natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Such certification is to be made by MSs on the basis of the paying agenciesŐ compliance with a set of criteria (Ňaccreditation criteriaÓ) regarding internal environment, control activities, information and communication, monitoring. 
Certifieringen ska gras av medlemsstaterna under frutsttning att de utbetalande organen uppfyller ett antal kriterier (ÓackrediteringskriterierÓ) avseende interna frhllanden, kontrollverksamheter, information och kommunikation samt vervakning.
Administrative checks: Formalised documentary checks carried out by PAs on all applications in order to verify that they comply with the terms under which aid is granted. 
Administrativa kontroller: Formaliserade dokumentkontroller som de utbetalande organen gr av alla anskningar fr att kontrollera att de uppfyller stdkraven.
European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD): Finances the UnionŐs financial contribution to rural development programmes. 
Europeiska jordbruksfonden fr landsbygdsutveckling (Ejflu): Finansierar EU:s ekonomiska bidrag till landsbygdsutvecklingsprogram.
Financial corrections: CommissionŐs exclusions from EU financing of expenditure that Member States have not effected in conformity with the applicable EU and national law. 
Finansiella korrigeringar: Kommissionens undantag frn EU-finansiering av utgifter som medlemsstaterna inte har betalat ut i enlighet med gllande EU-lagstiftning och nationell lagstiftning.
For CAP expenditure, the exclusions always take the form of financial corrections treated as assigned revenue. 
Nr det gller GJP-utgifter utgrs alltid undantagen av finansiella korrigeringar som behandlas som inkomster avsatta fr srskilda ndaml.
Integrated Administration and Control System (IACS): An integrated system consisting of databases of holdings, applications, agricultural areas, animals and, where applicable, payment entitlements. 
Integrerat administrations-och kontrollsystem (IAKS): Ett integrerat system med databaser ver jordbruksfretag, anskningar, jordbruksarealer, djur och, i frekommande fall, stdrttigheter.
Internationally accepted audit standards (IAAS) comprise auditing standards specified by different public and professional standard-setting bodies, such as the International Standards on Auditing (ISAs) issued by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB) or the International Standards of Supreme Audit Institutions (ISSAI) issued by the International Organisation of Supreme Audit Institutions (INTOSAI). 
Internationellt accepterade revisionsstandarder (IAAS): Omfattar revisionsstandarder som ges ut av olika offentliga och yrkesmssiga normgivande organ, ssom de internationella revisionsstandarderna (ISA) som ges ut av International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB) eller de internationella standarderna fr hgre revisionsorgan (Issai) som ges ut av Internationella organisationen fr hgre revisionsorgan (Intosai).
On-the-spot checks: Checks carried out by PAsŐ inspectors in order to verify that the final beneficiaries comply with the applicable rules. 
Kontroller p plats: Kontroller som de utbetalande organens inspektrer gr fr att verifiera att de slutliga stdmottagarna fljer gllande regler.
These can take the form of classical on-the-spot visits (to agricultural holdings or investments subject to aid) or of remote sensing 5 (review of recent satellite images of parcels) to be complemented with rapid field visits in cases of doubts. 
Kontrollerna kan best av traditionella besk p plats (p jordbruksfretag eller i anslutning till investeringar som fr std) eller av fjrranalys (genomgng av nyligen tagna satellitbilder p skiften) som i tveksamma fall kompletteras med snabba fltbesk.
Programme period: Multiannual framework for planning and implementing EU policies,. 
Programperiod: Flerrig ram fr planering och genomfrande av EU:s politik.
The current programme period runs from 2014 to 2020 Rural development programmes funded by EAFRD are managed under this multiannual framework; EAGF is managed on a yearly basis. 
Den nuvarande programperioden lper frn 2014 till 2020.
ABBREVIATIONS AAR CA CAP CB CF DG AGRI EAFRD EAGF ERDF ERR ESF IACS IRR ISAs ISSAIs MD PA Annual activity report Competent Authority of the Member State (usually the Ministry of Agriculture) Common Agricultural Policy Certification body Cohesion Fund Directorate General for Agriculture and Rural Development European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development European Agricultural Guarantee Fund European Regional Development Fund Error rate European Social Fund Integrated Administrative and Control System ÔIncomplianceŐ rate International Standards on Auditing International Standards of Supreme Audit Institutions Management Declaration Paying Agency 7 
F RKORTNINGAR AAR AO BM EGFJ Ejflu ERR Eruf ESF FF GD AGRI GJP IAKS rlig verksamhetsrapport attesterande organ behrig myndighet i medlemsstaten (i regel jordbruksministeriet) Europeiska garantifonden fr jordbruket Europeiska jordbruksfonden fr landsbygdsutveckling felfrekvens Europeiska regionala utvecklingsfonden Europeiska socialfonden frvaltningsfrklaring generaldirektoratet fr jordbruk och landsbygdsutveckling den gemensamma jordbrukspolitiken integrerat administrations och kontrollsystem 7
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I. With a budget of 363 billion euro (in 2011 prices) for the 2014-2020 period (around 38 % of the total amount of the multiannual financial framework 2014-2020), the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) is under shared management between the Commission and the Member States (MSs). 
