natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
This does not incentivise Member States to submit payments claims, in particular as to this end designation had to be completed. The change of n+2 to n+3 rule for 2014-2020 does not incite the rapid submission of payment claims either. 
Detta uppmuntrar inte medlemsstaterna att lmna in betalningsanskningar, srskilt eftersom myndigheterna mste vara utsedda frst. ndringen frn n+2-regeln till n+3-regeln fr 2014Đ2020 stimulerar inte heller ett snabbt inlmnande av betalningsanskningar.
This explanation is underpinned by the fact that the project selection rate in Member States is comparable across the two programming periods up to now. 
Denna frklaring bygger p det faktum att programurvalstakten i medlemsstaterna hittills r jmfrbar mellan de tv programperioderna.
The Commission considers that the overlap of eligibility periods is one of several factors contributing to the delay in implementation of the subsequent period. 
Kommissionen anser att verlappningen av stdperioderna r en av flera faktorer som bidrar till frseningen i genomfrandet av den pfljande perioden.
Other important factors interplay such as the level of pre-financing and the n+ rule. 
Andra viktiga faktorer samspelar, till exempel graden av frfinansiering och n+-regeln.
These factors influence strongly the absorption as perceived through EU payments but not the actual level of implementation on the ground. 
Dessa faktorer har en stark inverkan p anslagsutnyttjandet mtt i EU-betalningar, men pverkar inte den faktiska, reella genomfrandegraden.
The Commission does not see a higher absorption risk at the end of the programme period for 2014-2020 than for 2007-2013. 
Kommissionen ser ingen hgre risk nr det gller utnyttjandet i slutet av programperioden 2014Đ2020 jmfrt med perioden 2007Đ2013.
Taking into account n+3 and current selection rates as well as payments certified by beneficiaries the Commission considers that potentially the same level of absorption could be achieved for 2014-2020 as for 2007-2013. 
Med hnsyn till n+3-regeln och de nuvarande urvalsgraderna samt de betalningar som har attesterats av stdmottagarna, anser kommissionen att samma utnyttjandegrad mjligen kan ns fr 2014Đ2020 som fr 2007Đ2013.
The Commission also notes that the annual accounts procedure was introduced in the 2014-2020 legal framework (requiring Member States to get accustomed to it) and that the relatively high level of pre-financing does not give a sufficient incentive to accelerate the submission of EU payment claims. 
Kommissionen konstaterar ocks att det rliga redovisningsfrfarandet infrdes i den rttsliga ramen fr 2014Đ2020 (vilket innebar att medlemsstaterna mste vnja sig vid det), och att den frhllandevis hga frfinansieringsgraden inte ger tillrckliga incitament att pskynda inlmnandet av betalningsanskningar till EU.
In 2016, the Commission put in place a close monitoring system for the 2014-2020 programmes that appear to be progressing slowly. 
Under 2016 infrde kommissionen ett noggrant vervakningssystem fr de program fr 2014Đ 2020 som frefaller framskrida lngsamt.
The Commission considers that the quality of projects may not necessarily be linked to the level of outstanding commitments. 
Kommissionen anser inte att projektens kvalitet ndvndigtvis r kopplad till nivn p de utestende tagandena.
The Commission refers to its reply paragraph 2.14 of ECA's 2016 annual report. 
Kommissionen hnvisar till sitt svar p punkt 2.14 i revisionsrttens rsrapport 2016.
While absorption can always be improved, the Commission considers that the average rate of 97% is comparable to the earlier periods and is satisfied with this result. 
Utnyttjandegraden kan alltid frbttras, men kommissionen anser att en genomsnittlig grad p 97 % r jmfrbar med tidigare perioder och r njd med det resultatet.
To be more precise, this level of absorption exceeds the rate recorded for the ERDF and ESF programmes for the 2000-2006 period (96%). 
Denna utnyttjandegrad verskrider nrmare bestmt den grad som registrerades fr Eruf-och ESF-programmen under perioden 2000Đ2006 (96 %).
The work of the Task Force for Better Implementation and its cooperation with the relevant Member State authorities had a positive impact on the de-commitment and the rate of absorption. 
Arbetet i arbetsgruppen fr bttre genomfrande och dess samarbete med de berrda medlemsstaternas myndigheter hade en positiv inverkan p tertagandena och utnyttjandegraden.
The Commission highlights that it took a number of actions for Member States at risk of absorption earlier than this date on the basis of intense bilateral policy dialogues. 
