as from 1995.
Podjetji Norsk Film AS in Norsk FilmStudio AS sta bili od leta 1995 oproščeni plačila davka.
The exemption was based on Section 26, first paragraph, litra k, of the former Tax Act of 18 August 1911 No 8, replaced by the Tax Act of 26 March 1999 No 14 [4].According to Section 2-32 of the Norwegian Tax Act, presently setting out the rules regarding this preferential tax regime, non-profit organisations, institutions and companies are exempt from corporate tax to the extent that they operate on a non-profit basis.
Oprostitev je temeljila na točki (k) prvega odstavka oddelka 26 nekdanjega zakona o davku št. 8 z dne 18. avgusta 1911, ki ga je nadomestil zakon o davku št. 14 z dne 26. marca 1999 [4].V skladu z oddelkom 2-32 norveškega zakona o davku, ki v veljavni obliki določa pravila glede tega režima prednostne davčne obravnave, so neprofitne organizacije, ustanove in podjetja oproščeni plačila davka od dobička pravnih oseb, če poslujejo na neprofitni osnovi.
Whether an institution or a company is considered as non-profit according to Section 2-32 is determined on the basis of objective criteria, with the purpose of the company being the decisive factor.
Ali je ustanova oziroma podjetje neprofitno v skladu z oddelkom 2-32, se določi na podlagi objektivnih meril, pri čemer je odločilni dejavnik namen podjetja.
Thus, a charitable purpose indicates the presence of a non-profit body.
Dobrodelni namen tako nakazuje, da gre za neprofitno podjetje.
In order to determine the purpose of the company, the tax authorities take into account inter alia its statutes including its statutory purpose and the activity actually carried out.
Pri določanju namena podjetja davčni organi med drugim upoštevajo njegove statute, vključno s predpisanim namenom in dejavnostjo, ki jo podjetje dejansko izvaja.
Whether the body is engaged in activities that are exposed to competition is also taken into consideration.
Prav tako se upošteva, ali podjetje opravlja konkurenčne dejavnosti.
If the undertaking carries out economic or commercial activities and competes with taxable profit driven companies, this indicates the existence of a taxable status.
Če podjetje opravlja gospodarske ali trgovinske dejavnosti in konkurira z obdavčljivimi profitnimi podjetji, to kaže, da je tudi samo obdavčljivo.
Another element taken into account is the nature of the funding of the undertaking.
Poleg tega se upošteva tudi, kako je podjetje financirano.
If the company is funded by private gifts or other contributions, this indicates that the company has a non-profit purpose.
Financiranje podjetja z zasebnimi darili ali drugimi prispevki nakazuje njegov neprofitni namen.
An organisation considered non-profit is exempt from corporate tax for profit resulting from the non-profit purpose of the company.
Neprofitna organizacija je oproščena plačila davka od dobička pravnih oseb za dobiček, ki izhaja iz neprofitnega namena podjetja.
Income derived from commercial activities is – under certain conditions – subject to corporate tax [5].Whether Section 2-32 is applicable to a company or organisation is determined by the tax authorities as part of the normal annual assessment process.
Pod določenimi pogoji se ji za prihodek iz trgovinskih dejavnostih zaračuna davek od dobička pravnih oseb [5].Davčni organi v okviru običajnega letnega postopka ocenjevanja določijo, ali za podjetje ali organizacijo velja oddelek 2-32.
It is on the basis of the information provided by the tax payer in the tax return and other information available that the local tax authorities determine which tax regime is applicable.
Lokalni davčni organi določijo veljavni davčni režim na podlagi informacij, ki jih predložijo davkoplačevalci v davčni napovedi, in ostalih razpoložljivih informacij.
Norsk Film AS, Norsk FilmStudio AS and ScanCam AS were granted a tax exemption based on the fact that the purpose of the companies was non-profit.
Podjetja Norsk Film AS, Norsk FilmStudio AS in ScanCam AS so bila oproščena plačila davka zaradi svojega neprofitnega namena.
Until 1995, Norsk Film AS and Norsk FilmStudio AS did not apply for the special regime.
Podjetji Norsk Film AS in Norsk FilmStudio AS do leta 1995 nista zaprosili za posebni režim.
Following their applications they benefited from such a regime from 1995 until 2001.
Po vložitvi zahtevka jima je bil takšen režim odobren za obdobje med letoma 1995 in 2001.
As from 2002, the companies were no longer funded by government subsidies and they carried out normal business activities.
Po letu 2002 podjetji nista bili več financirani z vladnimi subvencijami in sta opravljali običajne poslovne dejavnosti.
