natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Court, however, underlines that it previously identified issues (22) which remain unresolved: — in several areas the scope or scale of reservations should be greater (see paragraphs 1.20; 3.52 to 3.54; 4.45 to 4.46; 5.31 to 5.34; 6.46 to 6.47 and Annexes x.3 to Chapters 2 to 7), — data from Member States on recoveries or withdrawals is still incomplete or has not yet been audited and/or validated by the Commission (see Annex 1.2, point 3), — the difference between financial correction mechanisms and recoveries (financial corrections are a consequence of weaknesses identified in supervisory and control systems whereas recoveries are related to irregular payments) and their impact (financial corrections are borne by the taxpayers whereas recoveries are paid by the individual beneficiaries) is still not adequately taken into consideration (see Annex 1.2, point 3). 
Vendar Sodišče poudarja, da je v prete­ klosti ugotovilo težave (22), ki so še nerešene: — obseg ali teža pridržkov bi morala biti na več področjih večja (glej odstavke 1.20; 3.52 do 3.54; 4.45 do 4.46; 5.31 do 5.34; 6.46 do 6.47 in priloge x.3 k poglavjem 2 do 7), — podatki držav članic o izterjavah ali umikih so še vedno nepopolni ali pa jih Komisija še ni revidirala in/ali potrdila (glej Prilogo 1.2, točka 3), — razlike med mehanizmi za finančne popravke in izterjave (finančni popravki so posledica slabosti, ugotovljenih v nadzornih in kontrolnih sistemih, izterjave pa so povezane z nepravilnimi plačili) in njihovim učinkom (finančni popravki bremenijo davkoplačevalce, izterjave pa plačajo posamezni upravičenci) se še vedno ne upoštevajo na ustrezen način (glej Prilogo 1.2, točka 3).
T H E C O M M I S S I O N ’ S R E P L I E S _____________ (20) See Green Paper on the modernisation of the EU public procurement policy (directives 2004/18/EC and 2004/17/EC). 
O D G O VO R I KO M I S I J E _____________ (20) Glej zeleno knjigo o modernizaciji direktiv EU o politiki oddaje javnih naročil (direktivi 2004/18/ES in 2004/17/ES).
(21) See point 2.3 of COM(2011) 323 final of 1 June 2011. 
(21) Glej točko 2.3 COM(2011) 323 konč. z dne 1. junija 2011.
(22) See paragraph 1.31 of the Court’s 2009 Annual Report. — The Commission considers that the scope or scale of reservations is appropriate (see replies to paragraphs 1.19 to 1.20, 3.52 to 3.54, 4.46 and 5.33-5.34). — Information related to recoveries is included in note 6 to the accounts. 
(22) Glej odstavek 1.31 letnega poročila Sodišča za leto 2009. 1.25 — Komisija meni, da je obseg ali teža pridržkov ustrezna (glej odgovore na odstavke 1.19 do 1.20, 3.52 do 3.54, 4.46 in 5.33 do 5.34). — Informacije v zvezi z izterjavami so vključene v pojasnilo 6 k računovodskim izkazom.
In Cohesion, for the programming period 2000-2006 the Commission verifies that information submitted for the closure of programmes is complete and reliable. 
Komisija v zvezi s kohezijo za programsko obdobje 2000–2006 potrjuje, da so informacije, predložene za zaključek programov, celovite in zanesljive.
For the 2007-2013 programming period, the Commission is carrying out a specific audit enquiry on the Member States’ systems for recoveries, in order to gain assurance on the quality of data submitted in the annual statements on recoveries and withdrawals. 
Komisija za programsko obdobje 2007–2013 izvaja posebni revizijski pregled sistemov držav članic za izterjave, da pridobi zagotovilo o kakovosti podatkov, predloženih v letnih izjavah o izterjavah in umikih.
The first results of this audit are expected to be taken into account in the annual activity reports of 2011. — The Commission reports in its accounts at the level of the EU budget and considers that recoveries are essential in protecting the EU budget. 
Pričakuje se, da se bodo prvi rezultati te revizije upoštevali v letnih poročilih o dejavnostih za leto 2011. — Komisija v svojih računovodskih izkazih poroča na ravni prora­ čuna EU in meni, da so izterjave bistvene za zaščito proračuna EU.