SAMMANFATTNING I. Den gemensamma jordbrukspolitiken (GJP) har en budget p 363 miljarder euro (i 2011 rs priser) under perioden 2014Đ2020 (cirka 38 % av det totala beloppet fr den flerriga budgetramen 2014Đ2020) och genomfrs med delad frvaltning mellan kommissionen och medlemsstaterna.
While the Commission delegates the implementation of the budget to paying agencies (PAs) designated by MSs, it retains ultimate responsibility and is required to ensure that the EUŐs financial interests are protected as though the Commission were performing the delegated budget implementation tasks itself. 
Kommissionen delegerar genomfrandet av budgeten till utbetalande organ som utses av medlemsstaterna men behller det slutliga ansvaret fr genomfrandet och ska se till att EU:s ekonomiska intressen skyddas p samma stt som om den sjlv utfrde de delegerade budgetgenomfrandeuppgifterna.
For this purpose, certification bodies (CBs) appointed by MSs have been entrusted with the role of being the PAsŐ independent auditors since 1996. 
Fr detta ndaml har de attesterande organ som utses av medlemsstaterna haft i uppgift sedan 1996 att vara de utbetalande organens oberoende revisor.
They have been required, since the 2015 financial year, to also provide an opinion, prepared in accordance with internationally accepted audit standards, stating whether the expenditure for which reimbursement has been requested from the Commission is legal and regular. 
Sedan budgetret 2015 har de ocks varit skyldiga att avge ett utltande, utarbetat i enlighet med internationellt accepterade revisionsstandarder, och ange huruvida de utgifter fr vilka ersttning har begrts frn kommissionen r lagliga och korrekta.
The 2015 financial year was thus the first for which the Commission could use the CBsŐ enhanced work on legality and regularity. 
Budgetret 2015 var drmed det frsta ret fr vilket kommissionen kunde anvnda de attesterande organens frstrkta granskning av laglighet och korrekthet.
In this context, we assessed whether the framework set up by the Commission enabled the CBs to draw an opinion on the legality and regularity of CAP expenditure in accordance with the applicable EU regulations and internationally accepted audit standards, thus providing reliable results for CommissionŐs assurance model. 
Mot denna bakgrund bedmde vi huruvida den ram som kommissionen har infrt gjorde det mjligt fr de attesterande organen att uttala sig om GJP-utgifternas laglighet och korrekthet i enlighet med gllande EU-frordningar och internationellt accepterade revisionsstandarder och p s vis leverera tillfrlitliga resultat till kommissionens skerhetsmodell.
We conclude that the framework designed by the Commission for the first year of implementation of the new work of the CBs has significant weaknesses. 
Vi drar slutsatsen att den ram som kommissionen utformat fr det frsta rets genomfrande av de attesterande organens nya arbete har betydande brister.
As a result, the CBsŐ opinions do not fully comply with the applicable standards and rules in important areas. 
En fljd av det r att de attesterande organens utltanden inte fullt ut fljer gllande standarder och regler p viktiga omrden.
The CBs' new role is a positive step towards a single audit model because the CBs' outputs have the potential to help MSs to strengthen their control systems, reduce audit and control costs and enable the Commission to obtain independent additional assurance as to the legality and regularity of expenditure. 
De attesterande organens nya roll r ett positivt steg mot en modell fr samordnad granskning eftersom deras output kan hjlpa medlemsstaterna att strka sina kontrollsystem, minska revisons-och kontrollkostnaderna och gra det mjligt fr kommissionen att uppn ytterligare, oberoende skerhet om utgifternas laglighet och korrekthet.
V. Against this backdrop, we analysed the CommissionŐs existing assurance model and the changes introduced to take account of the CBsŐ enhanced role. 
