natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In his Opinion, 34 which the Court largely followed on this point, Advocate General Vilaça pointed out that if the VAT rate were standardised at 25 %, thereby increasing the rate applied to beer by 6 percentage points, the difference in price between the two products would decrease by BEF 1.5 (from BEF 95.25 to BEF 93.75), whereas if the rate were standardised at 19 % — that is to say, by reducing the rate applied to wine — the reduction would have amounted to BEF 6 (from BEF 95.25 to BEF 89.25).
Generalni pravobranilec Vilaça je v sklepnih predlogih 34, ki jim je Sodi�če v zvezi s to točko v bistvenem sledilo, poudaril, da bi se v primeru, če bi se davčna stopnja izenačila na 25 % in bi se davčna stopnja za pivo dvignila za 6 odstotkovnih točk, razlika med tema dvema proizvodoma zmanj�ala za 1,5 BFR (iz 95,25 na 93,75 BFR), medtem ko bi z izenačitvijo na 19 %, se pravi z znižanjem davčne stopnje, ki velja za vino, ta razlika zna�ala 6 BFR (iz 95,25 na 89,25 BFR).
In neither case did the price relationship between wine
V obeh primerih se razmerje cene vina in piva
A more detailed analysis of the facts of the case allows us to comprehend better the significance of the conclusion which the Court reached and to assess whether, as the Kingdom of Sweden suggests, it is appropriate to transpose to the present case the approach adopted in that earlier case.
Natančnej�a preučitev zadevnih podatkov omogoča bolj�e razumevanje vsebine ugotovitev Sodi�ča in presojo, ali je, kot predlaga Kraljevina Švedska, re�itev iz te
33 — 4.2 times.
33 – 4,2 krat.
Considering the prices net of VAT (BEF 100 for wine and BEF 25 for beer), the differential was precise- ly 1 : 4.
Ob upo�tevanju cen brez DDV (100 BFR za vino in 25 BFR za pivo), je bila razlika točno 1 proti 4.
34 — Opinion delivered on 26 February 1987 in Case 356/85, cited above, [1987] ECR 3299, point 102 et seq.
34 – Predstavljeni 26. februarja 1987 v zgoraj navedeni zadevi Komisija proti Belgiji (Recueil, str.
32 — Case 356/85, cited above, paragraph 18.
32 – Zgoraj navedena sodba Komisija proti Belgiji, točka 18.
COMMISSION v SWEDEN reduction of 6.65 %.
KOMISIJA PROTI ŠVEDSKI odstotkih, za 6,65 %.
The price ratio between wine and beer would decrease by 11.8 %, although continuing to be of the order of 2 : 1.
Razmerje med ceno vina in piva bi se zmanj�alo za 11,8 %, čeprav bi ostalo �e vedno 2 proti 1.
38 and beer undergo significant change (-1.5 % if the rate were standardised at 25 %, and -6.3 % if the rate were standardised at 19 %).
38 ni veliko spremenilo (–1,5 % v primeru izenačitve davčne stopnje na 25 % in –6,3 % v primeru izenačitve davčne stopnje na 19 %).
In the former case, which had to be regarded as the most likely in view of the statements issued by the Belgian Government in the course of the proceedings, the price of a litre of beer would have increased by 5 %, whereas, in the latter case, the price of a litre of wine would have fallen by 4.8 %. 35
V prvem primeru, ki ga je treba �teti za bolj verjetnega, glede na pojasnila belgijske vlade med postopkom, bi se cena enega litra piva dvignila za 5 %, medtem ko bi se v drugem primeru cena enega litra vina znižala za 4,8 %. 35
In the light of those figures, is it possible to conclude — as the Court did in Case 356/85, referred to above — that the difference in the prices of beer and wine in Sweden is so great that the 20 % disparity 39 between the rates of duty applied to the two beverages is not capable of influencing consumer behaviour?
Ali lahko na podlagi teh podatkov sklepamo, podobno kot je Sodi�če razsodilo v zgoraj navedeni sodbi Komisija proti Belgiji, da je razlika v cenah piva in vina na Švedskem tako pomembna, da obstoječa razlika 20 % 39, ki obstaja med stopnjami tro�arin, ki veljajo za ti dve pijači, ni taka, da bi lahko vplivala na vedenje potro�nikov?
