natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
19. ugotavlja, da bi moralo biti področje uporabe predloga direktive o zavarovalnih jamstvenih shemah omejeno na fizične osebe in da bi bilo treba fizične osebe, neposredno povezane s propadlim zavarovateljem, kot so direktorji, višji vodilni delavci ali člani upravnega odbora z glasovalno pravico, katerih poklicna odgovornost je povezana z vzrokom nesolventnosti, izključiti iz celote potrošnikov, ker ni pravno zavezujoče evropske opredelitve, kaj je malo ali mikropodjetje, in ker se tovrstni subjekti s časom spreminjajo; poziva Komisijo, naj po dogovoru o pravno zavezujoči opredelitvi ponovno preuči vključitev izbranih pravnih oseb; poudarja, da lahko države članice po načelu subsidiarnosti v področje uporabe nacionalne zavarovalne jamstvene sheme vključijo tudi pravne osebe;
Notes that in the absence of a legally binding EU definition of what constitutes a small or micro-undertaking, and given the changing nature of such entities over time, the scope of the proposal for a directive on IGSs should be limited to natural persons and that natural persons directly linked to the failed insurer, such as directors, senior managers or voting board members whose area of professional responsibility is connected to the causes of the insolvency, should be excluded from the body of consumers; calls on the Commission to re-evaluate the case for including select legal persons once a legally binding definition has been agreed; stresses that, in keeping with the subsidiarity principle, individual Member States may choose to include legal persons within the scope of their national IGSs;
Zavarovalne jamstvene sheme so dragoceno orodje za zmanjšanje tveganj, s katerimi se imetniki zavarovalnih polic soočajo v primeru propada zavarovalne družbe.
Insurance guarantee schemes (IGS) are considered a valuable tool in reducing the risks facing policyholders in the event of the failure of an insurance entity.
Evropski parlament je večkrat izrazil podporo premisleku o pristopu na ravni EU (Solventnost II, člen 242; organ EIOPA, člen 26), pa tudi poročevalec načeloma podpira predloge Evropske Komisije v beli knjigi o direktivi o zavarovalnih jamstvenih shemah (objavljeni julija 2010), saj meni, da je to pomembno tudi za uspešnost direktive Solventnost II.
The European Parliament has repeatedly demonstrated its support for consideration of an EU level approach (Solvency II, Article 242; EIOPA, Article 26), and your rapporteur supports in principle the proposals put forward by the European Commission in its White Paper on a Directive for Insurance Guarantee Schemes (published July 2010), seeing them not least as consequential for the success of Solvency II.
Vprašanje zavarovalnih jamstvenih shem je zapleteno zaradi velikih razlik v obstoječih shemah v državah članicah EU ter medsebojne povezave med tem področjem in drugimi vprašanji, ki se ravno obravnavajo na ravni EU, še najbolj pa glede uvedbe direktive Solventnost II.
The issue of IGS is complex on account of the wide variation in existing schemes across EU Member States and the interaction between IGS and other issues currently under consideration at EU level, most prominently the imminent introduction of Solvency II.
V obrazložitvi bomo najprej analizirali utemeljitev za rešitev na ravni EU, nato pa bo poročevalec podal pregled prednostnih točk.
This explanatory statement will begin by analysing the case for an EU solution, before providing an overview of your rapporteur's preferences.
Ali je evropska razsežnost potrebna?
Is an EU dimension necessary?
Direktiva Solventnost II bo po letu 2013 korenito spremenila evropsko zavarovalništvo.
Solvency II – from 2013 – will radically alter the European insurance industry.
Statistično bodo s tveganjem povezane gospodarske zahteve te direktive zmanjšale tveganje stečaja zavarovatelja na največ enega od 200 zavarovateljev na leto.
Statistically, the economic, risk-based requirements of Solvency II will reduce the risk of an insurer going bankrupt to a one in 200 year event.