The Commission understands that the Court’s reference to recoveries concerns those at the level of beneficiaries in the Member States and requires that information reported should refer to such recoveries. 
Komisija razume, da sklicevanje Sodišča na izterjave zadeva tiste na ravni upravičencev v državah članicah, in zahteva, da se informacije, o katerih se poroča, nanašajo na take izterjave.
However, in areas of shared management this responsibility lies with the Member States, as explained in the Commission’s replies to paragraph 1.39 of the 2009 Annual Report of the Court. 
Vendar so na področjih deljenega upravljanja za to odgovorne države članice, kot je razloženo v odgovorih Komisije na odstavek 1.39 v letnem poročilu Sodišča za leto 2009.
As soon as a Member State has reimbursed unduly paid funds (through effective claw back or through setting off), the Commission considers that the EU budget is protected. 
Komisija proračun EU šteje kot zaščiten takoj, ko država članica povrne neupravi­ čeno izplačana sredstva (prek uspešne izterjave ali prek porav­ nave).
However, Member States are obliged to recover unduly paid amounts wherever possible and appropriate. 
Vendar so države članice zavezane k izterjavi neupravičeno izplačanih zneskov, kadar koli je to mogoče in primerno.
When these payments are correctly identified as pre-financing they are not treated in the Union’s accounts as definitive expenditure at the time they are made. 
Kadar so ta plačila pravilno navedena kot pred­ financiranje, se jih ob času nastanka v računovodskih izkazih Unije ne obravnava kot dokončne odhodke.
Instead they are recorded as an asset in the balance sheet until justification is presented for costs incurred (or, less frequently completion of the required activity). 
Namesto tega so evidentirana v bilanci stanja kot sredstvo, dokler se ne predloži dokazilo za nastale stroške (ali redkeje, dokler zahtevana dejav­ nost ni končana).
On this basis, the Commission records the related expense in the economic outturn account and clears the balance sheet entry. 1.27. 
Na tej osnovi Komisija vknjiži ustrezne stroške v izkaz poslovnega izida in vknjižbo obračuna v bilanci stanja.
If advances are recognised in the accounts as definitive expenditure, there is no accounting record of the need to present evidence of the final use of the funds. 
1.27 Če se predplačila v računovodskih izkazih priznajo kot dokončni odhodki, ni računovodske evidence o tem, da je treba predložiti dokaze o končni porabi teh sredstev.
This increases the risk that the use of funds will not be justified, and that irregularities will not be detected or detected only after a considerable delay. 
To pove­ čuje tveganje, da bo poraba sredstev neupravičena in da nepra­ vilnosti ne bodo ugotovljene ali bodo ugotovljene šele z veliko zamudo.
This may make it more difficult to recover amounts irregularly paid. 
To lahko oteži izterjavo nepravilno izplačanih zneskov.
Substantial increase of pre-financing between 2005 and 2010 1.28. The gross recorded value of accumulated pre-financing has more than doubled over the last six years (from 39 billion to 84 billion euro, see first row of Table 1.3). 
Veliko povečanje predfinanciranja od leta 2005 do 2010 1.28 Evidentiranabrutovrednostakumuliranegapredfinan­ ciranja se je v zadnjih šestih letih več kot podvojila (z 39 milijard EUR na 84 milijard EUR, glej prvo vrstico tabele 1.3).
The Commission also estimates, during the cut-off exercise (23), the expenditure incurred at year-end by the bene­ ficiaries for which payment requests have not yet been received. 
Pri ločitvi proračunskih let Komisija(23) tudi pripravi oceno odhodkov, ki so nastali na koncu leta pri upravičencih in za katere še niso bili prejeti zahtevki za plačilo.
These accrued charges (see second row of Table 1.3) are deducted from the related gross outstanding pre-financing. 
Ti vnaprej vračunani stroški (glej drugo vrstico tabele 1.3) se odštejejo od ustreznih bruto zneskov predfinanciranja, ki še ni bilo obraču­ nano.
The resulting net pre-financing amount in the balance sheet (see third row of Table 1.3) has grown significantly too, but less rapidly (from 29billion to 49 billion euro). 
