natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In relation to direct taxes, the Court has held that the situations of nonresidents and of residents are generally not comparable, because the income received in the territory of a State by a nonresident is in most cases only a part of his total income, which is concentrated at his place of residence, and because a non-resident’s personal ability to pay tax, determined by reference to his aggregate income and his personal and family circumstances, is easier to assess at the place where his personal and financial interests are centred, which in general is the place where he has his usual abode. 22
Na področju neposrednih davkov je Sodi�če presodilo, da položaj nerezidentov praviloma ni primerljiv s položajem rezidentov, ker je dohodek, ki ga na ozemlju države članice pridobi nerezident, najpogosteje le del njegovih skupnih dohodkov, katerih sredi�če je v kraju njegovega prebivali�ča, in ker je osebno davčno zmožnost nerezidenta, ki izhaja iz upo�tevanja vseh njegovih dohodkov ter njegovega osebnega in družinskega položaja, najlažje presoditi v kraju, v katerem je sredi�če njegovih osebnih in premoženjskih interesov, kar običajno ustreza kraju njegovega običajnega prebivali�ča.22
Accordingly, conditions imposed by national law must be regarded as indirectly discriminatory where, although applicable irrespective of nationality, they affect essentially migrant workers or the great majority of those affected are migrant workers, where they are applicable without distinction but can more easily be satisfied by national workers than by migrant workers or where there is a risk that they may operate to the particular detriment of the latter. 19
Tako je treba �teti, da so posredno diskriminatorni, čeprav veljajo brez razlikovanja glede na državljanstvo, pogoji nacionalnega prava, ki v glavnem ali v veliki večini prizadenejo delavce migrante, ter pogoji, ki veljajo brez razlikovanja, a jih domači delavci lažje izpolnijo kot delavci migranti, in pogoji, pri katerih obstaja nevarnost, da bodo učinkovali v breme zlasti delavcev migrantov.19
21 — Case C-329/05 Meindl [2007] ECR I-1107, paragraph 22.
21 — Sodba z dne 25. januarja 2007 v zadevi Meindl (C-329/05, ZOdl., str. I-1107, točka 22).
22 — Case C-279/93 Schumacker [1995] ECR I-225, paragraphs 31 to 33, and Case C-234/01 Gerritse [2003] ECR I-5933, paragraph 43.
I-225, točke od 31 do 33), in z dne 12. junija 2003 v zadevi Gerritse (C-234/01, Recueil, str. I-5933, točka 43).
19 — O’Flynn, paragraph 18 and the caselaw cited.
19 — Zgoraj navedena sodba O’Flynn (točka 18 in navedena sodna praksa).
However, the three categories of nonresidents are treated differently from residents in Germany.
Vendar so tri kategorije nerezidentov obravnavane drugače kot rezidenti v Nemčiji.
The position is different, however, when a nonresident taxpayer, whether employed or self-employed, receives all or almost all his income in the State where he works. 23
Drugače pa je v primeru davčnega zavezanca nerezidenta, zaposlenega ali samozaposlenega, ki prejema ves ali skoraj ves dohodek v državi, v kateri dela.23
In that case, the nonresident is objectively in the same situation in so far as concerns income tax as a resident of that State who does the same work there.
V tem primeru je nerezident objektivno v enakem položaju glede dohodnine kot rezident te države, ki tam opravlja enake dejavnosti.
Both are taxed in that State alone and their taxable income is the same. 24
Oba sta obdavčena samo v tej državi in njuna davčna osnova je enaka.24
Although they are liable to unlimited German income tax, persons permanently resident abroad and who are employed by a legal person governed by German public law, frontier workers and German officials or employees of the European Communities resident abroad are denied eligibility for the subsidy because, under the law on the property subsidy, the subsidised property must be situated in Germany.
Čeprav so v celoti zavezane za plačilo nem�ke dohodnine, so namreč osebe, ki imajo stalno prebivali�če v tujini in jih zaposluje pravna oseba nem�kega javnega prava, obmejni delavci in uradniki ali uslužbenci Evropskih skupnosti z nem�kim državljanstvom, ki prebivajo v tujini, prikraj�ane za kori�čenje subvencije, ker mora biti v skladu z zakonom o subvenciji za stanovanja subvencionirana nepremičnina na nem�kem ozemlju.