They were therefore considered as normal profit-making companies and consequently subject to standard corporate tax.
Zato sta se šteli za običajni profitni podjetji, za kateri je posledično veljal običajni davek od dobička pravnih oseb.
Until 1998, Norsk Film AS and Schibsted ASA each owned 50% of the shares in ScanCam AS.
Do leta 1998 sta imeli podjetji Norsk Film AS in Schibsted ASA vsako v lasti 50 % delnic podjetja ScanCam AS.
ScanCam AS was therefore not considered an integrated part of Norsk Film AS’ business.
Podjetje ScanCam AS zato ni veljalo za sestavni del poslovanja podjetja Norsk Film AS.
From December 1998, ScanCam AS was 100 % owned first by Norsk Film AS and then, from 1999, by Norsk FilmStudio AS (the wholly-owned subsidiary of Norsk Film AS). After this change, the tax authorities considered that ScanCam AS was an integrated part of Norsk Film AS’ activity and could therefore benefit from the same tax regime for the years 1998–2000.
Po decembru 1998 je bilo podjetje ScanCam AS najprej v 100-odstotni lasti podjetja Norsk Film AS, od leta 1999 pa v lasti podjetja Norsk FilmStudio AS (hčerinsko podjetje v popolni lasti podjetja Norsk Film AS).
ScanCam AS generated a profit in the years 1998, 1999, 2000 and 2001 [6].In their evaluation, the tax authorities considered that the companies could benefit from the non-profit organisation status on the basis of the following elements: the statutes of Norsk Film AS which provided that its purpose was non-profit, the fact that 97,7 % of the shares were held by the State and local municipalities and the fact that the company was funded essentially through state subsidies.
Po tej spremembi so davčni organi menili, da je podjetje ScanCam AS sestavni del dejavnosti podjetja Norsk Film AS in bi se zato zanj v letih od 1998 do 2000 lahko uporabljal enak davčni režim. Podjetje ScanCam AS je v letih 1998, 1999, 2000 in 2001 ustvarilo dobiček [6].Davčni organi so v svoji oceni menili, da bi podjetja lahko imela korist od statusa neprofitne organizacije na podlagi naslednjih elementov: statutov podjetja Norsk Film AS, ki so dokazovali njegov neprofitni namen; dejstva, da je bilo 97,7 % delnic v državni lasti in lasti lokalnih občin; ter dejstva, da je bilo podjetje financirano predvsem z državnimi subvencijami.
The tax authorities furthermore indicated that the tax exemption was given under the proviso that a possible profit should be used in full to achieve the purpose of the company within the framework of being a non-profit undertaking.
Poleg tega so davčni organi navedli, da je bila davčna oprostitev odobrena pod pogojem, da se morebitni dobiček v celoti porabi za doseganje namena podjetja v okviru njegovega neprofitnega delovanja.
The subsidiary Norsk FilmStudio AS was regarded as an integrated part of Norsk Film AS’ activity and covered by the same tax exemption.
Hčerinsko podjetje Norsk FilmStudio AS se je štelo za sestavni del dejavnosti podjetja Norsk Film AS in zanj je veljala enaka davčna oprostitev.
The Norwegian authorities have indicated that Norsk FilmStudio AS did not generate a profit in the years 1995–2001 and that consequently, the application of the favourable tax regime was without effect.
Norveški organi so navedli, da podjetje Norsk FilmStudio AS v obdobju 1995–2001 ni ustvarilo dobička, zato uporaba ugodnega davčnega režima ni imela učinka.
The companies are now all subject to standard corporate tax.
Za vsa podjetja zdaj velja običajni davek od dobička pravnih oseb.
The Authority, in Decision No 491/09/COL, considered that it was doubtful whether the application of the exemption from corporate tax based on the logic of exemption for non-profit organisations may justify the tax exemption in the case of the companies belonging to the Norsk Film group.
Nadzorni organ je v Odločbi št. 491/09/COL menil, da ni jasno, ali uporaba oprostitve od davka od dobička pravnih oseb na osnovi logike oprostitve neprofitnih organizacij lahko upraviči oprostitev od davka v primeru podjetij, ki pripadajo skupini Norsk Film.
The aid in the form of an exemption from corporate tax is operating aid.
Pomoč v obliki oprostitve od davka od dobička pravnih oseb je pomoč za poslovanje.
Such aid is only allowed under special circumstances, and, in particular, in situations where the criteria set out in the Authority’s Guidelines are met (e.g. for certain types of environmental or regional aid).
