natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In Denmark, until 1998, the internal audit unit of the paying agency was used as the Certifying Body and was not independent. 
I Danmark fungerade fram till 1998 utbetalningsstllets enhet fr internrevision som attesterande organ och var inte oberoende.
In Germany (Bavaria, Baden-Wrttemberg), internal audit and the Certifying Body constitute the same ÔcombinedŐ unit under the Ministry of Agriculture (1). 
I Tyskland (Bayern, Baden-Wrttemberg) utgr organet fr internrevision och det attesterande organet samma ÓkombineradeÓ enhet inom jordbruksministeriet (1).
In Austria (Zollamt Salzburg), the independence of the Certifying Body was at risk because there was a conflict of interest for one of the two auditors, who also had duties within ÔFinanzlandesamt SalzburgŐ, which is responsible for the paying agency itself. 
I sterrike (ÓZollamt SalzburgÓ) var det attesterande organets oberoende i fara p grund av att en av de tv revisorerna hade en intressekonflikt, d denne ven hade ligganden inom ÓFinanzlandesamt SalzburgÓ som ansvarar fr sjlva utbetalningsstllet.
Since the audit these problems have been resolved by the Commission. 
Kommissionen har sedan granskningen utfrdes lst dessa problem.
Some Certifying Bodies have used the services responsible for the internal audit of the paying agencies to carry out substantive testing of a sample of payments. 
Vissa attesterande organ har anvnt sig av de enheter som ansvarar fr internrevision av utbetalningsstllena fr att genomfra substansgranskning av ett stickprov av betalningar.
This varies from 10 % of the work (Sweden) to more than 50 % (Italy (ENR), Netherlands (LASER), Portugal (INGA, Ifadap)). 
Detta varierar frn 10 % av arbetet (Sverige) till mer n 50 % (Italien (ENR), Nederlnderna (Laser), Portugal (INGA, Ifadap)).
While it may be appropriate for Certifying Bodies to place reliance on the work of these units when assessing internal controls, internal audit resources should not be used to perform certification work to the extent that the units concerned are no longer able to fulfil their other tasks, thereby prejudicing the ability of paying agencies to meet the accreditation criteria. 
Det kan vara lmpligt att de attesterande organen stder sig p dessa enheters arbete nr de bedmer internkontroller, men internrevisionsresurser br inte anvndas fr att utfra attesteringsarbete i en sdan utstrckning att de berrda enheterna inte lngre fullgr sina vriga uppgifter, vilket kan skada utbetalningsstllenas frmga att uppfylla ackrediteringskriterierna.
Auditing standards 31. 
Revisionsprinciper 31.
The Commission guideline on ÔPrinciples for the certification of the accounts of a paying agencyŐ (July 1997) makes clear that the certification must be carried out broadly in accordance with the International Audit Standards (IAS), now called International Standards on Auditing (ISA), set out by the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC). 
I kommissionens riktlinje om ÓPrinciperna fr attestering av utbetalningsstllets rkenskaperÓ (juli 1997) grs klart att attesteringen skall utfras i verensstmmelse med internationellt erknd god revisionssed (International Audit Standards Đ IAS, som numera kallas International Standards on Auditing Đ ISA) vilken faststlls av det internationella revisorsfrbundet (IFAC).
The IFACŐs handbook states that the audit documentation should Ôprovide another auditor who has no previous experience with the audit with an understanding of the work performed and the basis of the principal decisions takenŐ. 
I IFAC:s handbok str det att revisionsdokumentationen br vara sdan att en annan revisor, som inte har ngon tidigare erfarenhet frn granskningen, frstr vilket arbete som utfrts och p vilken grund de viktigaste besluten har fattats.
The CourtŐs examination of the audit working papers retained by the Certifying Bodies to support their reports has shown that their extent and quality varies from unsatisfactory (Ireland) to comprehensive (Greece, Spain, Netherlands, Portugal). 
Revisionsrttens underskning av de arbetsdokument frn revisionen som de attesterande organen anvnt som underlag fr sina rapporter har visat att deras omfattning och kvalitet varierar frn otillfredsstllande (Irland) till uttmmande (Grekland, Spanien, Nederlnderna, Portugal).
In many cases the Certifying Body has failed to properly file the documentation, to indicate on the working papers who completed them and when or to evidence management review (France, Austria, Sweden, United Kingdom). 
I mnga fall har det attesterande organet varken arkiverat dokumentationen p korrekt stt, angivit p arbetsdokumenten vem som frdigstllt dem och nr eller visat att ledningen gtt igenom dem (Frankrike, sterrike, Sverige, Frenade kungariket).