Here, therefore, we are faced with differentiated treatment that disadvantages nonresidents liable to unlimited German income tax.
Soočamo se torej z različnim obravnavanjem, ki postavlja nerezidente, ki so v celoti zavezani za plačilo nem�ke dohodnine, v slab�i položaj.
This differentiated treatment could deter those nonresidents from making use of the freedoms conferred on them by the Treaty.
To različno obravnavanje odvrača te nerezidente od izvajanja svobo�čin, ki jih imajo na podlagi Pogodbe.
Therefore, from the point of view of the factor giving rise to the property subsidy, namely unlimited liability to German income tax, German residents and nonresidents are in a comparable situation.
Zato so glede na dejavnik, na katerem temelji subvencija za stanovanja, namreč zavezanost v celoti za plačilo nem�ke dohodnine, nem�ki rezidenti in nerezidenti v primerljivem položaju.
23 — Schumacker, paragraph 36.24 — Case C-80/94 Wielockx [1995] ECR I-2493, paragraph 20.25 — Protocol of 8 April 1965 (OJ 1967 L 152, p. 13).
24 — Glej sodbo z dne 11. avgusta 1995 v zadevi Wielockx (C-80/94, Recueil, str.
That is the case, firstly, for nonresidents employed by a legal person governed by German public law.
Tako je, prvič, v primeru nerezidentov, ki jih zaposluje pravna oseba nem�kega javnega prava.
These persons, because they reside and work abroad, are denied a financial advantage, namely, the property
Te osebe so – ker prebivajo in delajo v tujini – prikraj�ane za finančno ugodnost,
OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL BOT — CASE C-152/05 subsidy.
BOTA – ZADEVA C-152/05 in sicer subvencijo za stanovanja.
The denial of this advantage has the effect of deterring them from leaving their State of origin, Germany, to work in another Member State which, in the light of the aforementioned caselaw, constitutes an obstacle to freedom of movement for workers.
Učinek tega prikraj�anja je ta, da jih odvrača od tega, da bi zapustili matično državo, Nemčijo, da bi �li delat v drugo državo članico, kar glede na navedeno sodno prakso pomeni oviro za prosto gibanje delavcev.
In that judgment, the Court accepted that the situation of a couple, both German nationals, who were working in Germany and were subject to taxation in that State but were residing in another Member State, was covered by Article 48 of the EEC Treaty (after amendment, Article 48 of the EC Treaty, now Article 39 EC).
V tej sodbi je namreč Sodi�če priznalo, da se za položaj para z nem�kim državljanstvom, ki dela v Nemčiji in je obdavčen v tej državi, prebiva pa v drugi državi članici, uporablja člen 48 Pogodbe EGS (postal člen 48 Pogodbe ES, ki je po spremembi postal člen 39 ES).
It took the view that ‘any Community national who, irrespective of his place of residence and his nationality, has exercised the right to freedom of movement for workers and who has been employed in a Member State other than that of residence falls within the scope of Article 48 EC’. 27
Štelo je, da „vsi državljani Skupnosti, ne glede na njihovo prebivali�če in njihovo državljanstvo, ki so izkoristili pravico do prostega gibanja delavcev in ki so opravljali poklicno dejavnost v drugi državi, kot je tista, v kateri je njihovo prebivali�če, sodijo na področje uporabe člena 48 Pogodbe“.27
Secondly, the Commission considers that the law on the property subsidy also constitutes discrimination against frontier workers.
Drugič, Komisija meni, da zakon o subvenciji za stanovanja pomeni tudi diskriminacijo obmejnih delavcev.
In its judgment in N, 28 the Court reached the same decision in respect of freedom of establishment.
V sodbi N28je Sodi�če ugotovilo enako na področju svobode ustanavljanja.
In this regard, the Federal Republic of Germany considers that the situation of nonresident German nationals working in Germany and liable to unlimited German income tax is not covered by Articles 39 EC and 43 EC.