Tudi tako nastali neto znesek predfinanciranja v bilanci stanja (glej tretjo vrstico tabele 1.3) se je močno povečal, vendar je rasel počasneje (z 29 milijard EUR na 49 milijard EUR).
T H E C O M M I S S I O N ’ S R E P L I E S _____________ (23) The cut-off exercise seeks to ensure that both revenue and expen­ diture are completely and accurately recorded in the correct accounting period. 
O D G O VO R I KO M I S I J E _____________ (23) Z ločitvijo proračunskih let se skuša zagotoviti, da so prihodki in odhodki v celoti in točno evidentirani v pravem računovodskem obdobju.
The accounting services in the Commission are continuing their work on clarifying the issues related to the recognition and clearing of pre-financing (see also reply to paragraph 1.37). 
Računovodske službe v Komisiji nadaljujejo svoje delo glede pojasnitve vprašanj v zvezi s priznavanjem in obračunavanjem pred­ financiranja (glej tudi odgovor na odstavek 1.37).
Notwithstanding the validity of the principle stated in the second part of the Court’s comment, it should be noted that, for instance, in the case of the financial engineering instruments (FEI’s) the legal basis foresees only one eligibility check of the expenses incurred, at the closure of the programme or at the end of the programming period (whichever comes first). 
Kljub veljavnosti načela, navedenega v drugem delu pripombe Sodišča, je treba upoštevati, da na primer pravna podlaga v primeru instru­ mentov finančnega inženiringa predvideva samo en pregled upraviče­ nosti nastalih stroškov, in sicer ob zaključku programa ali na koncu programskega obdobja (če se to zgodi prej).
Therefore, whatever the accounting treatment applied to cash disbursements by the Commission to Member States, eventual irregularities will only be detected at that time. 1.28. 
Zato se bodo samo takrat lahko zaznale morebitne nepravilnosti, ne glede na računovodsko obravnavo, ki jo Komisija uporablja za denarna izplačila za države članice.
The Commission is monitoring the situation regarding the growth in pre-financing amounts. 
1.28 Komisija spremlja položaj v zvezi z rastjo v zneskih pred­ financiranja.
Much of this increase is justified by the move to a new programming period (2007-2013) and the pre-financings paid out according to the shared management legislation. 
Velik del tega povečanja opravičujeta prehod v novo programsko obdobje (2007–2013) in predfinanciranje, izplačano po zakonodaji o deljenem upravljanju.
Nonetheless the accounting services of the Commission continue to work with the operational Directorates-General (DGs) to try to keep open pre-financing amounts as low as possible, but this work can often be in conflict with the underlying legislation. 1.27. 
Vendar računovodske službe Komisije še naprej sodelujejo z operativnimi generalnimi direktorati (GD), da bi odprti zneski predfinanciranja ostali čim nižji, vendar je lahko to delo pogosto v nasprotju z zadevno zakonodajo. 1.27
EN 10.11.2011 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion 25 Table 1.3 — Evolution of pre-financing (1) and related accrued charges between 2005 and 2010 (in million euro) Accrued charges 268 % (1) Prepaid expenditure for Financial Engeneering Instruments amounting to 4 775 million euro in 2010 and 2 153 million euro in 2009 are not included (see paragraphs 1.31 to 1.33). 
SL 10.11.2011 UradnilistEvropskeunije 25 Tabela 1.3 – Gibanje predfinanciranja (1) in s tem povezanih vnaprej vračunanih stroškov med letoma 2005 in 2010 (v milijonih EUR) Vnaprej vračunani stroški 268 % (1) Vnaprej plačani odhodki za instrumente finančnega inženiringa v višini 4 775 milijonov EUR v letu 2010 in 2 153 milijonov EUR v letu 2009 niso všteti (glej odstavke 1.31 do 1.33).
31.12.2005 31.12.2006 31.12.2007 31.12.2008 31.12.2009 31.12.2010 Difference from 2005 to 2010 Amount in % Total gross pre-financing (before cut-off) 38 854 43 129 55 099 73 754 84 761 84 387 45 533 117 % 9 489 12 649 20 501 34 469 35 934 34 966 25 477 Total net pre-financing (after cut-off) 29 365 30 480 34 598 39 285 48 827 49 421 20 056 68 % T H E C O U R T ’ S O B S E R VA T I O N S Inaccurate or incomplete data on pre-financing Lack of clearing of pre-financing 1.29. 