Kommissionen betonar att den vidtog ett antal tgrder som baserades p utkade bilaterala dialoger med medlemsstater som riskerade att inte uppfylla utnyttjandegraden fre detta datum.
The coordinated high-level political action covering all Member States at risk in a systematic manner started 14 months before the end date for eligibility. 36. 
De samordnade politiska tgrderna p hg niv omfattade p ett systematiskt stt alla medlemsstater som var i riskzonen och inleddes 14 mnader fre slutdatumet fr stdberttigandeperioden.
The actions were mostly concentrated on the management of already selected projects or calls planned to be launched. 
36. tgrderna koncentrerades frmst p frvaltningen av redan utvalda projekt eller planerade anskningsomgngar.
Therefore the principal aim was to safeguard the strategic objectives of the programmes. 
Det huvudsakliga syftet var drfr att trygga programmens strategiska ml.
The Commission refers to its reply to Box 1. 
Kommissionen hnvisar till sitt svar p ruta 1.
The Commission notes that the first guidance on phasing of major projects was issued already in 2012 and presented to the MS during the COCOF meeting (COCOF_12-0047-02-EN). 
Kommissionen ppekar att den utfrdade sin frsta vgledning om fasindelning fr strre projekt redan 2012 och lade fram den fr medlemsstaterna vid mtet i samordningskommittn fr fonderna (COCOF_12-0047-02-EN).
The rules have been further explained in the closure guidelines issued in 2013 and amended in 2015 to provide legal certainty to Member States. 
Reglerna har frklarats ytterligare i de riktlinjer fr avslutande av program som utfrdades 2013 och ndrades 2015 fr att skapa rttsskerhet fr medlemsstaterna.
The Commission is of the view that reprogramming is a necessary tool to ensure flexibility in relation to interventions defined in the programmes for a period of almost a decade. 3 
Kommissionen anser att programndringar r ett ndvndigt verktyg fr att srja fr flexibilitet hos de insatser som faststlls i program som varar i nstan ett rtionde. 3
A number of detailed elements require a programme amendment according to the regulatory framework and Member States cannot avoid undertaking those. 
Det finns ett antal faktorer som krver programndringar enligt den rttsliga ramen, och medlemsstaterna kan inte undvika att gra sdana programndringar.
This enables the Commission to ensure that the focus of interventions is kept and the basis for programme implementation remains sound (cf. elements listed under Article 37 of the General Regulation and those that are part of the approved programme). 
P s stt kan kommissionen se till att insatsernas inriktning bibehlls och att grunden fr programgenomfrandet frblir sund (jmfr de faktorer som anges i artikel 37 i frordningen om allmnna bestmmelser och de som ingr i det godknda programmet).
It is up to the Member States to decide how much additional information is included in their programmes compared to the bear minimum legally required. 
Det r medlemsstaterna som beslutar hur mycket ytterligare information som de ska ta med i sina program jmfrt med det minimum av uppgifter som krvs enligt lagstiftningen.
A higher number of details (about beneficiaries, target groups, major projects etc.) require a more frequent amendment, without putting the strategic orientation into question. 
En hgre detaljniv (om stdmottagare, mlgrupper, stora projekt osv.) krver oftare ndringar, utan att den strategiska inriktningen ifrgastts.
In 2014-2020 all performance-related changes in programmes are carefully screened by the Commission and the soundness of the justification is thoroughly assessed by geographical units in cooperation with the evaluation competence centre/evaluation unit. 
Under 2014Đ2020 kontrolleras alla resultatrelaterade ndringar noggrant av kommissionen och grunderna fr motiveringen bedms utfrligt av geografiska enheter i samarbete med centrumet fr utvrderingskompetens/utvrderingsenheten.
The reduced target value was already included in the first modification in 2012, based on a review of the indicators undertaken by the Hungarian authorities and presented to the monitoring committee in November 2011. 
Det minskade mlvrdet fanns redan med i den frsta ndringen 2012, baserat p en versyn av indikatorerna som utfrdes av de ungerska myndigheterna och lades fram fr vervakningskommittn i november 2011.
The experience of the first calls showed that the results of investments were lower than estimated when the OP was drafted and needed to be brought in line with reality. 
Erfarenheten frn de frsta anskningsomgngarna visade att resultaten av investeringarna var smre n vad som frvntades nr det operativa programmet utarbetades, och de behvde drfr anpassas till de verkliga frhllandena.
The final report states that at least 4.6 petajoules have finally been saved. 