A particular weakness concerns the documentation relating to sampling. 
En srskild svaghet gller dokumentationen om stickprovstagning.
Sampling Method 33. 
Stickprovstagning Metod 33.
The CommissionŐs guideline No 3 on the ÔPrinciples for the certification of the accounts of a paying agencyŐ (July 1997) states that the Certifying Body should aim to achieve an assurance level of 95 % that the accounts are correct. 
Enligt kommissionens riktlinje nr 3 om ÓPrinciperna fr attestering av utbetalningsstllets rkenskaperÓ (juli 1997) br det attesterande organet strva efter att uppn 95 % skerhet om att rkenskaperna r korrekta.
This degree of assurance may be obtained from examining the internal control system and from a test of a sample of transactions. 
Denna skerhetsgrad kan uppns genom granskning av internkontrollsystemen och genom test av ett urval av transaktioner.
For sampling purposes, MUS is recommended. 
Fr stickprov rekommenderas den statistiska urvalsmetoden MUS.
The approach applied by most Certifying Bodies was MUS (Table 5). 
Den metod som de flesta attesterande organ tillmpade var MUS (tabell 5).
Among the Certifying Bodies which did not use MUS for 1998, some stated that they would apply MUS for 1999 (Italy (AIMA), Austria (AMA)). 
Bland de attesterande organ som inte anvnde MUS fr 1998 angav vissa att de skulle anvnda MUS fr 1999 (Italien (AIMA), sterrike (AMA)).
Although MUS was used to determine the sample size, it was not always used to select the transactions (Greece, Italy (DCCC)). 
MUS anvndes visserligen fr att faststlla stickprovets storlek, men det anvndes inte alltid fr att vlja ut transaktionerna (Grekland, Italien (DCCC)).
Some Certifying Bodies have relied on the coordinating body/paying agencies to perform the sampling on their behalf (France, Austria (AMA)), but have since performed this task themselves. 
Vissa attesterande organ har frlitat sig p att det samordnande organet/utbetalningsstllena skall gra stickprovstagningen t dem (Frankrike, sterrike (AMA)), men har sedan utfrt uppgiften sjlva.
In Spain, the Certifying Body for four autonomous communities contracted out the sampling to a university and was not able to provide adequate supporting documentation for this. 
I Spanien lade det attesterande organet fr fyra sjlvstyrande enheter ut stickprovstagningen p ett universitet och kunde inte lmna tillrckliga underlag fr stickprovet.
(1) A private audit firm was appointed as the Certifying Body for 1999 for Denmark. 
(1) Ett privat fretag utsgs som attesterande organ fr 1999 fr Danmark.
For Germany the situation is likely to be resolved in time for certification of the 2000 accounts. 
Fr Tyskland kommer situationen troligen att lsas fre attesteringen av 2000 rs rkenskaper.
(2) There were two drawings on expenditures effected during two separate time intervals. 
(2) Det gjordes tv stickprover p utgifter under tv olika tidsperioder.
(3) Error evaluation not in accordance with MUS practice. 
(3) Utvrderingen av fel inte i enlighet med MUS-metoden.
(4) In addition to MUS, there were also transactions selected because of high monetary value. 
(4) Utver MUS valdes ven transaktioner ut p grund av att de utgjorde stora belopp.
(5) This figure represents the total error. 
(5) Denna siffra motsvarar det totala felet.
(6) One population, but where the transactions in high-risk areas are more likely to be audited. 
(6) En population, inom vilken det r mer sannolikt att transaktioner inom hgriskomrden granskas.
(7) No extrapolation carried out; error evaluation carried out on the basis of the number of errors found (and not on the monetary value). 
(7) Ingen extrapolering genomfrd; utvrdering av fel genomfrd utifrn antal ptrffade fel (och inte utifrn belopp).
(8) Statistical data here presented for the two populations together; the Certifying Body correctly treated them separately. 
(8) Statistikuppgifterna presenteras hr fr bda populationerna tillsammans. Det attesterande organet hanterade dem separat, vilket var korrekt.
(9) For the other populations, there were only conformity tests and no sampling for substantive tests. 
(9) Fr de vriga populationerna gjordes endast kontroller av verensstmmelse och inga stickprov fr substansgranskning.
(11) Not an increase of sample but a new sample on the PMSEE expenses that could not be checked in the first instance, see note 10 of the table. 
(11) Inget utkat stickprov men ett nytt stickprov p PMSEE-utgifter vilka inte kunde kontrolleras i frsta skedet, se fotnot 10.
(12) CCCOP qualified the accounts but finally no correction was made by the Commission (after a further mission there). 