Taka pomoč je dovoljena le v posebnih primerih, zlasti kadar so izpolnjena merila iz smernic Nadzornega organa (npr. za posebne vrste okoljske ali regionalne pomoči).
The Authority therefore doubted that the special tax rules – as applied to some of the companies belonging to the Norsk Film group – could be justified under the state aid provisions of the EEA Agreement.
Nadzorni organ je zato dvomil, da je posebna davčna pravila, ki so veljala za nekatera podjetja, ki pripadajo skupini Norsk Film, mogoče upravičiti na podlagi določb Sporazuma EGP o državni pomoči.
The payment of the grant does not constitute state aid
Plačilo subvencije ne pomeni državne pomoči
The Norwegian authorities argue that the payment of the NOK 36 million does not constitute state aid.
Norveški organi trdijo, da plačilo 36 milijonov NOK ne pomeni državne pomoči.
Adopting an effects based approach, the Norwegian authorities claim that the grant under review did not actually confer any economic advantage upon the recipient.
Norveški organi so z uporabo pristopa na podlagi učinkov trdili, da subvencija, ki se pregleduje, prejemniku dejansko ni zagotovila nobene gospodarske prednosti.
The Norwegian authorities consider that none of the companies gained any economic advantage as a result of the grant for upgrading and modernisation of Filmparken.
Norveški organi menijo, da zaradi subvencij za nadgradnjo in posodobitev prostorov Filmparken nobeno od podjetij ni pridobilo gospodarske prednosti.
Norsk FilmStudio AS was responsible for renting out the facilities to all production companies in Norway.
Podjetje Norsk FilmStudio AS je oddajalo prostore v najem vsem produkcijskim podjetjem na Norveškem.
There was a clear legal separation within the Norsk Film group of the activities of production of film and rental of production facilities.
V skupini Norsk Film so bile dejavnosti filmske produkcije in dejavnosti oddajanja produkcijskih prostorov v najem jasno pravno razmejene.
Access to the production facilities was open and given to all Norwegian production companies (including Norsk Film AS) on equal terms and conditions.
Dostop do produkcijskih prostorov je bil pod enakimi pogoji omogočen vsem norveškim produkcijskim podjetjem (vključno s podjetjem Norsk Film AS).
The rental activities were not profitable and generated deficits for Norsk FilmStudio AS.
Dejavnosti oddajanja v najem niso bile dobičkonosne in podjetje Norsk FilmStudio AS je z njimi ustvarilo izgubo.
The Norwegian authorities argue that it cannot be said that the measure gave the Norsk Film group an economic advantage as this was clearly not the effect of the grant.
Norveški organi trdijo, da ni mogoče trditi, da so ukrepi skupini Norsk Film zagotovili gospodarsko prednost, saj je jasno, da to ni bila posledica subvencije.
The intent and the effect of the measure were rather to provide Norwegian film producers with access to production facilities.
Namen in učinek ukrepa sta bila norveškim filmskim producentom omogočiti dostop do produkcijskih prostorov.
They stress that it was only due to a market failure that Norsk FilmStudio AS acted as the sole provider of rental studio facilities where films of a certain length and quality could be produced.
Poudarjajo, da je bilo zgolj zaradi tržne pomanjkljivosti podjetje Norsk FilmStudio AS edini najemodajalec studijskih prostorov, kjer je bilo mogoče snemati filme določene dolžine in kakovosti.
The company did so to the benefit of all producers and did not receive an economic advantage.
Podjetje je tako ravnalo v korist vseh producentov in ni pridobilo gospodarske prednosti.
The measure would in any event constitute existing aid
Ukrep bi v vsakem primeru pomenil obstoječo pomoč
The Norwegian authorities argue that even if the grant of NOK 36 million amounted to state aid, it would, in any event, constitute existing aid.
Norveški organi trdijo, da tudi če bi se subvencija v višini 36 milijonov NOK štela za državno pomoč, bi v vsakem primeru pomenila obstoječo pomoč.
Indeed, the Norwegian authorities consider that the payment of the NOK 36 million grant formed part of the existing system of aid in the form of the payment of the yearly grants.
Norveški organi vsekakor menijo, da je bilo plačilo subvencije v višini 36 milijonov NOK del obstoječega sistema pomoči v obliki plačila letnih subvencij.
The Norwegian authorities state that the fact that the grant was paid out from a different budget than that used for the yearly grants is not a sufficient indication that the grant itself constituted a severable and new measure.
Norveški organi trdijo, da dejstvo, da je bila subvencija izplačana iz drugega proračuna in ne iz proračuna, iz katerega se izplačujejo letne subvencije, ni zadosten dokaz, da je sama subvencija pomenila ločen in nov ukrep.
