natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Slika 2 kaže trende implicitne davčne stopnje za EU-15, EU-25, nove države članice (NDČ) in za Nemčijo.
Figure 3 shows trends in ITR over time for EU-15, EU-25, the new Member States and Germany.
Slika 2.
Figure 3.
Vendar je treba to implicitno davčno stopnjo za kapital, ki jo je določila Komisija, razlagati previdno.
These implicit rates of tax on capital supplied by the Commission must, however, be approached and interpreted with caution.
Primerna je kot splošna usmeritev za primerjavo med državami.
They provide a rough means of comparing countries.
Na podlagi njenega razvoja se lahko namreč oblikujejo napačni sklepi, ker ITR znatno preceni dejansko realno obdavčitev kapitala med zelo uspešnim prometom na borzi in finančnih trgih.
Comparing trends in ITRs over time can be misleading, however, as the ITR significantly overestimates the real rate of tax on capital at times of booming stock exchanges and financial markets.
Davčno breme se znatno zmanjšuje ne le za dobičke pravnih oseb, ampak tudi za zasebne kapitalske prihodke.
In addition to corporate profits, the tax burden on private capital income is also being steadily lightened.
To kaže gibanje v smeri uvedbe dvojnega sistema obdavčevanja prihodkov v vsej Evropi.
This is demonstrated by the EU-wide trend towards a dual system of income taxation.
V skladu s tem prihodki od obresti in dividend niso več progresivno obdavčeni, ampak se zanje uporablja pavšalna stopnja (Flat Tax), ki je znatno nižja od najvišjih stopenj obdavčitve prihodkov od dejavnosti.
Consequently, income from interest and dividends is no longer taxed progressively, but subject to a fixed-rate 'flat tax' set far below the top rates of tax on earned income.
Ker so kapitalski prihodki veliko bolj koncentrirani kot prihodki od dejavnosti, pomeni uvedba takšnega dvojnega sistema obdavčevanja prihodkov širšo davčno razbremenitev v korist najbogatejših.
Since capital income is much more concentrated than labour income, the introduction of a dual system of income tax amounts to a large measure of tax relief in favour of the wealthiest.
Vendar se v Evropski uniji zelo spreminja tudi obdavčitev prihodkov od dejavnosti.
However, there have also been significant changes in the EU in relation to the taxation of income from employment.
Čeprav se povprečna davčna stopnja za delo v zadnjih desetih letih v glavnem ni spremenila, se je spremenil delež posameznih dohodkovnih skupin, ki prispevajo davke.
While the average rate of tax on income from employment has been largely unchanged for the last ten years, there has been a change in the proportion of taxes provided by the various income groups.
V več državah so se najvišje davčne stopnje v zadnjih letih znižale.
In many countries, the top rates of income tax have been reduced in recent years.
V EU 15 so se od leta 1998 povprečno znižale za 4,7 odstotne točke.
There has been an average fall of 4.7% since 1998 in the top rate of tax on personal income in the EU-15 countries.
S takšnim znižanjem obdavčitve se davčno breme prenese z višjih na nižje prihodke.
Reductions of this kind confirm the shift in the tax burden from high- to low-income earners.
V več vzhodnoevropskih državah je bila uvedena pavšalna davčna stopnja za vse prihodke.
Several eastern European countries have introduced a flat tax on all personal income.
Od sredine devetdesetih let 20. stoletja so se v vsej Evropi najbolj zvišali posredni davki, zlasti davek na dodano vrednost.
The tax segment that has grown most sharply since the mid-90s across the EU is indirect taxation, and above all VAT.
Slika 3.
Figure 4.
Poleg davka na dodano vrednost je večina držav članic EU uvedla ali povišala tudi tako imenovane okoljske davke na električno energijo, plin, bencin in kurilno olje.
In addition to VAT, most EU countries have introduced or increased 'eco-taxes' on electricity, gas, petrol and heating oil.
Ti davki se štejejo kot pozitivni za okolje, če se zaradi njih podraži poraba energije v industriji.
To the extent that these taxes increased the cost of energy use for industry, they can be said to have had a positive environmental effect.
Vendar so običajno prav za industrijska podjetja določene pomembne izjeme, zasebna gospodinjstva pa morajo plačevati celotne davke.
However, as a rule industrial undertakings were provided with generous derogations, while private households bore the full brunt of the taxes.
V takšnih okoliščinah je učinek „zelenih“ davkov predvsem obremenitev oseb z nizkimi dohodki, saj revnejša gospodinjstva porabijo višji odstotek svojih dohodkov za plačevanje stroškov elektrike in ogrevanja.