At this point, it is necessary to compare the information we have in the present case with the figures set out above, in order to assess whether, in the present case, it is possible to reach the same conclusions as the Court arrived at in Case 356/85 Commission v Belgium.
Na tem mestu je treba za presojo, ali je v obravnavanem primeru mogoče priti do istih sklepov, do katerih je Sodi�če pri�lo v sodbi Komisija proti Belgiji, podatke, ki jih imamo v tej zadevi, primerjati s tistimi, predstavljenimi zgoraj.
On the basis of the data provided by or unchallenged by the Kingdom of Sweden, 36 and applying to a litre of wine with an alcoholic strength of 12.5 % vol. the excise duty applicable to beer (SEK 1.47 by volume of alcohol), the outcome is a price reduction in absolute terms of SEK 4.63 per litre (EUR 0.50), 37and, in percentage terms, a
Na podlagi podatkov, ki jih je predložila Kraljevina Švedska, 36 oziroma jim ni ugovar- jala, in ob predpostavki, da bi za liter vina z vsebnostjo alkohola 12,5 vol. % uporabili stopnjo tro�arine, določeno za pivo, in sicer 1,47 SEK na volumenski odstotek alkohola, bi kot rezultat dobili zmanj�anje cene v absolutni vrednosti 4,63 SEK/l (0,50 EUR) 37in, v
In my view, that question must elicit a negative response.
Po mojem mnenju mora biti odgovor negativen.
A comparison of the data relating to the present case and the facts which gave rise to the judgment in Case 356/85 reveals that the two cases cannot, in fact, be regarded as comparable.
Iz primerjave podatkov, ki se nana�ajo na to zadevo, s tistimi, ki se nana�ajo na zadevo, ki se je končala s sodbo Komisija proti Belgiji, namreč izhaja, da dejanska stana nista primerljiva.
While the Court was able to hold in Case 356/85 that, given a ratio of 1 : 4 between the price of beer and the price of wine, any reduction in the price of wine in the region of 5 % did not appear capable of influencing consumer choice, the same cannot be claimed with certainty and without taking other factors into consideration if that ratio is 1 : 2, and any reduction in the price of wine is in the region of 6.5 %.
Če je Sodi�če v prej navedeni sodbi lahko ugotovilo, da glede na to, da je razmerje med ceno piva in ceno vina 1 proti 4, morebitno znižanje cene vina, ki bi bilo blizu 5 %, ni tako, da bi lahko vplivalo na izbiro potro�nikov, pa tega, brez upo�tevanja drugih dejavnikov, ni mogoče z gotovostjo trditi v primeru, ko je navedeno razmerje 1 proti 2, morebitno znižanje cene vina pa bi zna�alo 6,5 %.
40In principle, the narrower the
40 Načeloma velja, predloge generalnega
38 — It would decrease from 2.3 to 2.1.
38 – Šla bi iz 2,3 na 2,1.
39 — Comparing the duty levied by volume of alcohol and using as a basis a wine with an alcoholic strength of 12.5 % vol.
39 – Primerjava tro�arine, ki se odmeri za volumenski odstotek alkohola in z upo�tevanjem vina z alkoholno stopnjo 12,5 vol. %.
36 — The comparison is based on the average price of a litre of wine with an alcoholic strength of 12.5 % vol.
36 – Primerjava je opravljena ob upo�tevanju povprečne cene enega litra vina z alkoholno stopnjo 12,5 %.
It is scarcely necessary to point out that if lighter and less expensive wines — falling within the tax bracket relevant in this case — were taken into consideration, the price difference compared with beer would be less marked, whereas, as we saw above, the difference in taxation to the detriment of wine would be greater.
Jasno je, da če bi se upo�tevala lažja in cenej�a vina, ki spadajo v upo�tevno kategorijo davkov, bi bila razlika v ceni glede na pivo manj poudarjena, medtem ko, kot je bilo ugotovljeno zgoraj, bi bila razlika v obdavčitvi v �kodo vina večja.