Zvezna republika Nemčija v zvezi s tem meni, da se za položaj nem�kih državljanov nerezidentov, ki delajo v Nemčiji in so v celoti zavezani za plačilo nem�ke dohodnine, ne uporabljata člena 39 ES in 43 ES.
Consequently, I take the view that the situation of German frontier workers nonresident in Germany who work in that Member State and are liable to German income tax is also covered by Articles 39 EC and 43 EC.
Zato menim, da se tudi za položaj nem�kih obmejnih delavcev, ki so v Nemčiji nerezidenti, v tej državi članici delajo in so obdavčeni z nem�ko dohodnino, uporabljata člena 39 ES in 43 ES.
Even though in Werner the Court ruled that Article 52 of the Treaty did not apply to a situation in which a national of a Member State who works in that Member State and receives all or almost all his income there has his residence in another Member State, it abandoned that interpretation in Ritter-Coulais. 26
Čeprav je Sodi�če v zgoraj navedeni sodbi Werner presodilo, da se člen 52 Pogodbe ne uporablja za položaj, v katerem državljan države članice, ki dela na ozemlju te države in tam dobiva vse ali skoraj vse dohodke, prebiva v drugi državi članici, je v sodbi Ritter-Coulais26 to razlago opustilo.
27 — Ritter-Coulais, paragraphs 31 and 32.28 — Case C-470/04 N [2006] ECR I-7409, paragraph 28.
28 — Sodba z dne 7. septembra 2006 (C-470/04, ZOdl., str. I-7409, točka 28).
26 — Case C-152/03 Ritter-Coulais [2006] ECR I-1711.
26 — Sodba z dne 21. februarja 2006 (C-152/03, ZOdl., str. I-1711).
Those frontier workers, even though they are liable to unlimited German income tax and thus contribute to German tax revenues, are denied a form of financial support funded from those revenues solely because they reside on the other side of the border.
Čeprav so ti obmejni delavci v celoti zavezani za plačilo nem�ke dohodnine in tako prispevajo k nem�kim davčnim prihodkom, so prikraj�ani za denarno podporo, financirano iz teh prihodkov, samo zato, ker prebivajo na drugi strani meje.
Finally, the same holds true for German nationals who are agents or officials of the European Communities.
Nazadnje velja enaka ugotovitev za uslužbence ali uradnike Evropskih skupnosti, ki so nem�ki državljani.
I think that this financial disadvantage may have the effect of deterring these frontier workers from establishing their main residence in a Member State other than Germany.
Menim, da lahko ta finančna neugodnost povzroči odvračanje teh obmejnih delavcev od tega, da se naselijo na ozemlju druge države članice, kot je Nemčija.
Yet, for an employed or selfemployed worker, the right to reside in another Member State is the corollary of the right, enshrined in Article 18 EC, for any citizen of the Union to stay and reside in the Member States.
Pravica delavca, zaposlenega ali samozaposlenega, da prebiva v drugi državi članici, je posledica pravice do prebivanja na ozemlju držav članic, ki je v členu 18 ES določena za vsakega državljana Unije.
These people are denied a financial advantage because they reside abroad.
Te osebe so prikraj�ane za finančno ugodnost, ker prebivajo v tujini.
The conditions imposed by the law on the property subsidy therefore have the effect of deterring agents or officials of the European Communities from leaving their State of origin to work in another Member State, which also constitutes an obstacle to freedom of movement for workers.
Učinek pogojev, ki jih nalaga zakon o subvencijah za stanovanja, je odvračanje uslužbencev ali uradnikov Evropske Skupnosti, da zapustijo matično državo, da bi v drugi državi članici opravljali gospodarsko dejavnost, kar je tudi ovira prostemu pretoku delavcev.
The application of the law on the property subsidy therefore clearly amounts to an exclusion of nonresidents liable to unlimited German income tax from eligibility for a financial advantage and constitutes indirect discrimination, as a rule contrary to Articles 39 EC and 43 EC. There is therefore no
Uporaba zakona o subvencijah za stanovanja torej izključuje nerezidente, ki so v celoti zavezani za plačilo nem�ke dohodnine, od dodelitve finančne ugodnosti in pomeni posredno diskriminacijo, ki je načeloma v
Any exclusion of a worker from a financial advantage that he derives from his status
Vse pravice, ki izhajajo iz člena 18 ES, pridejo posebej do izraza v členih 39 ES in 43 ES.