In these circumstances, the effect of the so-called 'green' taxes is to place a particular burden on low-earners, as poorer households spend a higher proportion of their income on energy and heating costs.
Podobno imajo visoki davki na gorivo pozitiven ekološki učinek le, če je na voljo učinkovit in privlačen sistem javnega prevoza.
Also, higher taxes on petrol only have a beneficial impact on the environment if inexpensive and attractive public transport alternatives are available.
V nasprotnem primeru je obdavčena le poraba, kar ima že spet regresiven učinek.
Otherwise their only effect is to tax consumption, with the usual regressive effect.
Zato stališče Komisije, da bi „preusmeritev obdavčenja od davka na dobiček k davku na porabo in/ali k davku na onesnaževanje […] lahko […] pripomogla k povečanju ravni zaposlenosti“ (KOM(2005)532), ni prepričljivo.
The Commission's view that 'a shift from labour to consumption and/or pollution taxes could help […] to increase employment levels' (COM(2005) 532), is not, therefore, convincing.
Posledica davčne konkurence v EU ni toliko zmanjšanje skupnih davčnih prihodkov, ampak strukturna sprememba davčnega sistema.
The consequences of tax competition in the EU are therefore not so much a decline in total tax revenues as a structural change in tax systems.
Ta sprememba je povezana predvsem z distributivnim učinkom obdavčevanja.
This change primarily effects the way tax is distributed.
Vse navedene spremembe razbremenjujejo osebe z visokimi prihodki ter povečujejo davčno breme za osebe, ki spadajo na spodnji del dohodninske lestvice.
All the changes mentioned have the effect of reducing the tax burden on higher income earners, while the tax burden is increasing at the opposite end of the income scale.
K temu prispevajo znižanje davkov za pravne osebe, znižanje najvišjih davčnih stopenj in prehod k dvojnemu obdavčevanju prihodkov tako kot tudi splošna preusmeritev z neposrednih na posredne davke.
This result is the effect of lowering corporation tax, cutting top income tax rates and switching to a dual income tax system, and of the general shift of emphasis from direct to indirect taxation.
Namesto da bi davčni sistem zmanjševal socialne razlike, še naprej povečuje razkorak med bogatimi in revnimi.
The tax system, instead of reducing social inequalities, is deepening the chasm between rich and poor.
Zato razlikovanje med „škodljivo“ in „zdravo“ davčno konkurenco ni utemeljeno.
There is therefore no justification for distinguishing between 'harmful' and 'beneficial' tax competition.
Prerazporeditev dohodkov od spodaj navzgor je v vsakem primeru škodljiva.
Redistributing income upwards is harmful in any event.
Taka prerazporeditev ogroža socialno ravnotežje, zmanjšuje dejansko povpraševanje in povzroča nastanek neuporabljenih zmogljivosti, znižuje rast in zvišuje brezposelnost.
It undermines social equilibrium, reduces effective demand and leads to unused capacities, low growth and high unemployment.
Dolgoročno bo regresivno prestrukturiranje davčnega sistema verjetno znižalo javnofinančne prihodke.
In the long run, a regressive restructuring of the tax system is also likely to diminish public revenues.
Dejansko se skupni davčni prihodki znižujejo od konca devetdesetih.
Actually, total tax revenues have declined since the end of the 1990s.
Če se bo to gibanje nadaljevalo, bo financiranje pomembnih javnih storitev in naložb ogroženo (Slika 4).
(Figure 5) If this trend continues, the funding of essential public services and public investment will be at risk.
Slika 4.
Figure 5.
Vir: podatkovna zbirka Ameco, Komisija EU
Source: Ameco database, EU Commission
Vendar nacionalne suverenosti v davčnih zadevah ne spodkopavajo samo tržne silnice.
National sovereignty in tax issues, however, is not only undermined by market forces.
Pogodba EU sicer ne obravnava obdavčevanja neposredno, vendar s svojimi določbami utesnjuje politike držav članic.
The EU Treaty, while not covering direct taxation, still restricts the tax policies of the Member States with its provisions.
Zato v zadnjih letih podjetja vse bolj vlagajo tožbe zoper svojo vlado, češ da nacionalna davčna zakonodaja krši evropsko.
Hence, in recent years, companies have increasingly taken governments to court claiming that national tax laws were breaching European law.
S svojimi sodbami je Sodišče Evropskih skupnosti oblikovalo negativno evropsko davčno zakonodajo, ki spodbija veljavnost nacionalnih določb in tako spodbuja zmanjševanje javnofinančnih prihodkov od davkov.