40 — But this increases if less expensive wines of lower alcoholic strength are taken into consideration.
40 – Vendar pa se ta poveča, kjer se upo�tevajo vina z nižjo alkoholno stopnjo in nižjo ceno.
37 — The calculation also includes the application of VAT at a rate of 25 %.
37 – Izračun upo�teva tudi uporabo 25 % DDV-ja.
circumstances in which it is definitely more straightforward to compare the prices of the beverages per litre, bearing in mind also that, as the Swedish Government pointed out in its observations, the average Swedish consumer tends to buy wine packaged in what is known as the ‘Bag in Box’ format.
Systembolaget, 41v pogojih, ki vsekakor omogočajo najbolj neposredno primerjavo cen za liter teh pijač, upo�tevajoč tudi nagnjenost povprečnega �vedskega potro�nika, ki ga je v pisnih vlogah navajala tožena vlada, k nakupu vin, pakiranih v t.i. Bag in Box.
42In any event, the Commission has failed to provide any information to demonstrate that its method of comparison is more relevant — bearing in mind the habits of Swedish consumers and the characteristics of the market — than the method suggested by the Swedish Government.
42Vendar pa Komisija ni predložila dokazov, na podlagi katerih bi njen način primerjave, ob upo�tevanju navad �vedskega potro�nika in lastnosti trga, lahko �teli za bolj ustreznega od tistega, ki ga je predlagala tožena vlada.
On the basis of the foregoing, I consider it necessary to reject the argument of the Kingdom of Sweden to the effect that it is possible, merely by taking into account the difference in price between wine and beer, to rule out the possibility that the disparity between the excise duty rates applied to the two products is likely to have any influence on consumer choice.
Na podlagi navedenega menim, da je treba zavrniti navedbo Kraljevine Švedske, na podlagi katere je že samo z upo�tevanjem razlike v obstoječih cenah med pivom in vinom možno izključiti, da bi razlika med stopnjami tro�arin, ki se uporabljajo za ta dva proizvoda, lahko imela kakr�en koli vpliv na izbiro potro�nikov.
At this point, it is necessary to assess whether the evidence provided by the Commission is sufficient to demonstrate that the tax arrangements at issue are likely to produce a protectionist effect in relation to beer and to the detriment of wine.
Na tem mestu je treba presoditi, ali elementi, ki jih je predložila Komisija, zadostujejo za ugotovitev, da zadevni davčni sistem lahko povzroči za�čitni učinek v razmerju do piva in v �kodo vina.
According to the Commission, it is clear from the Systembolaget’s statistics that consumer behaviour is influenced by the price variations caused by the differences in the rates of duty applied to the products at issue.
Po mnenju Komisije iz statističnih podatkov Systembolaget jasno izhaja, da na vedenje potro�nikov vplivajo spremembe cen zaradi spremembe tro�arin za zadevne proizvode.
The Commission points out that
Komisija poudarja, da statistike za leto 1997, v katerem je začela veljati
Since I have reached that conclusion in the light of the information provided by the Swedish Government, I shall not dwell on the question — the subject of lengthy discussion between the parties in the course of the written procedure — of the appropriateness of the method of comparison which the Swedish Government adopted, and which consisted in comparing the price of a litre of wine with the price of a litre of beer.
Ker sem do te ugotovitve pri�el z upo�tevanjem podatkov, ki jih je predložila tožena vlada, se ne bom zaustavljal pri vpra�anju, ki sta ga stranki med pisnim postopkom na �iroko obravnavali, in sicer vpra�anju glede pravilnosti primerjalne metode, ki jo je uporabila �vedska vlada in katere vsebina je primerjava cene enega litra vina in enega litra piva.
In that connection, I shall merely point out that the method proposed by the Commission, which involves comparing the prices of a glass of wine and a tankard of beer of different volumes, does not appear to be the most appropriate, particularly in view of the ways in which the two products are marketed. They are, in fact, mainly sold through Systembolaget’s sales outlets, 41in
V zvezi s tem se bom omejil na ugotovitev, da metoda, ki jo je predlagala Komisija in katere vsebina je primerjava cen enega kozarca vina in enega vrčka piva z različno količino, ni najprimernej�a in to predvsem ob upo�tevanju načinov trgovanja s temi proizvodi.