I den slutliga rapporten anges att minst 4,6 petajoule slutligen sparades.
This is less than planned in 2007, but double the amount of the planned result from 2012, in line with the budget doubling compared between 2012 and 2016. 
Detta r mindre n vad som planerades 2007, men dubbelt s mycket som det planerade resultatet frn 2012, i linje med frdubblingen av budgeten mellan 2012 och 2016.
Box 5 Đ Significant transfers of EU contribution between priority axes without proportional adjustment of target value of the performance indicator There was a first modification in 2012 (C(2012) 6310)). 
Ruta 5 Đ Betydande verfringar av EU-bidrag mellan insatsomrden utan motsvarande justering av mlvrdet fr resultatindikatorn Detta var den frsta ndringen 2012 (C(2012) 6310).
It reduced the target to 2.7 petajoule, based on the experiences in 2011 (justification available in SFC 2007) when it turned out that the target was far overestimated compared to the results of concrete first projects approved and implemented during 2011. 
I och med detta minskades mlet till 2,7 petajoule baserat p erfarenheten frn 2011 (en motivering ges i SFC 2007) nr det visade sig att mlet var lngt verskattat jmfrt med resultaten av de konkreta frsta projekten som godkndes och genomfrdes under 2011.
The budget was increased in 2012. 
Budgeten kades 2012.
Common Commission reply to paragraphs 55 and 56: The legal framework allows Member States to increase the EU co-financing up to a maximum level. 
Kommissionens gemensamma svar p punkterna 55 och 56: Den rttsliga ramen tillter medlemsstaterna att ka EU:s medfinansiering upp till en maximal niv.
Had Member States programmed up to the highest possible level the EU co-financing rate from the outset the total budget available for cohesion policy would have been significantly lower than the amount finally programmed for 2007-2013. 
Om medlemsstaterna frn brjan hade planerat medlen upp till den hgsta mjliga nivn fr EU:s medfinansieringssats skulle den totala tillgngliga budgeten fr sammanhllningspolitiken ha varit betydligt lgre n det belopp som slutligen planerades fr perioden 2007Đ2013.
The Commission stresses that the end of the 2007-13 period corresponded to the post-crisis era of austerity in public budgets/investments. 
Kommissionen betonar att slutet av perioden 2007Đ2013 motsvarar perioden efter krisen, med tstramningar av de offentliga budgetarna/investeringarna.
Therefore, including private contributions and increasing EU co-financing levels was an important element which allowed the continuation of programme implementation. 
Att inbegripa privata bidrag och ka EU:s medfinansieringssats var drfr en viktig faktor som gjorde det mjligt att fortstta programgenomfrandet.
Had they done so the total budget available for cohesion policy would have been significantly lower than the amount finally programmed for 2007-2013. 
Om de hade gjort det skulle den totala budget som fanns tillgnglig fr sammanhllningspolitiken ha varit betydligt lgre n det belopp som slutligen planerades fr 2007Đ2013.
The Commission refers to its reply to paragraph 91 to ECA's SR 36/2016 on Closure. 
Kommissionen hnvisar till sitt svar p punkt 91 i revisionsrttens srskilda rapport 36/2016 om avslutande.
For the period 2007-2013, the Commission listed the rules to which particular attention should be paid by the managing authorities in case they include retrospective operations in the operational programmes (see COCOF note 12-0050-01). 
Fr perioden 2007Đ2013 angav kommissionen de regler som de frvaltande myndigheterna br uppmrksamma srskilt om de inbegriper retrospektiva insatser i de operativa programmen (se 4 COCOF-meddelandet 12-0050-01).
The Commission has also raised awareness to the managing authorities and audit authorities on several occasions (for instance, in the Homologues 4 meeting) on the risks of retrospective projects. 
Kommissionen har ocks vid flera tillfllen uppmrksammat de frvaltande myndigheterna och revisionsmyndigheterna (t.ex. vid Homologues-mtet) p risken med retrospektiva projekt.
Additionally, the checklist used by the Commission for analysing the Closure declaration and Final control report includes a question on retrospective projects where they represent a particular risk for the programme. 
Den checklista som kommissionen anvnder fr att analysera de slutliga utltandena och de slutliga kontrollrapporterna innehller en frga om retrospektiva projekt nr de utgr en srskild risk fr programmet i frga.
The Commission reiterates its earlier replies to the Court's 2008 Annual Report2. 
Kommissionen upprepar sina tidigare svar p revisionsrttens rsrapport 20082.