Stečaj pomeni, da zavarovatelj nima dovolj premoženja za pokritje svojih obveznosti.
Bankruptcy refers to a situation where an insurer has a level of capital insufficient to cover its liabilities.
V takem primeru lahko imetnike zavarovalnih polic, ki vlagajo zahtevke, doletijo izgube.
In such a situation policyholders making claims are potential exposed to losses.
Direktiva Solventnost II pa uvaja lestvico nadzornega posredovanja še pred razglasitvijo stečaja.
However, under Solvency II a 'ladder' of supervisory intervention exists before bankruptcy can occur.
Lestvica se uradno uporabi, če zavarovatelj prekrši določbo o zahtevanem solventnostnem kapitalu.
The 'ladder' is formally initiated when an insurer breaches its Solvency Capital Requirement (SCR).
V takem primeru pristojni nadzornik zahteva, da zavarovatelj ukrepa, da bi v določenem časovnem obdobju obnovil raven kapitala nad zahtevani solventnostni kapital.
In such a situation the insurer will be required to take action by its competent supervisor to restore its level of capital above its SCR within a set period of time.
Če se kapital še nadalje zmanjšuje do točke, ko se spusti pod minimalni zahtevani kapital, bo zavarovatelj lahko posloval še naprej in izpolnjeval terjatve v zvezi s policami, vendar bo zanj potreben strog nadzorni ukrep, vključno s prepovedjo sklepanja novih poslov in/ali prisilno prodajo zavarovalnih in/ali drugih sredstev.
In the event of a further deterioration in its level of capital, to the point where it breaches its Minimum Capital Requirement (MCR), the insurer will still be a going concern capable of meeting policy claims, but will be subject to severe supervisory action, including prohibition of writing new business, and/or the forced sale of portfolios and/or other assets.
V praksi se bo od zavarovatelja zahtevalo, naj zadrži kapital tudi, če bo presegel zahtevani solventnostni kapital.
In practice insurers will be expected to hold capital even in excess of the SCR.
V tem primeru poročevalec navaja štiri področja, kjer je za zavarovalne jamstvene sheme potrebna evropska razsežnost:
This being the case, your rapporteur identifies four areas where an EU dimension to IGS is necessary:
1) Zagotavljanje varstva potrošnikov v primeru stečaja zavarovatelja
1) Ensuring consumer protection in the event of the bankruptcy of an insurer
Čeprav je to malo verjetno, je še vedno mogoče, da gre (čezmejni) zavarovatelj v stečaj in če ne bi obstajala zavarovalna jamstvena shema, bi lahko imetniki polic z neizplačanimi zahtevki utrpeli izgube.
While unlikely it is still possible that an (cross-border) insurer could become bankrupt, and policyholders with claims failing due may suffer losses as a consequence, absent an IGS.
2) Zagotavljanje enakega varstva potrošnikov ne glede na matično državo zavarovatelja
2) Ensuring equal consumer protection regardless of the 'home' state of the insurer
Čezmejna dejavnost se bo v prihodnjih letih verjetno še povečala, saj bo več vseevropskih zavarovateljev svoja hčerinska podjetja spreminjalo v podružnice, da bi lahko izkoristili kapitalske ugodnosti, ki jih te strukture omogočajo po direktivi Solventnost II.
Cross-border activity is likely to increase in coming years with more pan-European insurers moving from a subsidiary- to a branch-based-model to take advantage of the capital benefits such a structure offers under Solvency II.
Ker bodo potrošniki torej najverjetneje sklepali zavarovanja s podjetji, ki delujejo na trgih z drugačnimi zavarovalnimi jamstvenimi shemami ali brez njih, bo najverjetneje prihajalo do težav zaradi nedoslednega varstva potrošnikov.
With consumers therefore more likely to purchase insurance from firms operating from markets with differing or no IGS, there are obvious issues in relation to consistency of consumer protection.