The bag is then placed inside a cardboard box which is designed to make it easier to transport and store the product.
Ti proizvodi se namreč prodajajo predvsem na prodajnih mestih družbe
COMMISSION v SWEDEN reduced, the increase in sales amounted to just 2.8 %, which is the minimum figure for the period 1997-2003, whereas in 1999 sales rose by 15.4 %, far higher than the increase in 1997, in response to the cut in tax.
KOMISIJA PROTI ŠVEDSKI prodaja povečala le za 2,8 %, kar za obdobje od 1997 do 2003 predstavlja minimalno vrednost, medtem ko je bil v letu 1999 zabeležen dvig prodaje za 15,4 %, torej znatno vi�ji od dviga, doseženega leta 1997, skladno z zmanj�anjem stopnje tro�arine.
The years after 1999, with the exception of 2003, reveal a more or less constant increase in sales, in the region of 10 %.
Leta po 1999, z izjemo leta 2003, kažejo skorajda stalno povečevanje prodaje za okrog 10 %.
In my view, that suggests that factors other than the tax rate influenced the rise in beer sales in the reference period and, consequently, the difference in the volume of wine and beer sales during that period.
Ti podatki po mojem mnenju omogočajo ugotovitev, da so tudi drugi dejavniki, poleg davčnega, vplivali na nara�čanje prodaje piva v referenčnem obdobju in posledično na razliko med prodanimi količinami vina in piva, ki je nastala v navedenem obdobju.
So far as wine is concerned, while the Systembolaget’s statistics record a fall in sales in 1997, the year in which the reduced rate of tax was applied to beer, sales of wine in fact rose again in the following year, increasing by 2.7 %, almost the same as the rate of increase in beer sales recorded that year (2.8 %).
V zvezi z vinom statistični podatki prodaje družbe Systembolaget opozarjajo, da se kljub zmanj�anju v letu 1997, letu uporabe zmanj�ane stopnje tro�arine za pivo, namreč prodaja že v naslednjem letu znova poveča z rastjo za 2,7 %, skorajda enako rasti, zabeleženi v istem letu za pivo (2,8 %).
From 1998 onwards, sales of wine have increased, although not at a constant rate.
Od leta 1998 naprej je prodaja vina nara�čala, čeprav ne stalno.
for 1997, the year in which the tax reform cutting the rate of duty on beer by some 40 % entered into force, the statistics show both that sales of beer rose by 8.9 %, reversing the trend of previous years, when they fell significantly, and that sales of wine fell by 3.7 %.
davčna reforma, ki je za približno 40 odstotkovnih točk zmanj�ala stopnjo tro�arine za pivo, kažejo po eni strani, da se je prodaja te pijače povečala za 8,9 %, s preobratom glede na predhodna leta, v katerih se je prodaja bistveno zmanj�ala, in po drugi, da se je prodaja vina zmanj�ala za 3,7 %.
In 2002, the year in which the rate of duty on wine was cut by 18.8 %, sales of wine rose by 11 %.
V letu 2002, ko je bila za 18,8 % znižana tro�arina za vino, pa naj bi se prodaja tega proizvoda povečala za 11 %.
The Commission further points out that, while in the period between 1997 and 2001 sales of wine rose overall, sales of beer clearly increased more significantly in percentage terms.
Komisija poleg tega poudarja, da čeprav se je v obdobju med leti 1997 in 2001 prodaja vina v celoti povečala, pa se je prodaja piva povečala v znatno večjem odstotku.
Finally, the Commission notes that, while, in 1995, sales of wine by volume were substantially equivalent to sales of beer (approximately 103 million litres of each beverage), the volume of beer sold in 2004 (approximately 173 million litres) outstripped by some 20 % sales of wine (approximately 139 million litres).
Nazadnje, Komisija trdi, da medtem ko je bila leta 1995 količina prodanega vina v bistvu enaka prodaji piva (približno 103 milijone litrov za vsako pijačo), je količina piva, prodanega v letu 2004 (približno 173 milijonov litrov), za približno 20 % presegala prodajo vina (približno 139 milijonov litrov).