V. Mot denna bakgrund analyserade vi kommissionens nuvarande skerhetsmodell och de frndringar som gjorts fr att ta hnsyn till de attesterande organens utkade roll.
We noted that the CommissionŐs assurance model remains based on the Member StatesŐ control results. 
Vi konstaterade att kommissionens skerhetsmodell fortfarande bygger p medlemsstaternas kontrollresultat.
the 2015 financial year, the CBsŐ opinion on legality and regularity were merely one factor taken into account when the Commission calculated its adjustments of the errors reported in the Member States control statistics. 
Fr budgetret 2015 var de attesterande organens utltande om lagligheten och korrektheten bara en faktor som kommissionen beaktade nr den berknade sina justeringar av de fel som hade rapporterats i medlemsstaternas kontrollstatistik.
As those opinions are the only source which provides independent assurance on legality and regularity on an annual basis, the CBsŐ work, once done in a reliable manner, should become the key element for the CommissionŐs assurance. 
Eftersom de utltandena r den enda kllan till oberoende skerhet om lagligheten och korrektheten p rlig basis, br de attesterande organens arbete, nr det vl grs p ett tillfrlitligt stt, bli den viktigaste faktorn i kommissionens skerhet.
Our examination of the CommissionŐs guidelines compliance with the applicable regulations and internationally accepted audit standards identified the following weaknesses: (a) For the risk assessment procedure, we observed that the Commission required CBs to use the accreditation matrix which creates the risk of inflating the level of assurance that the CBs can derive from PAsŐ internal control systems; (b) The CBsŐ sampling method for transactions based on the PAsŐ lists of randomly selected on-the-spot checks entailed a series of additional risks that were not overcome: in particular, the CBsŐ work can only be representative if the samples initially selected by the PAs are themselves representative. 
Vid granskningen av hur kommissionens riktlinjer stmmer verens med gllande frordningar och internationellt accepterade revisionsstandarder identifierade vi fljande brister: a) Vad betrffar frfarandet fr riskbedmning konstaterade vi att kommissionen krvde att de attesterande organen skulle anvnda ackrediteringsmatrisen, vilket riskerar att blsa upp den grad av skerhet som de attesterande organen kan hrleda frn de utbetalande organens internkontrollsystem. b) De attesterande organens urvalsmetod fr transaktioner som baseras p de utbetalande organens lista ver slumpmssigt utvalda kontroller p plats medfrde en rad ytterligare risker som inte hade tgrdats: framfr allt kan de attesterande organens arbete bara vara representativt om de urval som de utbetalande organen frst gr r representativa.
A portion of the sampling for non-IACS transactions is not representative of expenditure and is thus is not representative of the financial year audited; (c) As regards substantive testing, the Commission required CBs, for part of the sampling, to carry out only a re-performance of the PAs' administrative checks; (d) The Commission required CBs for their substantive testing, only to re-perform the PAsŐ initial checks. 
En del av urvalet fr icke-IAKS-transaktioner r inte representativt fr utgifterna och drmed inte representativt fr det granskade budgetret. c) Vad betrffar substansgranskningen krvde kommissionen att de attesterande organen fr en del av urvalet endast skulle upprepa de utbetalande organens administrativa kontroller. d) Kommissionen krvde att de attesterande organen vid substansgranskningen endast skulle upprepa de utbetalande organens frsta kontroller.
(f) Finally, we concluded that the CBsŐ opinion on the legality and regularity of expenditure was based on an understated total error. 
Slutligen konstaterade vi att de attesterande organens utltande om utgifternas laglighet och korrekthet byggde p ett totalt fel som hade redovisats fr lgt.
Indeed, the errors detected and reported by the PAs in their control statistics were not taken into account by the CBs in calculating their estimated level of error. VII. 
Nr de attesterande organen berknade den uppskattade felnivn beaktade de i sjlva verket inte de fel som de utbetalande organen hade upptckt och rapporterat i sin kontrollstatistik.