According to well-established caselaw, national measures which are liable to hinder or make less attractive the exercise of fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Treaty may nevertheless be allowed if they pursue an objective in the public interest, are appropriate to ensuring the attainment of that objective and do not go beyond what is necessary to attain the objective pursued. 30
V skladu z ustaljeno sodno prakso se lahko sprejme nacionalne ukrepe, ki lahko ovirajo ali naredijo manj privlačno izvajanje temeljnih svobo�čin, ki jih zagotavlja Pogodba, če sledijo ciljem v javnem interesu, če so primerni za zagotovitev uresničitve teh ciljev in če ne presegajo tega, kar je nujno potrebno za uresničitev cilja, ki mu sledijo.30
However, is this discrimination justified by an overriding reason in the public interest?
Vendar, ali to diskriminacijo upravičuje nujni razlog v javnem interesu?
The justification for the discriminatory measure
Upravičenost diskriminatornega ukrepa
First, like the Federal Republic of Germany and the Commission, I am of the opinion that the desire to increase the German housing stock may be viewed as a public interest requirement.
Prvič, kot Zvezna republika Nemčija in Komisija menim, da se lahko želja povečati �tevilo stanovanj v Nemčiji �teje za nujni razlog v javnem interesu.
The Federal Republic of Germany considers that, if the Court were to take the view that the law on the property subsidy constitutes an obstacle to freedom of movement contrary to Articles 39 EC and 43 EC, this obstacle would be justified by an overriding reason in the public interest.
Zvezna republika Nemčija meni, da če bi moralo Sodi�če ugotoviti, da pomeni zakon o subvencijah za stanovanja oviro za prosto gibanje, ki je v nasprotju s členoma 39 ES in 43 ES, naj bi to omejitev vseeno upravičeval nujni razlog v javnem interesu.
Moreover, I think in actual fact that the housing issue concerns all the Member States.
Poleg tega dejansko menim, da stanovanjski problem zadeva vse države članice.
It is at the heart of all national and Community policies.
Je v sredi�ču vseh nacionalnih politik in tudi skupnostne.
The European Parliament, in a recent report of the Committee on Regional Development, takes the view that the right to adequate housing at an affordable price is a fundamental right. 31The Parliament also points out that this is a right recognised in several international charters and constitutions of Member States.
Evropski parlament v nedavnem poročilu Odbora za regionalni razvoj poleg tega navaja, da je pravica do primernega stanovanja po razumni ceni bistvena pravica.31 Parlament tudi opozarja, da gre za pravico, ki jo priznavajo razne mednarodne listine in ustave držav članic.
30 — Case C-104/06 Commission v Sweden [2007] ECR I-671, paragraph 25 and the caselaw cited.
30 — Sodba z dne 18. januarja 2007 v zadevi Komisija proti Švedski (C-104/06, ZOdl., str. I-671, točka 25 in navedena sodna praksa).
31 — See Report on Housing and Regional Policy of 28 March 2007 (A6-0090/2007).
31 — Glej poročilo o stanovanjski politiki in regionalni politiki z dne 28. marca 2007 (A6-0090/2007).
It takes the view that the actual objective of this law, namely the development of sufficient housing stock in Germany by promoting construction and purchase of housing, justifies the fact that the property subsidy is paid only to persons who are residents.
Meni namreč, da sam cilj tega zakona, in sicer razvoj zadostnega �tevila stanovanj v Nemčiji s spodbujanjem gradnje in nakupa stanovanj, upravičuje to, da samo rezidenti dobijo subvencijo za stanovanja.
The Federal Republic of Germany considers that in this way a sufficient supply of housing is guaranteed.
Zvezna republika Nemčija meni, da se tako zagotovi zadostna ponudba stanovanj.
Second, I also believe that the law on the property subsidy is an appropriate way of ensuring that the objective pursued is achieved.