31.12.2005 31.12.2006 31.12.2007 31.12.2008 31.12.2009 31.12.2010 Razlika od 2005 do 2010 znesek 45 533 v% Skupno bruto predfinanciranje (pred ločitvijo proračunskih let) 38 854 43 129 55 099 73 754 84 761 84 387 117 % 9 489 12 649 20 501 34 469 35 934 34 966 25 477 Skupno neto predfinanciranje (po ločitvi proračunskih let) 29 365 30 480 34 598 39 285 48 827 49 421 20 056 68 % U G O T O V I T V E S O D I Š Č A Netočni ali nepopolni podatki o predfinanciranju P o m a n j k a n j e o b r a č u n a v an j a p r e d f in a n c i r a n j a 1.29 Verjetno bo pri obračunavanju predfinanciranja vedno treba uporabiti delno oceno, vendar več generalnih direkto­ ratov za notranje politike in zunanje ukrepe v računovodske izkaze velikokrat še vedno vključi ocene celo takrat, ko so izjave o odhodkih sprejeli kot ustrezno osnovo za nadaljnja plačila upravičencu (24).
The use of estimates for accrued charges has increased significantly over time, moving from less than a quarter of the amount advanced in 2005 to nearly a half in 2010 (see second row of Table 1.3). 
Uporaba ocen vnaprej vračunanih stro­ škov se je sčasoma močno povečala in z manj kot četrtine s predplačili izplačanega zneska v letu 2005 narasla na skoraj polovico v letu 2010 (glej drugo vrstico tabele 1.3).
The Court has expressed disquiet over the growth of this practice (25). 
Sodišče je izrazilo pomisleke o širjenju te prakse (25).
T H E C O M M I S S I O N ’ S R E P L I E S 1.29. The Commission understands the Court’s concern in this area and has been making efforts to address this issue. 
O D G O VO R I KO M I S I J E 1.29 Komisija razume zaskrbljenost Sodišča na tem področju in si prizadeva za obravnavanje tega vprašanja.
In the context of the current revision of the Financial Regulation, the Commission has proposed to make the regular clearing of pre-financings compulsory. 
Komisija je v okviru pregleda finančne uredbe predlagala obvezno redno obračunavanje predfinanciranja.
Because of the risk of error in uncertified and/or unaudited statements of expenses, a number of Authorising Officers by Delegation are reluctant to make payments on the basis of such statements. 
Zaradi nevarnosti napak v nepotrjenih in/ali nerevidiranih izjavah o odhodkih številni odredbodajalci na podlagi prenosa ne želijo izvrše­ vati plačil na podlagi takih navedb.
They then use uncertified and/or unaudited expenditure statements as an indication of progress in the action subsidised and pay additional pre-financings, in order to secure a continuous treasury float of payments for the subsidised projects. 
Nato nepotrjene in/ali nerevidi­ rane izjave o odhodkih uporabijo kot kazalnike napredka subvencio­ nirane dejavnosti in plačajo dodatno predfinanciranje, s čimer zava­ rujejo stalno neporavnanost plačil za subvencionirane projekte v državni blagajni.
Clearing is then postponed until the end of the project. 
Obračunavanje se nato preloži do zaključka projekta.
It is worth mentioning that both the Commission and beneficiaries/ contractors (in particular in internal policies and external aid) will face a challenge in terms of administrative workload when regular clearings of pre-financings become more effective. _____________ (24) See paragraph 1.28, first indent, of the Court’s 2006 Annual Report, paragraphs 1.23, second indent, 1.24, second indent, and 1.26 of the 2007 Annual Report, paragraph 1.14 of the 2008 Annual Report and paragraph 1.12 of the 2009 Annual Report. 
Vredno je omeniti, da se bodo Komisija in upravičenci/izvajalci (zlasti pri notranjih politikah in zunanji pomoči) spopadali z izzivom glede upravne obremenitve, ko bo redno obračunavanje predfinanciranja uspešnejše. _____________ (24) Glej prvo alineo odstavka 1.28 letnega poročila Sodišča za leto 2006; drugo alineo odstavka 1.23, drugo alineo odstavka 1.24 in odstavek 1.26 letnega poročila za leto 2007; odstavek 1.14 letnega poročila za leto 2008 ter odstavek 1.12 letnega poročila za leto 2009.