According to the Commission, that disparity, which occurred after the 1997 tax reform, must be ascribed to the difference between the rates of duty on the two beverages introduced under the reform.
To razliko, ki je nastala po davčni reformi leta 1997, je treba po mnenju Komisije pripisati davčnim stopnjam za ti dve pijači, ki jih je uvedla navedena reforma.
The figures which the Commission has provided do not appear to me to be particularly meaningful, first, and above all, because they relate to sales of wine and beer generally, and do not therefore permit a separate analysis of sales trends in the competing categories.
Podatki, ki jih je navedla tožeča stranka, se mi prvič ne zdijo posebno relevantni, zlasti ker se nana�ajo splo�no na prodajo vina in piva in torej ne omogočajo ločenega upo�tevanja poteka prodaje po kategorijah, ki so v medsebojni konkurenci.
Secondly, while it is true that the statistics which the Commission has attached to its submission show that, from 1997 and until 2003, sales of beer continued to rise, that increase was not constant.
Na drugem mestu, čeprav je res, da iz statistik, ki jih navaja Komisija, izhaja, da je prodaja od leta 1997 do leta 2003 nara�čala, to nara�čanje vendarle ni bilo povsem konstantno.
In 1998, the year after the rate of duty was
V letu 1998, ki je sledilo zmanj�anju stopnje tro�arine, se je
In the light of the above considerations, I am of the view that the figures submitted by the Commission prove at most that Swedish consumers are sensitive to the variations that result from changes to the tax arrangements applicable to the beverages at issue; and, reflecting local patterns of consumption, where there is traditionally a predilection for beer, that sensitivity is more marked in the
Ob upo�tevanju zgornjih ugotovitev, menim da podatki, ki jih je predložila Komisija, omogočajo zgolj dokaz občutljivosti �vedskega potro�nika na povečanja cen, nastala zaradi sprememb davčne ureditve zadevnih pijač, občutljivost, ki se v povezavi s krajevnimi potro�ni�kimi navadami, ki tradicionalno dajejo prednost pivu, pokaže
At this point, it is necessary to consider what constitutes the actual burden of proof which the Commission must discharge in infringement proceedings pursuant to the second paragraph of Article 90 EC.
Na tem mestu se je treba vpra�ati, kak�no dokazno breme je Komisiji dejansko naloženo v okviru postopka zaradi kr�itve na podlagi člena 90, drugi odstavek, ES.
43 Moreover, it is clear that the effect, whereby sales expand as a result of a cut in tax, is of limited duration and probably lasts for just one year following the entry into force of the change in the tax rules.
43Poleg tega iz njih izhaja, da ima učinek povečanja prodaje po znižanju stopnje tro�arin časovno omejeno trajanje in se verjetno izčrpa v prvem letu po začetku veljave davčne spremembe.
While it is possible to infer from the statistics produced by the Commission that demand for the products at issue is to some degree elastic depending on price — and the Kingdom of Sweden does not dispute that fact — 44it is not, in my view, possible to extract from those statistics information concerning the impact of the price variations on the competitive relationship between the products that is sufficiently significant to enable us to establish that the increases in the sales of beer and wine respectively in 1997 and 2002 are attributable, at least in part, to a substitution effect.
Če je iz statističnih podatkov, ki jih je pripravila Komisija, možno sklepati na določeno elastičnost povpra�evanja po zadevnih proizvodih glede na ceno, dejavnik, ki ga sicer Kraljevina Švedska 44ne izpodbija, pa po mojem mnenju iz njih ni možno pridobiti relevantnih podatkov v zvezi z vplivom spremembe cen na konkurenčni odnos med navedenima proizvodoma, ki bi omogočali ugotovitev, da je dvig prodaje piva v letu 1997 in prodaje vina v letu 2002 mogoče vsaj delno pripisati substitucijskemu učinku.
An impact of that nature depends on the level of competition between the products themselves, hence on the crossprice elasticity of demand; however, the Commission has provided nothing on which to base an assessment of that factor.