3) Zagotavljanje varstva potrošnikov v primeru goljufije ali zlorabe pri prodaji
3) Ensuring consumer protection in the event of fraud or mis-selling
Zlorabe pri prodaji ali goljufije zavarovateljev ali posrednikov lahko imetnikom zavarovalnih polic povzročijo nižje donose in/ali izgube tudi zaradi drugih dejavnikov, ne samo stečaja zavarovatelja.
Mis-selling or fraudulent activities by insurers or intermediaries can result in policyholders being subject to lower returns and/or losses as a result of factors other than the bankruptcy of an insurer.
4) Zagotavljanje varstva davkoplačevalcev v primeru propada zavarovalne jamstvene sheme
4) Ensuring tax-payer protection in the event of IGS failure
Na nekaterih trgih, kjer pri obračunanih premijah prevladuje le eden ali manjše število zavarovateljev, bi lahko stečaj povzročil, da bi morali davkoplačevalci kljub obstoju zavarovalne jamstvene sheme nositi breme poplačil polic.
In certain markets where a single or small number of insurers dominate in terms of written premiums, bankruptcy could result in the tax-payer having to cover the cost of policy payouts, even if an IGS were present.
Z evropskega vidika je to še posebno vprašanje, kadar zavarovatelj v stečaju uporablja potni list za izvoz zavarovalnih premij drugam v EU.
From a European perspective this is a particular issue where the failed insurer is using a passport to export insurance premiums elsewhere within the EU.
Morebitno ogroženost davkoplačevalcev zaradi stečaja zavarovalne jamstvene sheme je treba zmanjšati na najnižjo možno raven.
Potential tax-payer exposure resulting from the failure of an IGS should be kept to an absolute minimum.
Glavne značilnosti direktive o zavarovalni jamstveni shemi na ravni EU
Key features of an EU IGS Directive
Poročevalec meni, da se da vse štiri navedene cilje ustrezno uresničiti z direktivo o minimalni usklajenosti, ki bo zagotavljala enako raven varstva potrošnikov ne glede na to, kje je zavarovatelj sklepal zavarovanje, ter omejila ogroženost davkoplačevalcev zaradi terjatev na trgih, kjer je eden ali več zavarovateljev glede na ves trg tolikšen, da bi njegov stečaj ogrozil zmožnost zavarovalne jamstvene sheme, da bi izplačala terjatve imetnikov zavarovalnih polic.
Your rapporteur believes that the four policy goals outlined above can be adequately met by a minimum harmonisation directive that ensures the same level of consumer protection regardless of the location of the insurer writing the policy, and limits the exposure of tax-payers for claims in markets where the size of one or more insurers vis-a-vis the overall market is such that its failure would imperil the ability of an IGS to meet policyholder claims.
V okviru teh omejitev – ki bodo natančneje pojasnjene v nadaljevanju – poročevalec meni, da bi za to shemo moralo veljati načelo subsidiarnosti.
Within these boundaries – to be further drawn out below – your rapporteur believes that the design of the scheme should be a matter of subsidiarity.
Priznava sicer, da morebitne konkurenčne motnje znotraj enotnega trga ostajajo nerešene, vendar meni, da bi bilo tovrstna vprašanja najbolje obravnavati v prihodnosti, ko bodo utrjene tudi druge zakonodajne spremembe ter zagotovljen osnovni cilj varstva potrošnikov in davkoplačevalcev.
As such your rapporteur acknowledges that potential competitive distortions within the single market remain unaddressed, but believes that such issues are best resolved at a later date when other legislative changes have bedded down and the primary objective of consumer and tax-payer protection assured.
Geografsko območje zavarovalnih jamstvenih shem se določi po načelu matične države .
The geographical scope of IGS should be on the basis of 'home' country principle
Ker standardi varstva potrošnikov na ravni EU niso usklajeni, ima pristop z državo gostiteljico nekaj prednosti glede enakih konkurenčnih pogojev in varstva potrošnikov.