We make a number of recommendations to address these observations: (a) The Commission should use the CBsŐ results, when the work is defined and performed in accordance with the applicable regulations and internationally accepted audit standards, as the key elementof its assurance model regarding the legality and regularity of expenditure; (a) The Commission should revise its guidelines as follows: (i) focus the CBsŐ risk assessment as regards legality and regularity on the key and ancillary controls already used by the Commission; (ii) require CBs, for the selection by the CBs of IACS transactions from the list of claims randomly selected by the PAs for on-the-spot checks, to put in place appropriate safeguards concerning the representativeness of the CBsŐ samples; the timely CBs on-the-spot visits; the non-disclosure of the CBsŐ sample to the PAs; (iii) for the sampling of non-IACS expenditure, require the CBs to draw their samples directly from the lists of payments; (iv) allow the CBs to carry out: on-the-spot testing for any transaction audited, and to carry out all audit steps and procedures that they themselves consider appropriate, without being limited to re-performing the PAs initial checks; (v) require the CBs to calculate only a single error rate regarding legality and regularity; (vi) for IACS transactions which are sampled from the list of PAsŐ random on-the-spot checks, the overall error calculated by the CBs, to be able to issue an opinion on legality and regularity of expenditure, should also include the level of error reported by the PAs in the control statistics, extrapolated to the remaining 10 transactions not subject to PA on-the-spot checks . 
VII. problem som vi har konstaterat: Vi lmnar ett antal rekommendationer om hur man kan komma till rtta med de a) Kommissionen br anvnda de attesterande organens resultat, nr arbetet har definierats och utfrts i enlighet med gllande frordningar och internationellt accepterade revisionsstandarder, som den viktigaste faktorn i sin skerhetsmodell nr det gller utgifternas laglighet och korrekthet. b) Kommissionen br ndra sina riktlinjer och i) inrikta de attesterande organens riskbedmning vad betrffar laglighet och korrekthet p de nyckelkontroller och kompletterande kontroller som redan anvnds av kommissionen, (i) krva att de attesterande organen i frga om sina urval av IAKS-transaktioner frn listan ver betalningsanskningar som de utbetalande organen slumpmssigt valt ut fr kontroller p plats vidtar lmpliga skyddstgrder och ser till att de attesterande organens urval r representativa, att de attesterande organens besk p plats grs i rtt tid och att de attesterande organens urval inte meddelas de utbetalande organen, 11
INTRODUCTION Expenditure under the Common Agricultural Policy 1. 
12 INLEDNING Utgifter inom den gemensamma jordbrukspolitiken 1.
For agriculture, EU support is granted through the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD). 
Inom jordbruket beviljas EU-std genom Europeiska garantifonden fr jordbruket (EGFJ) och Europeiska jordbruksfonden fr landsbygdsutveckling (Ejflu).
The total allocation for these two funds amounts to 363 billion euro (in 2011 prices) for the 2014-2020 programme period, which represents around 38 % of the total MFF for the period 2014-20201. 
De totala anslagen till dessa tv fonder uppgr till sammanlagt 363 miljarder euro (i 2011 rs priser) fr programperioden 2014Đ2020, vilket motsvarar cirka 38 % av den totala flerriga budgetramen fr perioden 2014Đ20201.
Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) expenditure under both funds can be grouped in two categories: - Integrated Administrative and Control System (IACS) expenditure, which is entitlement-based2 and consists mainly of annual per hectare payments.; - non-IACS expenditure, which are reimbursement-based payments, consisting mainly of investments in farms and rural infrastructure, as well as interventions in agricultural markets. 
Utgifterna fr den gemensamma jordbrukspolitiken (GJP) inom de bda fonderna kan delas in i tv kategorier: - Utgifter inom det integrerade administrations-och kontrollsystemet (IAKS), vilka r stdrttighetsbaserade2 och frmst bestr av rligt arealstd. - Icke-IAKS-utgifter, vilka r ersttningsbaserade std som till strsta delen bestr av investeringar i jordbruksfretag och infrastruktur p landsbygden samt interventioner p jordbruksmarknader.
The split between IACS and non-IACS expenditure for the two funds (around 86 % and 14 % of CAP expenditure respectively) for the 2015 financial year is show in Figure 1 below: 12 1 Annex I to Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 of 2 December 2013 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2014-2020 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 
Frdelningen mellan IAKS-och icke-IAKS-utgifter inom de tv fonderna (omkring 86 % respektive 14 % av GJP-utgifterna) under budgetret 2015 visas i figur 1 nedan. 13 1 Bilaga I till rdets frordning (EU, Euratom) nr 1311/2013 av den 2 december 2013 om den flerriga budgetramen fr 2014Đ2020 (EUT L 347, 20.12.2013, s.
2 Where a payment is based on meeting certain conditions. 
2 Utbetalning av std frutstter att vissa villkor r uppfyllda.
Figure 1 Đ The breakdown of CAP expenditure for the 2015 financial year (in billion euro) The legal and institutional framework for shared management under the CAP 4. 