Drugič, menim tudi, da lahko zakon o subvencijah za stanovanja zagotovi uresničitev sledenega cilja.
In my view, making the subsidy available to the three categories of nonresidents referred to by the Commission would not compromise the objective of increasing the German housing stock.
Po mojem mnenju namreč podelitev subvencije za stanovanja trem kategorijam nerezidentov, ki jih navaja Komisija, ne bi ogrozila cilja povečati �tevila stanovanj v Nemčiji.
There is no doubt that encouraging house-building by the grant of a subsidy contributes to the development of the housing stock in Germany and is thus directed at ensuring a sufficient supply of housing.
Nikakr�nega dvoma namreč ni, da spodbujanje gradnje stanovanj s podelitvijo subvencije prispeva h gradnji večjega �tevila stanovanj v Nemčiji, s čimer naj bi se zagotovila zadostna ponudba stanovanj.
Quite the opposite — the purchase or construction of a dwelling in another Member State by these nonresidents and by frontier workers in particular contributes to reducing housing demand in Germany.
Ravno nasprotno, nakup ali gradnja stanovanja na ozemlju druge države članice teh nerezidentov in zlasti obmejnih delavcev prispevata k zmanj�evanju povpra�evanja po stanovanjih v Nemčiji.
Those nonresidents would therefore not encumber the German property market and would not exert pressure on the strong demand that already exists.
Ti nerezidenti torej ne bi obremenili nem�kega nepremičninskega trga in ne bi pritiskali na že obstoječe veliko povpra�evanje.
Consequently, the objective of the law on the property subsidy, which is to ensure sufficient housing stock in Germany, may be achieved by measures that are less disadvantageous than the exclusion of nonresidents from eligibility for the grant.
Zato se lahko cilj zakona o subvencijah za stanovanja, ki je zagotavljanje zadostnega �tevila stanovanj v Nemčiji, doseže s manj neugodnimi ukrepi, kot je izključitev nerezidentov iz dodelitve subvencije.
I think that the subsidy for the purchase of a dwelling also leads indirectly to construction.
Glede subvencije za nakup stanovanja menim, da tudi posredno spodbuja gradnjo.
Persons entitled to the subsidy and wishing to purchase a dwelling increase demand and therefore encourage the construction of property for letting, meeting that demand, which they will subsequently be able to acquire.
Osebe, ki jim je dodeljena subvencija za stanovanja in želijo kupiti stanovanje, povečujejo povpra�evanje in zato spodbujajo gradnjo stavb, ki ustrezajo temu povpra�evanju, ki jih bodo lahko potem kupile.
In the light of all those considerations, I consider that the complaint is well founded.
Glede na vse navedeno menim, da je očitek utemeljen.
However, third, with regard to the proportionality of the law on the property subsidy, my opinion is that the Federal Republic of Germany could have achieved the intended objective by a less restrictive measure.
Vendar, tretjič, v zvezi s sorazmernostjo zakona o subvencijah za stanovanja menim, da bi lahko Zvezna republika Nemčija ta cilj lahko dosegla z manj omejevalnim ukrepom.
Accordingly, under the first subparagraph of Article 69(2) of the Rules of Procedure, the Federal Republic of Germany should be ordered to pay the costs.
Zato je treba na podlagi člena 69(2), prvi pododstavek, Poslovnika Zvezni republiki Nemčiji naložiti plačilo stro�kov postopka.
Having regard to the above considerations, I propose that the Court should:
Glede na zgoraj navedeno Sodi�ču predlagam, naj:
(1) declare that by excluding, in the first sentence of Paragraph 2(1) of the law on the property subsidy, properties situated in other Member States from eligibility for the property subsidy granted to persons liable to unlimited German income tax, the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 18, 39 and 43;
1. ugotovi, da Zvezna republika Nemčija s tem, da je v členu 2(1), prvi stavek, zakona o subvencijah za stanovanja izključila dodelitev subvencije za stanovanja osebam, ki so v celoti zavezane za plačilo nem�ke dohodnine, za nepremičnine v drugih državah članicah, ni izpolnila obveznosti iz členov 18 ES, 39 ES in 43 ES;
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Second Chamber)17 January 2008 *
SODBA SODIŠČA (drugi senat) z dne 17. januarja 2008*
ACTION under Article 226 EC for failure to fulfil obligations, brought on 5 April 2005,
V zadevi C-152/05, zaradi tožbe zaradi neizpolnitve obveznosti na podlagi člena 226 ES, vložene 5. aprila 2005,
JUDGMENT OF 17. 1.