There are merits to a 'host' approach from a level playing field and consumer protection perspective absent EU level harmonised consumer protection standards.
Vendar lahko ta pristop podvoji stroške za vseevropske zavarovatelje, ki morajo sodelovati v več nacionalnih shemah, z vidika bonitetnega nadzora pa je tudi v nasprotju z direktivo Solventnost II, v kateri je poudarjeno, da ima dokončno pristojnost za vprašanja bonitete glavni (matični) nadzornik.
However, it can result in duplication of costs for pan-European insurers having to participate in multiple national schemes and, more importantly from a prudential supervisory perspective, runs counter to the emphasis within Solvency II on ultimate discretion for prudential issues being with the lead ('home') supervisor.
Na ta način je zavarovateljeva nesolventnost povezana z nezmožnostjo nadzora matičnega nadzornika, tako da bi breme nesolventnosti krila matična zavarovalna jamstvena shema.
Thus, ultimately the failure of an insurer will be linked to the inadequacy of supervision by the 'home' supervisor, and the burden of responsibility for compensating policy-holders affected by such a failure should be borne by the 'home' IGS.
Zavarovalna jamstvena shema bi morala v celoti kriti terjatve v zvezi s policami za vse oblike zavarovanj, odškodninski postopek za terjatve pa bi moral zagotoviti, da bi bile izkušnje potrošnikov bolj ali manj enake.
IGS should fully cover valid policy claims across all forms of insurance, and the claims compensation process should provide consistency of consumer experience
Da se ohrani zaupanje potrošnikov v zavarovalništvo in enotni trg finančnih storitev, bi moral biti po poročevalčevem mnenju glavni dejavnik pri iskanju rešitev zavarovalnih jamstvenih shem na ravni EU zagotovitev dosledne ravni varstva potrošnikov pri vseh vrstah zavarovalnih produktov v primeru zavarovateljevega stečaja, (posrednikove) zlorabe pri prodaji ali goljufije.
In order to ensure that consumer confidence is maintained in both the insurance industry and the single market for financial services your rapporteur is convinced the key feature of an EU IGS solution should be to ensure a consistent level of protection for consumers of all types of insurance products in the event of insurer bankruptcy, (intermediary) mis-selling or fraud.
Nova zakonodaja EU ne bi smela zmanjšati varstva potrošnikov, ki ga zagotavljajo že obstoječe zavarovalne jamstvene sheme v državah članicah (nekatere že zagotavljajo varstvo za vse kategorije zavarovanj in/ali stoodstotno kritje).
New EU legislation should not result in a reduction in consumer protection in Member States with pre-existing IGS (several of which already offer protection on all classes of insurance, and/or 100% payouts).
Zaradi tega bi morali evropskim potrošnikom zagotoviti, da bodo vse vrste zavarovalnih produktov, ki jih kupijo, krila zavarovalna jamstvena shema, ki bo jamčila popolno poplačilo v določenem času, enakem za vso EU.
As a result, European consumers should be confident that all types of insurance products they buy are covered by an IGS, and that this IGS will guarantee that they receive 100% compensation within a set period of time, consistent throughout the EU.
Če želimo, da bo načelo matične države verodostojno z vidika potrošnikov, je nujno, da bodo izkušnje potrošnikov glede terjatev do zavarovalnih jamstvenih shem enake, ne glede na matično državo zavarovatelja.
Furthermore, to make the 'home' country principle credible from a consumer perspective, consistency of consumer experience when it comes to making IGS claims is necessary regardless of the 'home' country of the insurer.
Bistveno je, da je imetnikom polic na voljo enotna kontaktna točka pri njihovem nacionalnem nadzorniku, ki jim lahko pomaga pri terjatvah, ne glede na to, ali gre za zavarovalno jamstveno shemo v matični ali drugi državi članici.
It is essential that policyholders have a single point of contact within their national supervisor that can assist them with claims, be it from the domestic IGS or an IGS in another Member State.