With its rulings the ECJ has created a pernicious body of European tax law that has contributed to the erosion of national tax revenues by increasingly outlawing national provisions.
Davčni sistem, ki dejansko prispeva k večji rasti, ustvarjanju delovnih mest in socialnemu ravnotežju, se lahko vzpostavi le z usklajevanjem med državami članicami EU in spremembo razvojne usmeritve zadnjih dveh desetletij.
The introduction of a tax system that contributes to growth, employment and social balance requires coordination between EU Member States to reverse the trends of the last two decades.
o odločitvah Odbora za peticije v parlamentarnem letu 2006
on the deliberations of the Committee on Petitions during the parliamentary year 2006
PRILOGA I: Peticije, ki jih je prejel Parlament............................................................................15
ANNEX I: Petitions received by Parliament................................................................................16
PRILOGA II: Statistika peticij, prejetih leta 2006, razdeljena po jeziku........................................16
ANNEX II - Statistics of the petitions received in 2006 based on the language of the petitions......17
PRILOGA III: Korespondenca, ki jo je prejel odbor..................................................................17
ANNEX III: Correspondence received by the Committee...........................................................18
PRILOGA IV: Peticije, obravnavane v odboru leta 2006 (točke A).............................................18
ANNEX IV: Petitions discussed in the Committee in 2006 (A points)..........................................19
IZID KONČNEGA GLASOVANJA V ODBORU...................................................................19
RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE.........................................................................20
o odločitvah Odbora za peticije v parlamentarnem letu 2007
on the deliberations of the Committee on Petitions during the parliamentary year 2006
– ob upoštevanju členov 21 in 194 Pogodbe o ES,
– having regard to Articles 21 and 194 of the EC Treaty,
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za peticije ( A6‑0392/2007 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Petitions ( A6‑0392/2007 ),
A. ker je pravica do peticije temeljna pravica, ki je neločljivo povezana z državljanstvom Evropske unije,
A. whereas the right to petition is a fundamental right inextricably linked to citizenship of the European Union,
B. ker je pravica do peticije od leta 1992 zapisana v Pogodbi o ES in je potrjena tudi v členu 44 Listine o temeljnih pravicah Evropske unije in členu 191 poslovnika Evropskega parlamenta,
B. whereas the right to petition has been enshrined in the EC Treaty since 1992 and is confirmed in the Article 44 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Rule 191 of the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament,
C. ker Parlament, Svet in Komisijo zavezujejo določbe o pravici do peticije, zapisane v Pogodbah, in ker so se dogovorili, da bodo zagotovili nadaljnje medinstitucionalno obravnavanje peticij,
C. whereas Parliament, the Council and the Commission are all bound by the provisions in the Treaties on the right to petition and have agreed to guarantee the inter-institutional follow-up on petitions,
D. ker uresničevanje te pravice pomembno prispeva k prizadevanjem Evropske unije, da vzpostavi stik s svojimi državljani, in daje vpogled v pričakovanja evropske javnosti,
D. whereas the exercise of that right significantly contributes to the efforts of the European Union to reconnect with its citizens and offer an insight into the expectations of the European public,
E. ker so peticije sredstvo, s katerim državljani spremljajo, kako nacionalni, regionalni in lokalni organi prenašajo in izvajajo evropsko zakonodajo,
E. whereas petitions constitute a means by which citizens can contribute to the monitoring of the transposition and implementation of European legislation by national, regional and local authorities,
F. ker so peticije sredstvo za ocenjevanje, kako evropska zakonodaja in politika vplivata na posameznike, ter za opozarjanje Evropskega parlamenta na dvoumnosti in nepravilno izvajanje teh zakonov in politik, kar neposredno vpliva na njihove cilje,
F. whereas petitions represent a tool for assessing the impact of European laws and policies on individuals and alerting the European Parliament as to the ambiguities and misapplications of those laws and policies which have a direct impact on their very goals,
G. ker je število nedopustnih peticij leta 2006 ostalo nespremenjeno (približno tretjina vseh peticij), kar kaže, da je treba državljane EU stalno in ustrezno obveščati o pristojnostih Evropske unije in njenih institucij,