SODBA Z DNE 17. 1.
2008 — CASE C-152/05
2008 – ZADEVA C-152/05
Advocate General: Y. Bot, Registrar: R. Grass, having regard to the written procedure, after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 28 June 2007, gives the following
Grass, na podlagi pisnega postopka, po predstavitvi sklepnih predlogov generalnega pravobranilca na obravnavi 28. junija 2007 izreka naslednjo
By its application the Commission of the European Communities requests the Court to declare that, by excluding in the first sentence of Paragraph 2(1) of the Law on subsidies for owneroccupied dwellings (Eigenheimzulagengesetz), in the version published in BGBl. 1997 I, p.
Komisija Evropskih skupnosti s tožbo Sodi�ču predlaga, naj ugotovi, da Zvezna republika Nemčija s tem, da je v členu 2(1), prvi stavek, zakona o subvencijah za stanovanja (Eigenheimzulagengesetz), v različici, objavljeni v BGBl. 1997 I, str.
734, as amended by the ancillary budget law of 2004 (Haushaltsbegleitgesetz 2004, BGBl. 2003 I, p.
734, kakor je bila spremenjena z zakonom, ki spremlja proračun iz leta 2004 (Haushaltsbegleitgesetz 2004, BGBl. 2003 I, str.
3076, ‘the EigZulG’), real property in another Member State from eligibility for the subsidy for owneroccupied dwellings granted to persons liable to unlimited taxation on income, whether or not those
3076, v nadaljevanju: EigZulG), nepremičnine v drugih državah članicah izključila od dodelitve subvencije za stanovanja, dodeljene osebam,
COMMISSION v GERMANY persons are able to obtain a comparable subsidy in that other Member State, the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 18 EC, 39 EC and 43 EC.
KOMISIJA PROTI NEMČIJI ki so v celoti zavezane za plačilo dohodnine, ne glede na to, ali te osebe lahko pridobijo primerljivo subvencijo v tej drugi državi članici ali ne, ni izpolnila obveznosti iz členov 18 ES, 39 ES in 43 ES.
The German legislation
Nemška zakonodaja
Paragraph 1 of the Law relating to income tax (Einkommensteuergesetz), in the version published in the BGBl. 2002 I, p.
Člen 1 Einkommensteuergesetz (zakon o dohodnini) v različici, objavljeni v BGBl. 2002 I, str.
4210 (‘the EStG’), provides:
4210 (v nadaljevanju: EStG), določa:
1. have neither their domicile nor their habitual residence in Germany and who
(1) ki nimajo niti stalnega niti običajnega prebivali�ča v Nemčiji in
2. are linked by a contract of employment to a German legal person governed by public law and who therefore receive a salary from German public funds and the members of their households, possessing German nationality or not in receipt of income or only of income taxable in Germany alone. This shall apply exclusively
(2) ki imajo pogodbo o zaposlitvi, ki jih veže na pravno osebo nacionalnega javnega prava in ki zato dobivajo plačo iz nacionalne javne blagajne, ter osebe, ki spadajo v njihovo gospodinjstvo in imajo nem�ko državljanstvo ter ne dobivajo dohodkov
2008 — CASE C-152/05 to natural persons who, in the country in which they have their domicile or habitual residence, are liable to income tax only to an extent equivalent to limited liability to tax.
2008 – ZADEVA C-152/05 oziroma dobivajo le dohodke, ki so obdavčljivi izključno v Nemčiji. To velja le za fizične osebe, ki so v državi, v kateri imajo stalno ali običajno prebivali�če, zavezane za plačilo dohodnine le v delu, ki ustreza delnemu obdavčenju.