type: other

text: b" March 27, 2001\n\n KENNETH C. WEAVER\n CHIEF POSTAL INSPECTOR\n\n JON M. STEELE\n VICE PRESIDENT, NORTHEAST AREA OPERATIONS\n\n SUBJECT: Use of Postal Police Officers on the Central\n Artery/Tunnel Construction Project\n (Report Number OV-MA-01-001)\n\n This management advisory report presents the results of\n our review of the use of postal police officers to support the\n Massachusetts Highway Department's Central\n Artery/Tunnel construction project in Boston, Massachusetts\n (Project Number 00JR007OV000). We also determined\n whether the Postal Service appropriately and timely billed\n the highway department for police services.\n\nResults in Brief \t The review revealed that Postal Service and Inspection\n Service officials acted within the scope of their authority\n when performing services for the Central Artery/Tunnel\n construction project, but that they needed to improve the\n billing process for postal police services. Specifically,\n Postal Service officials did not bill the Massachusetts\n Highway Department using current rates or bill for indirect\n expenses associated with services provided. In addition,\n controls were not in place to ensure that the highway\n department was billed for total labor hours worked. Finally,\n once bills were issued, Postal Service officials did not\n ensure that all payments were received from the highway\n department. As a result, the Postal Service was not\n compensated for $26,203 in services provided.\n\n We suggested that Postal Service and Inspection Service\n officials bill the Massachusetts Highway Department at the\n correct rates, recover underbilled labor hours, adjust labor\n rates to include indirect expenses, ensure time cards are\n\x0cUse of Postal Police Officers on the Central OV-MA-01-001\n Artery/Tunnel Construction Project\n\n\n correctly accumulated, and use the automated payroll\n system as the source for billable hours. We also suggested\n that the Inspection Service reconcile actual costs incurred to\n amounts reimbursed by the Massachusetts Highway\n Department. Management generally agreed with our\n suggestions, and corrective actions planned and taken\n adequately address the issues identified in this report.\n Management\xe2\x80\x99s comments, in their entirety, are included in\n Appendix D of this report.\n\nBackground The Central Artery/Tunnel project is a major construction\n project managed by the Massachusetts Highway\n Department. The project, which is estimated to be\n completed in 2004, will:\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2\t Create an eight- to ten-lane underground expressway\n directly beneath the existing Central Artery that runs\n through the center of downtown.\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2\t Extend the Massachusetts Turnpike (I-90) from south\n of downtown Boston through a tunnel beneath South\n Boston and Boston Harbor to Logan Airport.\n\n The tunnel extension of the Massachusetts Turnpike affects\n the Boston Processing and Distribution Center because it\n requires the dismantling of a bridge used by Postal Service\n trucks and other vehicles on the property\xe2\x80\x99s south end. As a\n result of the construction, traffic was rerouted onto a new\n road that was built west of the demolished bridge. The\n construction project further affects the processing and\n distribution center because construction workers and\n equipment have access to Postal Service property for tunnel\n construction.\n\n The Massachusetts Highway Department contracted with\n the Postal Service in November 1994 to obtain security,\n safety, and other related services for the Boston Processing\n and Distribution Center. This contract directed that postal\n police officers would provide traffic and pedestrian control,\n security and safety support, and associated services in\n support of the project. The Postal Service billed the\n Massachusetts Highway Department an hourly rate for\n postal police officer services.\n\n\n\n\n 2\n\x0cUse of Postal Police Officers on the Central OV-MA-01-001\n Artery/Tunnel Construction Project\n\n\n\n\nObjective, Scope, and Our overall objective was to determine the Postal Service\xe2\x80\x99s\nMethodology authority to use postal police officer services for the\n Massachusetts Highway Department's Central\n Artery/Tunnel construction project. We also evaluated the\n appropriateness of rates billed to the highway department\n for services provided.\n\n To satisfy our objectives, we interviewed various Postal\n Service and Inspection Service officials from the Postal\n Service Facilities office, Northeast Division, and Boston\n Processing and Distribution Center. We also reviewed\n numerous documents related to the Postal Service\xe2\x80\x99s and\n Inspection Service\xe2\x80\x99s involvement in the project, including the\n Postal Service and Massachusetts Highway Department\n contract, the Postal Service and Fraternal Order of Police\n labor agreement, timecards, daily scheduling sheets,\n overtime lists, overtime reports, invoices, and other related\n documents. We reviewed documentation covering the\n period January 1997 through March 2000.\n\n We compared timecards and associated documentation to\n invoices for four randomly selected months to determine if\n the Postal Service appropriately billed the Massachusetts\n Highway Department for services provided by postal police\n officers. These months included January 1997, November\n 1997, April 1998, and May 1999.