G. whereas the number of petitions declared inadmissible remained constant in 2006, at about one-third of the total, reflecting a continuous need to ensure that EU citizens are properly informed about the competencies of the European Union and those of its institutions,
H. ker je treba priznati, da državljani EU seveda niso bili vedno zadovoljni z rezultati vloženih peticij, ki so bile označene za dopustne in obravnavane, vendar razumno število peticij vendarle prispeva k rešitvi določenega problema ali izpostavlja nekatere bojazni, ki utegnejo kasneje Parlamentu koristiti pri pogajanju o novi zakonodaji Skupnosti,
H. whereas it must be recorded that, naturally, not all admissible petitions received and investigated provide EU citizens with satisfaction but that a reasonable proportion of petitions do lead to the resolution of a particular problem, or highlight a particular concern, which may later serve Parliament when negotiating new Community legislation,
I. ker je bilo pri obravnavanju peticij pogosto ugotovljeno, da izvajanje zakonodaje Skupnosti v državah članicah ne poteka gladko, in ker obstajajo strukturne težave, povezane z izvajanjem nekaterih okoljskih standardov, zlasti člena 6 Direktive Sveta 92/43/EGS z dne 21. maja 1992 o ohranjanju naravnih habitatov ter prosto živečih živalskih in rastlinskih vrst
I. whereas the examination of petitions has continued to reveal persistent weaknesses in the implementation by Member States of Community law, and whereas there appear to be structural problems related to the implementation of certain environmental norms, notably, Article 6 of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora
7. (direktiva o habitatih) ter člena 4 Direktive 85/337/EGS z dne 27. junija 1985 o presoji vplivov nekaterih javnih in zasebnih projektov na okolje
7. (the Habitats Directive) and Article 4 of Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects certain public and private projects on the environment
40. , kot je bila spremenjena z Direktivo Sveta 97/11/ES z dne 3. marca 1997
40. , as amended by Council Directive 97/11EC of 3 March 1997
UL L 73, 14.3.1997, str.
OJ L 73, 14.3.1997, p.
K. ker je treba v drugih primerih pohvaliti ukrepe, ki jih je Komisija sprejela pri izvajanju svojih obveznosti iz člena 211 Pogodbe o ES kot "varuh Pogodb", na primer hitro odločitev za sprožitev postopka proti Španiji zaradi kršitve določb zakonodaje Skupnosti o javnih naročilih in pravočasno ukrepanje za preprečitev nepopravljive škode za okolje na Poljskem,
K. whereas, in other cases, the steps taken by the Commission in carrying out its duties under Article 211 of the EC Treaty as 'guardian of the Treaties' – such as the prompt decision to initiate proceedings against Spain for infringement of the rules of Community law on public procurement and the timely action taken to prevent irreversible damage to the environment in Poland – have been commendable,
L. ker je sodelovanje med odborom Evropskega parlamenta za peticije in Komisijo še vedno odločilno za učinkovito obravnavanje peticij in zagotavljanje najboljših rešitev za težave vlagateljev peticij,
L. whereas the cooperation between the Committee on Petitions and the Commission remains critical in dealing effectively with petitions and providing petitioners with the best redress to their problems,
M. ker je hiter odziv v primeru nepravilnega izvajanja evropske zakonodaje zelo pomemben in ker je treba pri priporočanju rešitev upoštevati posebne okoliščine posameznih primerov,
M. whereas the promptness of the redress in cases of misapplication of European legislation is highly important, and whereas the specific circumstances of each case should be taken into account when recommending solutions,
N. ker ima po členu 230 Pogodbe o ES Parlament pravico, da se obrne na Sodišče evropskih skupnosti pod enakimi pogoji kot Svet in Komisija, in ker Parlament v skladu s členom 201 te pogodbe izvaja nadzor nad dejavnostmi Komisije in ima zato na voljo tako pravna kot politična sredstva za učinkovitejši odgovor na legitimna vprašanja državljanov,
N. whereas, under Article 230 of the EC Treaty, Parliament has the right to bring actions before the Court of Justice of the European Communities under the same conditions as the Council and the Commission, and whereas, pursuant to Article 201 of that Treaty, Parliament is empowered to exercise control over the activities of the Commission and thus has at its disposal both the legal and the political instruments needed to respond more effectively to citizens' legitimate concerns,
O. ker je Parlament kljub vsemu vedno spodbujal zvesto sodelovanje, predvsem s Komisijo kot varuhom Pogodb, kot učinkovito sredstvo za odpravo težav, zaradi katerih ga državljani prosijo za pomoč,
O. whereas Parliament has nevertheless constantly promoted loyal cooperation, notably with the Commission as the guardian of the Treaties, as an effective means to remedy problems that have led citizens to seek its assistance,