The Commission clarifies that the 2007-2013 legal framework did not prohibit the selection of already completed operations ("retrospective operations"), provided that these were completed after the starting date for eligibility3. 
Kommissionen vill klargra att det enligt den rttsliga ramen 2007Đ2013 inte r frbjudet att vlja redan avslutade insatser (Óretrospektiva insatserÓ), frutsatt att de slutfrdes efter startdatumet fr stdberttigandeperioden3.
Under the 2014-2020 legal framework operations must not have been physically completed or fully implemented before the application for funding by the beneficiary to the managing authority4. 
Enligt den rttsliga ramen fr 2014Đ2020 mste insatserna inte ha avslutats helt eller fullt ut genomfrts innan stdmottagaren lmnar in sin stdanskan till den frvaltande myndigheten4.
The approach in the programming period 2014-2020 is therefore more restrictive than the approach in 2007-2013. 
Metoden fr programperioden 2014Đ2020 r drfr mer restriktiv jmfrt med metoden fr programperioden 2007Đ2013.
Regarding financial instruments, the modification decision on the closure guidelines of the Commission did not affect the provisions of Regulation 1083/2006 according to which the contribution from the funds into financial instruments must have been paid at latest at 31 December 2015. 
Vad gller finansieringsinstrumenten pverkade ndringsbeslutet i kommissionens riktlinjer om avslutande av program inte bestmmelserna i frordning (EG) nr 1083/2006, enligt vilka bidrag frn fonderna till finansieringsinstrument mste ha betalats ut senast den 31 december 2015.
See also Commission replies to paragraph 6.45 and recommendation 3 of the Court's 2015 annual report, and Commission reply to paragraph 91 of the ECA Special Report 36/2016. 
Se ven kommissionens svar p punkt 6.45 och rekommendation 3 i revisionsrttens rsrapport 2015, och kommissionens svar p punkt 91 i revisionsrttens srskilda rapport 36/2016.
The Commission confirms it is currently in the process of verifying the reliability of the figures used to close the OPs. 
Kommissionen bekrftar att den fr nrvarande hller p att kontrollera trovrdigheten hos de siffror som anvndes fr att avsluta de operativa programmen.
The relevant problems have been fully addressed in 2014-2020 programming period. 
De relevanta problemen har lsts helt fr programperioden 2014Đ2020.
The disbursement rates in 2007-2013 programming period followed the lifecycle of the financial instruments. 
Utbetalningsgraden 2007Đ2013 fljde finansieringsinstrumentens livscykel.
At closure, the managing authorities have estimated the resources returned attributable to Structural Funds or to be returned in the future from the investments in final recipients totalling 8.4 billion euros of legacy, therefore demonstrating a significant revolving effect. 
Vid avslutandet uppskattade de frvaltande myndigheterna att de terbetalade medel som kan hnfras till strukturfonderna eller medel som ska terbetalas i framtiden frn investeringar i slutmottagarna uppgr till totalt 8,4 miljarder euro i tidigare utbetalningar, vilket visar p en betydande revolverande effekt.
The Commission recognises some risks linked to contractual advance payments, but stresses that the legal base considers those eligible throughout the programming period. 
Kommissionen r medveten om att det finns vissa risker i samband med kontraktsenliga frskottsbetalningar, men betonar att sdana betalningar r stdberttigande under programperioden enligt den rttsliga grunden.
The Commission is not aware of contractual advance payments have led to the selection of poor quality projects. 
Kommissionen har inga uppgifter om att kontraktsenliga frskottsbetalningar har lett till att projekt av lg kvalitet har valts.
The Commission points out that the Czech authorities decided to allow advances in order to speed up absorption. 
Kommissionen ppekar att de tjeckiska myndigheterna beslutade att tillta frskottsbetalningar fr att snabba p utnyttjandet.
The Commission recommended not to go beyond standard market practice. 
Kommissionen rekommenderade dem att inte g utver gngse marknadspraxis.
At this stage of the closure process, the Commission notes that the risk of irregularities did not materialise and no major issues related to advance payments influenced the implementation of the programme. 
I detta skede av avslutandeprocessen konstaterar kommissionen att risken fr oegentligheter inte frverkligades och att inga strre problem i samband med frskottsbetalningar pverkade programmets genomfrande.
The Commission clarifies that Hungarian programmes have mostly overcommitted resources at the moment of closure and a list of non-operational projects has been requested for each Operational Programme, so there is no risk that contractual advances would not be used for effective projects. 