Figur 1 Đ Frdelningen av GJP-utgifter fr budgetret 2015 (miljarder euro) Den rttsliga och institutionella ramen fr delad frvaltning inom den gemensamma jordbrukspolitiken 4.
Responsibility for managing the CAP is shared between the Commission and the Member States. 
Ansvaret fr frvaltningen av den gemensamma jordbrukspolitiken delas av kommissionen och medlemsstaterna.
About 99 % of the CAP budget is spent under shared management, as defined in the Financial Regulation3. 
Omkring 99 % av budgeten fr den gemensamma jordbrukspolitiken genomfrs genom delad frvaltning, ssom faststlls i budgetfrordningen3.
The CAP Horizontal Regulation4 lays down ground rules specifically for the financing, management and monitoring of the CAP. 
I den horisontella GJP-frordningen4 faststlls grundregler specifikt fr finansieringen, frvaltningen och vervakningen av den gemensamma jordbrukspolitiken.
3 4 5 13 6.3 5.4 42.2 2.7 EAFRD EAGF IACS non-IACS 0 10 20 30 40 50 Article 59 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 (OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 
3 4 14 6,3 5,4 42,2 2,7 E jflu EGFJ IAKS icke-IAKS 0 10 20 30 40 50 Artikel 59 i Europaparlamentets och rdets frordning (EU, Euratom) nr 966/2012 av den 25 oktober 2012 om finansiella regler fr unionens allmnna budget och om upphvande av rdets frordning (EG, Euratom) nr 1605/2002 (EUT L 298, 26.10.2012, s.
1) (the ŇFinancial RegulationÓ). 
1) (budgetfrordningen).
Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on the financing, management and monitoring of the common agricultural policy and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 352/78, (EC) No 165/94, (EC) No 2799/98, (EC) No 814/2000, (EC) No 1290/2005 and (EC) No 485/2008 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 
Europaparlamentets och rdets frordning (EU) nr 1306/2013 av den 17 december 2013 om finansiering, frvaltning och vervakning av den gemensamma jordbrukspolitiken och om upphvande av rdets frordningar (EEG) nr 352/78, (EG) nr 165/94, (EG) nr 2799/98, (EG) nr 814/2000, (EG) nr 1290/2005 och (EG) nr 485/2008 (EUT L 347, 20.12.2013, s.
549) (the ŇCAP Horizontal RegulationÓ). 
549) (den horisontella GJP-frordningen).
Under shared management, the Commission remains ultimately responsible for the budget, but delegates its implementation to bodies specially designated by the Member States: the paying agencies (PAs). 
Vid delad frvaltning behller kommissionen det slutliga ansvaret fr budgeten men delegerar genomfrandet av den till organ som srskilt utsetts av medlemsstaterna: de utbetalande organen.
The CommissionŐs Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development (DG AGRI) oversees the PAsŐ implementation of the budget, verifying and reimbursing the expenditure declared monthly (for the EAGF) and quarterly (for the EAFRD) by the PAs and, ultimately, assessing whether expenditure is legal and regular by means of the conformity clearance procedure6. 
Kommissionens generaldirektoratet fr jordbruk och landsbygdsutveckling (GD Jordbruk och landsbygdsutveckling) vervakar de utbetalande organens genomfrande av budgeten, kontrollerar och erstter utgifter som redovisas mnadsvis (fr EGFJ) och kvartalsvis (fr Ejflu) av de utbetalande organen och bedmer slutligen huruvida utgifterna r lagliga och korrekta med hjlp av kontrollen av verensstmmelse6.
If this procedure reveals weaknesses in a PAŐs control system which have a financial impact on the EU budget, the Commission may apply financial corrections to that PA. 
Om man vid den kontrollen upptcker brister i ett utbetalande organs kontrollsystem som har ekonomiska konsekvenser fr EU:s budget kan kommissionen besluta om finansiella korrigeringar fr det utbetalande organet.
DG AGRIŐs shared management model, setting out the roles of the different parties involved, is presented in Annex I7. 
GD Jordbruk och landsbygdsutvecklings modell fr delad frvaltning, som anger vilka roller de olika inblandade parterna har, presenteras i bilaga I7.
The PAs perform administrative checks on all project applications and payment claims received from beneficiaries, as well as on-the-spot checks on a minimum sample of 5 % for the vast majority of supporting measures9. 
De utbetalande organen gr administrativa kontroller av alla projektanskningar och betalningsanskningar som den fr 5 6 7 8 I enlighet med artikel 7 i den horisontella GJP-frordningen.