The scheme is said to have always consisted of an investment part and an operating part.
Shema naj bi že od nekdaj obsegala del za naložbe in del za poslovanje.
The upgrading and modernising process had been ongoing for some time and the costs involved had, until 1998 – 1999, been estimated to NOK 13 million.
Postopek nadgradnje in posodobitve je potekal že nekaj časa, pri čemer je do leta 1998/1999 nastalo za okoli 13 milijonov NOK stroškov.
This amount included contributions from the Norwegian State through the existing support scheme which was in place since the 1970s.
V ta znesek so bili vključeni prispevki norveške države, dodeljeni prek obstoječe sheme za podporo, ki je bila uvedena v sedemdesetih letih prejšnjega stoletja.
In 1997, however, it became clear that NOK 13 million was not sufficient to complete the works and therefore it was decided to allocate an additional NOK 36 million to complete the upgrading.
Leta 1997 pa je postalo jasno, da 13 milijonov NOK ne bo zadostovalo za dokončanje del, zato je bila sprejeta odločitev, da se za dokončanje nadgradnje dodeli dodatnih 36 milijonov NOK.
The Norwegian authorities provided the Authority with data supporting that also in the past amounts had been allocated and earmarked for the upgrading and modernisation of infrastructures necessary for maintaining conditions for film production.
Norveški organi so Nadzornemu organu predložili podatke, ki so potrjevali dejstvo, da so bili tudi v preteklosti dodeljeni namenski zneski za nadgradnjo in posodobitev infrastrukture, potrebne za vzdrževanje pogojev za filmsko produkcijo.
Finally, the Norwegian authorities argue that the fact that the amount of the grant was much higher than the yearly payments had been until then was no indication that it constituted new aid.
Norveški organi tudi trdijo, da dejstvo, da je znesek subvencije bistveno višji od letnih plačil iz preteklosti, ne dokazuje, da gre za novo pomoč.
They refer to the judgment of the European Court of Justice in the case Namur-Les-Assurances [7]: “the emergence of new aid or the alteration of existing aid cannot be assessed according to the scale of the aid or, in particular, its amount in financial terms at any moment in the life of the undertaking if the aid is provided under earlier statutory provisions which remain unaltered”.
Sklicujejo se na sodbo Sodišča v zadevi Namur-Les-Assurances [7]: „nastanka nove pomoči ali spremembe obstoječe pomoči ni mogoče ocenjevati glede na obseg pomoči ali zlasti njen znesek v finančnem smislu v katerem koli obdobju delovanja podjetja, če se pomoč dodeli v skladu s predhodnimi zakonskimi določbami, ki se niso spremenile.“
New aid would in any event be compatible
Nova pomoč bi bila v vsakem primeru združljiva
The Norwegian authorities argue that the measure, if the Authority concluded that it amounted to new aid, would, in any event, be compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement.
Norveški organi trdijo, da bi bil ukrep, če bi Nadzorni organ sklenil, da gre za novo pomoč, v vsakem primeru združljiv z delovanjem Sporazuma EGP.
Indeed, they consider that the measure would be compatible with Article 61(3)(c) EEA as the grant’s purpose was cultural conservation, and the measure was necessary and proportionate to achieve such an aim.
Vsekakor menijo, da bi bil ukrep združljiv s členom 61(3)(c) Sporazuma EGP, saj je bil namen subvencije ohranjanje kulture, pri čemer je bil ukrep potreben in sorazmeren za dosego takega cilja.
The Norwegian authorities state that the production of films constitutes an important cultural expression and forms part of the nation’s heritage.
Po mnenju norveških organov filmska produkcija predstavlja pomembno kulturno izražanje in je del nacionalne dediščine.
Without suitable production facilities, no film production would take place.
Brez ustreznih produkcijskih prostorov filmska produkcija ne bi bila mogoča.
Furthermore, the grant was a necessary intervention because of a market failure.
Poleg tega je bila zaradi tržne pomanjkljivosti subvencija nujen ukrep.
The Norwegian authorities also stress that the Authority has approved support measures for audiovisual schemes which would remain without effect if the necessary infrastructure to produce audiovisual works did not exist.
Norveški organi tudi poudarjajo, da je Nadzorni organ odobril podporne ukrepe za avdiovizualne sheme, ki brez potrebne infrastrukture za produkcijo avdiovizualnih del ne bi imeli učinka.
The application of the preferential tax treatment does not constitute state aid
Uporaba prednostne davčne obravnave ne pomeni državne pomoči