Tak vpliv je odvisen od stopnje obstoječe konkurence med tema proizvodoma in torej od količnika navzkrižne elastičnosti povpra�evanja, dejavnikov v zvezi s katerimi Komisija ni predložila nobenih elementov za presojo.
I have already stated that the Court does not require the submission of statistical data or econometric studies which demonstrate that the tax arrangements at issue actually have a protectionist effect; nor could the Commission reasonably be required to furnish such evidence. 45However, it must demonstrate that the tax system is likely to produce such an effect.
Povedano je že bilo, da Sodi�če ne zahteva ugotovitve – na podlagi statističnih podatkov ali ekonometričnih �tudij – dejanskega za�čitnega učinka izpodbijane davčne ureditve, niti ni mogoče takega dokaza razumno zahtevati od Komisije, 45ampak zahteva dokaz, da taka ureditev lahko povzroči navedeni učinek.
In other words, it is incumbent on the Commission to assess all the objective features of the tax provision at issue in order to determine whether, in the light of the fiscal position that existed prior to its introduction and the characteristics of the market, there is evidence sufficient to raise a presumption that it is having an impact on the potential consumption of the products originating in other Member States and on the competitive relationship between the products in question.
Z drugimi besedami, naloga Komisije je, da opravi preizkus vseh objektivnih lastnosti zadevnega davčnega mehanizma in ob upo�tevanju davčnega položaja, ki je obstajal pred njegovo uvedbo, ter lastnosti trga oceni, ali obstajajo zadostni elementi za sklepanje na vpliv tega mehanizma na potencialno potrošnjo proizvodov s poreklom iz drugih držav članic in na razmerje konkurence med zadevnimi proizvodi. 46Če so podani indici, ki potrjujejo tezo Komisije,
46If there are indicators which substantiate the Commission’s argument, then it is for the govern-
43 – Statistični podatki, ki jih je pripravila Komisija, dokazujejo večjo rast prodaje vina v letu 2002 od rasti, ki je bila leta 1997 zabeležena za pivo, kljub temu, da je bilo zmanj�anje stopnje tro�arin za vino približno za polovico manj�e od zmanj�anja, ki se je predhodno uporabilo za pivo.
45 — That proof may be particularly hard to provide if the products are only partly interchangeable.
45 – Navedeno je �e zlasti težko dokazati, kadar gre za proizvode, ki so le delno zamenljivi.
44 — The increase in wine sales in 2002, following the cut in excise duty, is also apparent from the statistics provided by the Kingdom of Sweden.
44 – Rast prodaje vina v letu 2002, po zmanj�anju tro�arine, izhaja tudi iz statistik, ki jih je pripravila Kraljevina Švedska.
It is also clear from the Swedish Government’s written submissions that it is the more or less high but, in any event, appreciable elasticity in demand for alcoholic beverages in general that has enabled Sweden traditionally to use taxation to intervene in relation to prices and thereby to influence consumer habits.
Poleg tega iz pisnih vlog tožene vlade izhaja, da je prav bolj ali manj visoka elastičnost povpra�evanja po alkoholnih pijačah, ki jo je mogoče oceniti, Švedski sploh omogočila tradicionalno uporabo davčnega instrumenta za poseg v cene in torej v potro�ni�ke navade.
In the past, for example, raising the rate of tax on beverages with a high alcohol content, combined with other non-fiscal measures, enabled the Government to steer consumers of such beverages towards products with a lower alcohol content, mainly wine.
46 – Seveda bo dokazno breme, naloženo Komisiji, toliko lažje, kolikor bolj neposredno je konkurenčno razmerje, ki obstaja med zadevnimi proizvodi, vse do sovpadanja, in z ugotovitvijo različne obdavčitve v primeru, ko bi �lo za proizvode, ki so si dejansko podobni.
COMMISSION v SWEDEN ment concerned to justify the difference in tax treatment at issue 47and/or to provide evidence to show that there is no breach of the second paragraph of Article 90 EC. 48
KOMISIJA PROTI ŠVEDSKI je naloga zainteresirane vlade, da upraviči razliko pri zadevnem davčnem obravnavanju 47 in/ali predloži dokaze, ki izključujejo kr�itev člena 90, drugi odstavek. 48