Kommissionen vill klargra att de ungerska programmen frmst har resurser som omfattas av redan gjorda taganden vid avslutandet. En frteckning ver ej aktiva projekt har begrts fr varje operativt program, s det finns ingen risk fr att kontraktsenliga frskott inte anvnds fr effektiva projekt.
In any case the Commission recommended not to go beyond standard market practice for advances. 
I alla hndelser rekommenderade kommissionen Ungern att inte g utver gngse marknadspraxis fr frskott.
On the basis of the results of the ex-post evaluation of the 2007-2013 programming period and of the 7th report on Economic, Social and Territorial Cohesion, Cohesion policy has shown overall good results. 
P grundval av efterhandsutvrderingen av programperioden 2007Đ2013 och den sjunde rapporten om EU:s ekonomiska, sociala och territoriella sammanhllning har sammanhllningspolitiken visat verlag goda resultat.
The Commission is committed to maintaining the achievement of good results and to continue its efforts to accelerate absorption in Member States. 
Kommissionen r fast besluten att bibehlla de goda resultaten och att fortstta sina insatser fr att ka utnyttjandegraden i medlemsstaterna.
The Commission underlines that while the timely approval of programmes is important in relation to programme implementation there are other important factors in terms of absorption over the period. 
Kommissionen understryker att ett tidigt godknnande av programmen visserligen r viktigt fr programgenomfrandet men det finns andra viktiga utnyttjanderelaterade frgor under perioden.
Programmes approved relatively late compared to the average can still achieve better than average absorption levels by the end of the period. 
Program som godknts frhllandevis sent jmfrt med genomsnittet kan nd prestera bttre n de genomsnittliga utnyttjandegraderna i slutet av perioden.
One of those factors is whether programmes are subject to a n+2 or a n+3 rule than whether the adoption date occurs a couple of months earlier or later. 
En av dessa faktorer r huruvida programmen omfattas av n+2-regeln eller n+3-regeln, inte om antagandedatumet infaller ett par mnader tidigare eller senare.
As compared to the n+3 rules, the n+2 rule enforces a stronger budgetary discipline and incentivises faster budgetary implementation. 
Jmfrt med n+3-regeln skapar n+2-regeln en starkare budgetdisciplin och stimulerar ett snabbare budgetgenomfrande.
The Commission recognises the disincentive effect on absorption of the n+3 rule and of the high level of pre-financing, in particular in light of the annual accounts systems and the designation process. 
Kommissionen r medveten om att n+3-regeln har en hmmande effekt p anslagsutnyttjandet och den hga nivn p frfinansieringen, srskilt mot bakgrund av systemet fr rsrkenskaper och frfarandet fr att utse ansvariga myndigheter.
The Commission has taken this into account when presenting its proposals for post-2020. 
Kommissionen har tagit hnsyn till detta nr den lgger fram sina frslag fr perioden efter 2020.
The Commission reiterates its replies provided to the Special Report 36/20166. 
Kommissionen upprepar sina svar om den srskilda rapporten 36/20166.
An overlap between two periods is necessary given that many operations take several years to be implemented and that there will always be a start-up phase and wrapping up phase. 
En verlappning mellan tv perioder r ndvndig, med tanke p att mnga insatser tar flera r att genomfra och att det alltid kommer att finnas en start-och avslutningsfas.
The Commission enhances continuity between periods through a number of measures, including phasing of larger projects. 
Kommissionen strker kontinuiteten mellan perioderna genom ett antal tgrder, bland annat fasindelning av strre projekt.
The Commission started taking actions for some Member States as early as 2010 immediately when some risk of slow absorption was perceived7. 
Kommissionen brjade vidta tgrder fr vissa medlemsstater s tidigt som 2010, omedelbart nr risker fr lngsamt utnyttjande pvisades7.
For certain Member States additional actions had to be undertaken from 2014 onwards. 87. 
Fr vissa medlemsstater var det ndvndigt att vidta ytterligare tgrder frn 2014 och framt.
It is standard programme management practice that when a programme shows indication of 6 7 Please see the Commission replies to paragraphs 129 and 130 of the ECA's SR36/2016 For example, regular monitoring of the performance of programmes had been undertaken since the beginning of the period. 
6 7 Se kommissionens svar p punkterna 129 och 130 i revisionsrttens srskilda rapport 36/2016. Programresultaten har till exempel vervakats regelbundet sedan periodens brjan.