(12) CCCOP lmnade reservation angende rkenskaperna, men ingen rttelse frn kommissionen (efter nnu ett revisionsbesk dr).
(13) In the third population, the criteria were 80 % level of confidence and 1 % level of materiality, but only 19 transactions were tested out of 185 because already five errors had been found and an extrapolation was made. 
(13) I den 3:e populationen var kriterierna en skerhetsgrad p 80 % och vsentlighetsgrnsen 1 %, men endast 19 av 185 transaktioner kontrollerades fr att man redan funnit 5 fel och en extrapolering gjordes.
(14) For one population, no substantive testing was made because the conformity testing showed a lot of failures; CCCOP decided to qualify that budget line. 
(14) Fr en population gjordes ingen substansgranskning eftersom kontrollen av verensstmmelse visade p mnga brister. CCCOP beslutade att lmna en reservation fr den budgetposten.
(15) The sampling and selection of transactions for per hectare aid were common to ONIC and SIDO. 
(15) ONIC och SIDO anvnde samma stickprovstagning och urval av transaktioner fr std per hektar.
(16) The population included national funds as well. 
(16) Populationen innefattade ven nationella medel.
(17) Public storage was not included in the MUS sample. 
(17) Offentlig lagring ingick inte i MUS-stickprovet.
(18) CCCOP found out that for small maize producers, a wrong ratio of production was applied but they were not able to quantify it; it was one of the reasons for qualifying the ONICŐs accounts, and there have also been corrections in clearance 1994 and 1995. 
(18) CCCOP upptckte att fel produktions grad anvndes fr sm majsproducenter, men kunde inte kvantifiera detta. Det var en orsak till att en reservation lmnades angende ONIC:s rkenskaper; rttelser har ven gjorts vid avslag av rkenskaperna fr 1994 och 1995.
(19) The extrapolated error was under the 1 % materiality in both paying agencies. 
(19) Det extrapolerade felet lg under vsentlighetsgrnsen p 1 % fr bda utbetalningsstllena.
(20) In fact, here it is the total error because, after finding the systematic error, all the transactions were checked. 
(20) Hr avses faktiskt det totala felet, eftersom man efter att ha upptckt det systematiska felet kontrollerade alla transaktioner.
(21) Most likely error. 
(21) Mest sannolikt fel.
(22) Mixture of MUS and manual as the first sample was not representative (file from which it was extracted was not the right one). 
(22) Kombination av MUS och manuellt urval, pga. att det frsta stickprovet inte var representativt (den akt stickprovet gjordes utifrn var inte den rtta).
(23) Some known errors are not quantified. 
(23) Vissa knda fel r inte kvantifierade.
This should have been done and would then maybe have led to the qualification of the accounts. 
Detta borde har gjorts och det skulle eventuellt ha medfrt en reservation avseende rkenskaperna.
(24) We have asked for information about the sample size and the error evaluation during the mission and in the sector letter but we have not received any response yet (the CB does not keep working papers at all). 
(24) Revisionsrtten har under revisionsbesket och i sektorsbrevet begrt information om stickprovets storlek och om utvrderingen av fel men har nnu inte erhllit ngonting (det attesterande organet har inga arbetsdokument alls).
(25) Error excluded from error evaluation and later charged to national budget. 
(25) Fel uteslts frn utvrderingen av fel och belastade sedan den nationella budgeten.
(26) Not clear from the report about the error extrapolation. 
(26) Inga tydliga uppgifter i rapporten om extrapolering av fel.
Will be followed up during EAGGF 1A mission in February. 
Skall fljas upp under revisionsbesket avseende EUGFJ 1A i februari.
(27) The errors and error extrapolation is not clear from the report. 
(27) Inga tydliga uppgifter i rapporten om fel och extrapolering av fel.
Three populations were identified and a sample size of 100 each was determined. 
Tre populationer identifierades och en stickprovsstorlek p 100 vardera faststlldes.
2.3.2001 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 69/15 Populations 36. 
2.3.2001 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning C 69/15 Populationer 36.
It is essential to establish that the population from which the sample is to be taken is complete. 
Det r mycket viktigt att faststlla att den population ur vilken stickprovet skall tas r fullstndig.
The Certifying Bodies for some paying agencies have not evidenced this aspect of their work (Ireland, Italy, United Kingdom) others have not been able to reconcile the data (SDE (France)). 
De attesterande organen fr vissa utbetalningsstllen har inte lagt fram underlag fr denna del av sitt arbete (Irland, Italien, Frenade kungariket) och andra har inte kunnat stmma av uppgifterna (SDE [Frankrike]).