Omogočena bi jim morala biti vsaj ustrezna pomoč za razumevanje odškodninskega postopka in vlaganje terjatev v domačem jeziku.
Not least they should be able to receive adequate assistance in understanding the compensation process, and be able to make claims in their own language.
Evropski nadzorni organ za zavarovanja in poklicne pokojnine (organ EIOPA) bi moral oblikovati usklajen pristop k odškodninskim terjatvam imetnikov polic, ki bi bil preprost in bi temeljil na zgledih najboljše prakse; po potrebi prek zavezujočih tehničnih standardov.
EIOPA should work on developing a harmonised approach for policyholder compensation claims on the basis of simplicity and best practice, if necessary through binding technical standards.
Nadzornika v matični državi in državi gostiteljici bi morala polno sodelovati, da bi v primeru zavarovateljevega stečaja kar se da zmanjšala motnje za imetnike polic v državi gostiteljici.
'Home' and 'host' supervisors should cooperate fully to ensure minimised disruption for policyholder in a 'host' country in the event of a bankruptcy.
Zavarovalne jamstvene sheme bi morale v tej fazi kriti samo fizične osebe, nacionalne sheme pa lahko po izbiri vključijo tudi pravne osebe .
IGS should only cover natural persons at this stage, though national schemes may choose to include legal persons
Z vidika enotnega trga je še posebej dragoceno, če so v zavarovalni jamstveni shemi zajeta tudi mala in mikropodjetja, vendar je treba merila za opredelitev tovrstnih podjetij določiti zelo previdno.
There is value in including micro- and small-undertakings in an IGS from a single market perspective, but defining criteria to identify such undertakings requires careful attention.
Poročevalec namreč ugotavlja, da na ravni EU sicer obstaja opredelitev, kaj je malo oziroma srednje podjetje (priporočilo Komisije 2003/361/EC) , a se ne uporablja dosledno v vsej EU.
Indeed, your rapporteur notes that while an EU definition exists of what constitutes an SME ( Commision Recommendation 2003/361/EC ), this definition is not consistently applied across the EU.
Dodatne zaplete povzroča spremenljiva narava teh podjetij skozi čas.
The changing nature of such undertakings over time provides additional complications.
Zaradi tega bi morala biti prihodnja direktiva o zavarovalnih jamstvenih shemah omejena na fizične osebe, po sprejetju zakonske opredelitve malih in srednjih podjetij za vso EU ter po utrditvi zavarovalne jamstvene sheme samo za fizične osebe pa bi morala Komisija ponovno preučiti, ali bi lahko te sheme zajele tudi pravne osebe.
As a result, any forthcoming Directive for IGS should be limited to natural persons, but on adoption of a legal definition of SMEs across the EU, and following the bedding-down on a consumer-only IGS, the Commission should re-examine the case for IGS to also cover select legal persons.
Poročevalec v skladu s pristopom najmanjšega usklajevanja, ki ga zagovarja v tem poročilu, meni, da bi bilo treba državam članicam omogočiti, da v zavarovalne jamstvene sheme vključijo tudi pravne osebe, če tako želijo.
In keeping with the minimum harmonisation approach advocated throughout this report, your rapporteur believes that individual Member States should be allowed to include legal persons within their national IGS if they so wish.
Za način financiranja nacionalne zavarovalne jamstvene sheme bi moralo veljati načelo subsidiarnosti.
The model for IGS funding should be a matter of subsidiarity.
Shema bi morala biti dovolj odporna, matični nadzornik pa bi moral uporabljati verodostojne nadzorne standarde, da odškodninskih terjatev ne bi poravnavali z davkoplačevalskim denarjem, nadzor nad vsem pa bi moral imeti organ EIOPA.
The IGS scheme should be sufficiently robust, with the 'home' supervisor applying credible supervisory standards to avoid tax-payer funding of compensation claims, with oversight by EIOPA