(25) In its Opinion No 6/2010 on a proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and the Council on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Union, the Court stated its concerns as to the very high increase of uncleared pre-financing and the need for action. 
(25) Sodišče je v svojem Mnenju št. 6/2010 o predlogu uredbe Evrop­ skega parlamenta in Sveta o finančni uredbi, ki se uporablja za splošni proračun Evropske unije, navedlo svoje pomisleke glede zelo velikega povečanja neobračunanega predfinanciranja in opozorilo, da je treba ukrepati.
The audit has brought to light a significant number of cases where initially the Commission did not properly record payments as giving rise to an asset. 
Revizija je razkrila veliko število primerov, ko Komisija prvotno ni pravilno evidentirala plačil, kot da bodo privedla do sredstev.
Thus, in contra­ diction to the principle of substance over form(26) the accounts gave the impression that recipients have provided full justification for use of the funds, when in practice this was not the case. 
Tako so računovodski izkazi v nasprotju z načelom prednosti vsebine pred obliko (26) dajali vtis, da so prejemniki v celoti utemeljili porabo sredstev, čeprav v praksi ni bilo tako.
The relevant regulations in the areas of Cohesion and Rural development(27) provide for the inclusion of payments made from operational programmes to establish or contribute to funds implementing FEIs in the declarations of expenditure. 
Ustrezni predpisi za področji kohezije in razvoja podeželja(27) določajo, da se plačila iz operativnih programov za vzpostavitev skladov, ki izvajajo instrumente finančnega inženiringa, ali kot prispevek vanje, navedejo v izjavah o odhodkih.
The Commission has adopted the practice of recording the full amounts declared by Member States as expenses in the economic outturn account as if they were definitive settlement of a claim. 
Komisija je sprejela prakso evidentiranja polnih zneskov, ki jih države članice prija­ vijo kot stroške, v izkaz poslovnega izida, kot da bi bil zahtevek s tem dokončno obračunan.
T H E C O M M I S S I O N ’ S R E P L I E S 1.30. 
O D G O VO R I KO M I S I J E 1.30 To vprašanje je bilo prvič izpostavljeno na začetku leta 2011.
The legal framework for shared management does not require that the related amounts paid as advances be claimed from the Commission in a separate cost statement, nor does it require a specific periodic reporting on their use by the final beneficiary. 
Pravni okvir deljenega upravljanja ne zahteva, da se ustrezni zneski, plačani kot predplačila, od Komisije zahtevajo v ločeni izjavi o stroških, niti ne zahteva posebnega rednega poročanja o njihovi uporabi s strani upravičenca.
See also replies to paragraphs 1.31 and 1.32. 
Glej tudi odgovore na odstavka 1.31 in 1.32.
In the absence of any information on payments made to FEIs, which is not requested from Member States in the applicable legal basis, the Commission had initially no other option but to consider these payments as expenses. 
1.31 Če ni bilo nobenih informacij o plačilih, izvršenih za instru­ mente finančnega inženiringa, česar veljavna pravna podlaga ne zahteva od držav članic, Komisija sprva ni imela nobene druge možnosti, kot da ta plačila šteje kot stroške.
On the basis of the information it requested and obtained from Member States in June 2011, the Commission has treated payments to FEIs as assets in the 2010 accounts including the comparative figures for 2009. 
Komisija je na podlagi informacij, ki jih je zahtevala in pridobila od držav članic junija 2011, plačila za instrumente finančnega inženi­ ringa v računovodskih izkazih za leto 2010, vključno s primerjalnimi podatki za leto 2009, obravnavala kot sredstva.
See notes 2.5, 2.9, 2.10 and 3.4 to the consolidated accounts where all details are provided. 
Glej pojasnila 2.5, 2.9, 2.10 in 3.4 h konsolidiranim računovodskim izkazom, v katerih so navedene vse podrobnosti.