In some cases, the population incorrectly contained non-EAGGF payments and/or the national element of co-financed measures (Ireland, United Kingdom) which may affect the conclusions drawn from the results of testing. 
I vissa fall innehll populationen felaktigt betalningar som inte avsg EUGFJ och/eller nationella poster fr samfinansierade tgrder (Irland, Frenade kungariket) vilket kan pverka de slutsatser man drar utifrn resultatet av stickprovet.
Parameters 37. 
Parametrar 37.
Sampling is used to determine if errors in the accounts are, taken as a whole, material (i.e. unacceptably high). 
Stickprovstagning anvnds fr att faststlla om felen i rkenskaperna som helhet r vsentliga (det vill sga oacceptabelt stora).
This is done by extrapolating errors found in the sample and comparing the resulting most likely error and upper error limit (1) with a pre-set materiality threshold. 
Detta sker genom att man extrapolerar de fel som ptrffas i stickprovet och jmfr mest sannolikt fel och den vre felgrnsen (1) med en frutbestmd vsentlighetstrskel.
If the upper error limit is lower than the materiality threshold, the accounts can be considered as acceptable. 
Om den vre felgrnsen r lgre n vsentlighetstrskeln kan rkenskaperna betraktas som acceptabla.
All the Certifying Bodies visited have used 1 % materiality. 
Alla beskta attesterande organ har anvnt vsentlighetstrskeln 1 %.
Whilst it is a requirement that Certifying Bodies obtain 95 % overall assurance from their audits, not all of this needs to be obtained from substantive tests on sample items. 
Det r ett krav att attesterande organ utifrn sina granskningar skall uppn en generell skerhet p 95 %, men denna behver inte i sin helhet grundas p substansgranskning av stick-provsposter.
Auditing standards also allow part of the assurance to be obtained from an assessment of inherent and control risks, thus reducing the assurance required from substantive tests and, consequently, sample sizes. 
God revisionssed medger ven att en del av skerheten grundas p en bedmning av inneboende risk och kontroll-risk, vilket innebr att mindre skerhet behver uppns frn substansgranskning och drmed att stickprovens storlek kan minskas.
However, assurance from the assessment of control risk requires the auditor to evaluate and test the operation of the internal control system and conclude that it operating to a high standard. 
Skerhet frn bedmning av kontrollrisk innebr emellertid att revisorn mste utvrdera och testa hur internkontrollsystemet fungerar och komma fram till att det fungerar vl.
Two thirds of the Certifying Bodies sought to obtain all the required assurance (95 % recommended by the Commission) from substantive tests on sample items (see Table 5). 
Tv tredjedelar av de attesterande organen frskte erhlla hela den ndvndiga skerheten (95 % enligt kommissionens rekommendation) frn substansgranskning av stickprovsposter (se tabell 5).
Some Certifying Bodies relied on earlier experience and good internal control in order to reduce the level of assurance obtained from sample testing, thereby reducing the sample size (see Table 5). 
Vissa attesterande organ frlitade sig p tidigare erfarenhet och god internkontroll fr att minska den skerhet som uppnddes genom stickprovstagning, och minskade drigenom sitt stickprov (se tabell 5).
Denmark assessed the risk for each population and set its sample so as to obtain 80 % of its assurance from sample testing for arable crops and 90 % for export refunds. 
Danmark bedmde risken fr varje population och faststllde sitt stickprov s att man skulle erhlla 80 % av sin skerhet frn stickprovstagning fr jordbruksgrdor och 90 % fr exportbidrag.
The Certifying Body for ENR (Italy) sought to obtain 80 % of its assurance from the sample, relying, for the remainder, on its evaluation of the internal control procedures and in particular the work performed by the internal audit unit, despite the fact that the area aid measure was introduced for (1) The most likely error is an extrapolation of the errors found in the sample to project them across the population. 
Det attesterande organet fr ENR (Italien) avsg att uppn 80 % av sin skerhet frn stickprovet, och frlitade sig fr terstoden p sin utvrdering av frfarandena fr internkontroll och srskilt det arbete som enheten fr internrevi-1 ( ) Mest sannolikt fel berknas genom att de fel som ptrffats i stickprovet extrapoleras till att glla hela populationen.
The upper error limit is the most likely error plus a statistical allowance to take account of the risk that the sample may not be representative of the population. the first time in 1998 and, consequently, neither the Certifying Body nor internal audit had any experience of auditing such a scheme. 
Den vre felgrnsen r mest sannolikt fel plus ett statistiskt tillgg fr att beakta risken fr att stickprovet inte r representativt fr populationen. sion utfrt, trots att arealstdstgrden infrdes fr frsta gngen 1998 och varken det attesterande organet eller internrevisionsenheten fljaktligen hade ngon erfarenhet av att granska ett sdant program.