P. ker Parlament še vedno prejema peticije z obtožbami, da države članice kršijo človekove in temeljne pravice vlagateljev peticij, ker člen 6(1) Pogodbe o EU določa, da Unija temelji na načelih svobode, demokracije, spoštovanja človekovih pravic in temeljnih svoboščin ter pravne države, in ker ima Parlament v skladu s členom 7(1) Pogodbe o EU pravico, da sproži postopek za ugotavljanje, ali obstaja nevarnost, da država članica hudo krši načela iz člena 6(1),
P. whereas Parliament has continued to receive petitions alleging persistent breaches by Member States of the petitioners' human and fundamental rights, whereas under Article 6(1) of the EU Treaty the Union is founded on the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law, and whereas Article 7(1) of the EU Treaty gives Parliament the right to initiate a procedure to determine whether there is a clear risk of a serious breach by a Member State of principles mentioned in Article 6(1),
1. poudarja, da je postopek vlaganja peticij pomemben za zagotavljanje ustreznega odziva in rešitev za bojazni evropskih državljanov glede spoštovanja njihovih pravic v skladu s Pogodbo in evropsko zakonodajo;
Emphasises the significance of the petitions process in ensuring that European citizens' individual concerns about respect for their rights under the Treaty and European legislation receive appropriate responses and solutions;
3. meni, da so peticije orodje, s katerim je mogoče oceniti, kaj evropska javnost pričakuje od Evropske unije in do kakšne mere lahko EU ta pričakovanja uresniči;
Believes that petitions offer an instrument with which to gauge what the European public expects from the European Union and the extent to which the European Union manages to deliver;
8. pozdravlja 23. letno poročilo Komisije o nadzoru uporabe prava Skupnosti ( KOM(2006)0416 ), v katerem priznava pomembno vlogo postopka vlaganja peticij pri ugotavljanju kršitev;
Welcomes the Commission's 23rd Annual Report on monitoring the application of Community Law ( COM(2006)0416 ), which acknowledges the role of the petitions procedure in identifying infringements;
10. poziva Odbor za peticije, naj pisno in v čim krajšem času sporoči svoje odločitve o peticijah, ki jih obravnava na svojih sestankih, zato da bi se izognili nesporazumom in napačnim razlagam v množičnih medijih ali pri vlagateljih peticij;
Calls on the Committee on Petitions to notify, in writing and within a short time, its decisions relating to petitions that it considers at its meetings, so as to avoid misunderstandings and false interpretations by the mass media and petitioners;
13. ponovno poudarja, da mora Komisija izkoristiti možnost v skladu s členom 228 Pogodbe o ES, da države članice privede pred Sodišče, na podlagi česar se jih lahko kaznuje z globo v obliki pavšalnih zneskov ali denarne kazni, kadar odlagajo izvajanje odločb Sodišča v postopkih ugotavljanja kršitev;
Reaffirms the need for the Commission to make use of the possibility of bringing Member States before the Court of Justice under Article 228 of the EC Treaty, so that fines in the form of lump sums and penalty payments may be imposed whenever Member States delay the implementation of judgments of the Court of Justice in infringement proceedings;
16. potrjuje, da mora Svet kot institucija tesneje sodelovati pri dejavnostih odbora, in spodbuja sodelovanje Sveta pri sejah odbora na ustrezni ravni v skladu z medinstitucionalnim sporazumom o boljši pripravi zakonodaje
Confirms the need for greater involvement on the part of the Council, as an institution, in the Committee's activities, and encourages its participation in meetings of the Committee at the appropriate level, as stated in the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making
1. , ki so ga 16. decembra 2003 sprejeli Svet, Evropski parlament in Komisija;
1. , adopted on 16 December 2003 by the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission;
21. poudarja, da so te misije pomembne za izboljšanje komunikacije z državljani in boljšo ozaveščenost v državah članicah o dejavnostih Evropskega parlamenta nasploh in zlasti Odbora za peticije;
Stresses the significance of those missions in the efforts to improve communication with citizens and to raise awareness in the Member States about the activities of the European Parliament, in general, and of the Committee on Petitions, in particular;
23. ugotavlja, da se število prejetih peticij v drugem letu po širitvi EU na 25 držav članic ni bistveno spremenilo; vendar opaža, da bo po pristopu Romunije in Bolgarije januarja 2007 Parlament po vsej verjetnosti prejel precej večje število peticij državljanov iz teh držav;
Notes that, during the second year since the enlargement of the EU to 25 Member States, the number of petitions received by Parliament has remained relatively constant; observes, however, that the accession of Romania and Bulgaria in January 2007 is likely to produce a considerable number of petitions from the citizens of those countries;