See also reply to paragraph 1.32. _____________ (26) The International Public Sector Accounting Standard (IPSAS) 1 defines this principle as follows: ‘If information is to represent faithfully the transactions and other events that it purports to represent, it is necessary that they are accounted for and presented in accordance with their substance and economic reality and not merely their legal form. 
Glej tudi odgovor na odstavek 1.32. _____________ (26) Mednarodni računovodski standard za javni sektor (MRSJS) 1 to načelo opredeljuje takole: Če naj informacije zvesto predstavljajo posle in druge poslovne dogodke, za katere se trdi, da jih predsta­ vljajo, jih je treba obravnavati in predstavljati v skladu z njihovo vsebino in gospodarsko resničnostjo, ne zgolj v skladu z njihovo pravno obliko.
The substance of trans­ actions or other events is not always consistent with their legal form’ (Appendix A, page 70 of ‘Handbook of International Public Sector Accounting Pronouncements 2011’, Volume 1). 
Vsebina poslov ali drugih poslovnih dogodkov ni vedno skladna z njihovo pravno obliko (dodatek A, str. 70 priroč­ nika za mednarodne računovodske izjave za javni sektor, leto 2011, zvezek 1).
See also Article 124 of the Financial Regulation. 
Glej tudi člen 124 finančne uredbe.
(27) See Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 (OJ L 210, 31.7.2010, p. 
1083/2006 (UL L 210, 31.7.2010, str.
25), Section 4, Article 44 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1828/2006 (OJ L 371, 27.12.2006, p. 
25), oddelek 4, člen 44 in Uredbo Komisije (ES) št. 1828/2006 (UL L 371, 27.12.2006, str.
1), Section 8, Articles 43 to 46 for the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund, Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 (OJ L 277, 21.10.2005, p. 
1), oddelek 8, členi 43 do 46 za Evropski sklad za regionalni razvoj, Evropski socialni sklad in Kohezijski sklad, Uredbo Sveta (ES) št. 1698/2005 (UL L 277, 21.10.2005, str.
1), Article 71(5) and Commission Regulation (EC) No1974/2006 (OJ L 368, 23.12.2006, p. 
1), člen 71(5) in Uredbo Komisije (ES) št. 1974/2006 (UL L 368, 23.12.2006, str.
15), Articles 50 to 52 for the European Agri­ cultural Fund for Rural Development. 
15), členi 50 do 52 za Evropski kmetijski sklad za razvoj podeželja.
EN 10.11.2011 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion 27 T H E C O U R T ’ S O B S E R VA T I O N S 1.32. However, according to the sectoral regulations, authorities in the Member States are only required to present a final declaration on their use in form of loans, guarantees or equity investments provided to final recipients at a later date (typically at the end of the programme period). 
SL 10.11.2011 UradnilistEvropskeunije 27 U G O T O V I T V E S O D I Š Č A 1.32 Vendar morajo organi v državah članicah v skladu s sektorskimi predpisi pripraviti končno izjavo le o njihovi porabi v obliki posojil, jamstev ali kapitalskih naložb, ki se končnim prejemnikom zagotovijo pozneje (običajno na koncu programskega obdobja).
This meant that in 2010 the Commission had no comprehensive information on the amounts actually used by the FEIs, and it was only after this problem came to light in early 2011 that it was able to collect the necessary information from the Member States. 
Zato Komisija leta 2010 ni imela nobenih izčrpnih informacij o zneskih, ki so jih instru­ menti finančnega inženiringa dejansko porabili, in je lahko šele po tem, ko je v začetku leta 2011 ta težava prišla na dan, od držav članic zbrala potrebne informacije.
As a result, around 4,8 billion euro were not recorded as pre-financing in the balance sheet of the 2010 provisional accounts (28). 
Posledično približno 4,8 milijarde EUR v bilanci stanja začasnih računovodskih izkazov za leto 2010 ni bilo evidentiranih kot predfinanci­ ranje (28).
Additionallyanumberofothergrantschemesallow cash advances to be made to beneficiaries, prior to presen­ tation of final cost statements. 
Druge sheme pomoči 1.33 Polegtegatudištevilnedrugeshemedonacijomogo­ čajo denarna predplačila upravičencem pred predložitvijo končnih izjav o stroških.