In Ireland, the Certifying Body sought to obtain 75 % of its assurance from the sample for most of the schemes audited. 
I Irland avsg det attesterande organet att erhlla 75 % av sin skerhet frn stickprovet fr de flesta av de granskade programmen.
The United Kingdom has obtained between 63 % and 74 % of its assurance from substantive testing the balance coming from its evaluation of inherent and control risks. 
Frenade kungariket erhll mellan 63 % och 74 % av sin skerhet frn substansgranskning och resten frn sin utvrdering av inneboende risk och kontrollrisk.
These reduced assurance levels are acceptable where the Certifying Body can demonstrate that it can obtain the additional assurance required from other sources. 
Dessa lgre skerhetsniver r acceptabla nr det attesterande organet kan visa att det kan erhlla ytterligare ndvndig skerhet frn andra kllor.
Sample size 40. 
Stickprovets storlek 40.
This implies a minimum sample size of 223 transactions, rising to 406 where all of the assurance has to be obtained from substantive testing. 
Detta innebr att stickprovet br utgras av minst 223 transaktioner, vilket stiger till 406 om all skerhet mste erhllas genom substansgranskning.
Although this guideline was issued too late to affect the sampling carried out by the Certifying Bodies for 1998 certification, most Certifying Bodies did in fact take samples within this range. 
Trots att dessa riktlinjer gavs ut fr sent fr att de skulle pverka de stickprover de attesterande organen gjorde fr 1998 rs attestering tog i sjlva verket de flesta attesterande organen stickprov inom detta intervall.
Some tested far more transactions than the strict application of MUS required. 
Vissa kontrollerade mnga fler transaktioner n vad en strikt tillmpning av MUS skulle ha krvt.
For example, RRV (Sweden) tested twice as many. 
RRV (Sverige) kontrollerade till exempel dubbelt s mnga.
For 1998, the Certifying Bodies tested some 32 000 payments. 
Fr 1998 granskade de attesterande organen ungefr 32 000 betalningar.
At national level the differences between the numbers of transactions tested is particularly noticeable, ranging from 131 for Greece to over 11 000 for Spain. 
P nationell niv r skillnaderna mellan antalet kontrollerade transaktioner srskilt anmrkningsvrd, d de varierar frn 131 fr Grekland till mer n 11 000 fr Spanien.
Much of the explanation lies in the number and nature of the paying agencies themselves but also important is the discretion given to Certifying Bodies to determine the number of populations for audit purposes. 
En stor del av frklaringen bestr i antalet utbetalningsstllen och deras karaktr, men det r ocks viktigt att de attesterande organen ftt rtt att faststlla hur mnga populationer som skall granskas.
Error evaluation 42. 
Utvrdering av fel 42.
The Commission guideline cites IAS 19 (superseded by ISA 530): ÔThe auditor should analyse any errors detected in the sample and project the errors found in the sample to the population. 
I kommissionens riktlinjer citeras IAS 19 (ersatt av ISA 530): ÓRevisorn skall analysera samtliga felaktigheter som upptckts i stickprovet, och extrapolera de felaktigheter som upptckts i stickprovet p hela populationen.
Strictly speaking, only if the UEL is below the preset materiality threshold will the auditor be 95 % sure that there is not a material incidence of error. 
Endast om den vre felgrnsen ligger under vsentlighetsbeloppet kan revisorn vara till 95 % sker p att det inte frekommer fel i vsentlig utstrckning.
2 ( ) MLE = sum of taintings*ASI (average sampling interval). UEL = basic precision + sum of taintings*ASI*PC (Poisson coefficient) + known (systematic) errors. 
(2) Mest sannolikt fel (MLE) = summan av de procentuella felen (taintings) x genomsnittlig urvalsintervall (ASI). vre felgrns (UEL) = grundprecision + summan av de procentuella felen (taintings) x genomsnittlig urvalsintervall (ASI) x Poisson-koefficienten (PC) + knda (systematiska) fel.
C 69/16 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 2.3.2001 43. 
C 69/16 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning 2.3.2001 43.
Errors may be divided into two main types, substantive and formal. 
Felen kan delas in i tv typer: vsentliga fel och formella fel.
Substantive errors are errors with some sort of financial impact, implying that the wrong amount has been paid to the beneficiary and subsequently erroneously reimbursed by the Commission. 
Vsentliga fel r fel som har ngon form av ekonomiska konsekvenser, som innebr att fel belopp har utbetalats till mottagaren varefter kommissionen felaktigt betalat ersttning.