\n\n We conducted our review from April 2000 through\n March 2001 in accordance with the President\xe2\x80\x99s Council on\n Integrity and Efficiency, Quality Standards for Inspections.\n We discussed our conclusions and observations with\n appropriate management officials and included their\n comments, where appropriate.\n\nAuthority To Use Our review revealed that Postal Service officials acted\nPostal Police Officers within the scope of their authority when using postal police\n officers to perform services for the Central Artery/Tunnel\n construction project. Titles 39 and 40 of the U.S. Code\n state that postal police officers are responsible for ensuring\n the protection of Postal Service persons and property.\n Pursuant to Title 39, the Postal Service is authorized to act\n in a business-like manner to include contracting to protect\n postal operations and recovering related costs. Postal\n police officers supporting the Central Artery/Tunnel\n\n\n\n 3\n\x0cUse of Postal Police Officers on the Central OV-MA-01-001\n Artery/Tunnel Construction Project\n\n\n\n construction project conducted traffic and pedestrian control\n only as it affected Postal Service property. As a result,\n postal police officers acted within the scope of their authority\n when performing services for the construction project.\n\nAppropriateness of Postal Service officials did not bill the Massachusetts\nRates Billed Highway Department for rate increases specified in the\n amendment to the labor agreement or for indirect expenses\n associated with services provided. In addition, Postal\n Service and Inspection Service officials did not ensure that\n all labor costs for postal police officers supporting the\n construction project were recovered. As a result, the\n Inspection Service was not compensated for $26,203 in\n services provided for the Central Artery/Tunnel construction\n project.\n\nRate Increases Postal Service officials did not correctly bill the\n Massachusetts Highway Department for services provided\n by postal police officers. Specifically, Postal Service\n officials did not bill the Massachusetts Highway Department\n for rate increases specified in the amendment to the labor\n agreement because controls did not exist to ensure that rate\n increases were instituted as required.\n\n The October 1994 Postal Service labor agreement with the\n Fraternal Order of Police identifies general labor rates for\n postal police officers. The labor agreement identified a rate\n to be paid for hours worked from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. and\n a separate rate, including a shift differential, for hours\n worked from 6:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. The Postal Service and\n Fraternal Order of Police amended the labor agreement in\n July 1996 to provide rate increases in May 1997 and May\n 1998 for postal police officers based on changes to the\n Employment Cost Index.\n\n Postal Service officials billed the Massachusetts Highway\n Department using October 1994 rates, but did not adjust the\n rates for the May 1997 increases specified in the\n amendment to the labor agreement until May 1998. In\n addition, Postal Service officials did not bill the\n Massachusetts Highway Department for the May 1998 day\n rate increase, and did not fully bill the Massachusetts\n Highway Department for the May 1998 night rate increase.\n Postal Service officials did not bill the Massachusetts\n\n\n\n 4\n\x0cUse of Postal Police Officers on the Central OV-MA-01-001\n Artery/Tunnel Construction Project\n\n\n Highway Department for established rate increases\n because controls did not exist to ensure that rate increases\n were instituted as required. As a result, the Postal Service\n underbilled the Massachusetts Highway Department\n $25,735 for the period May 1997 through March 2000 for\n services provided by postal police officers. See Appendices\n A and B for detailed calculations related to the underbillings.\n\nIndirect Expenses \t The Postal Service also did not bill the Massachusetts\n Highway Department for all indirect expenses incurred,\n including supervisory support and workers compensation\n costs, in connection with postal police officer services. The\n Postal Service contract with the Massachusetts Highway\n Department permits the Postal Service to bill for indirect\n expenses in connection with the project. While some\n indirect expenses were included as part of the initial hourly\n rates charged for postal police officers, these rates did not\n cover all indirect costs incurred.\n\n For example, the hourly rates do not cover supervisory\n costs associated with postal police services. Shift\n supervisors, or sergeants, devoted about three hours per\n day supervising postal police officers supporting the\n construction project. This work included scheduling postal\n police officers for the project and obtaining last minute\n replacements for those previously scheduled to work.\n Additionally, hourly rates do not cover workers\xe2\x80\x99\n compensation costs associated with employee injuries and\n claims. Billing for all indirect expenses, including\n supervision and workers compensation costs incurred,\n would help ensure that the Postal Service is appropriately\n compensated for services provided.\n\nLabor Hours Billed \t The Postal Service and Inspection Service did not ensure\n that all labor hours charged by postal police officers\n supporting the construction project were billed. Our review\n of timecards and invoices disclosed errors that resulted in\n an underbilling of $1,326 for the night shift and an\n overbilling of $858 for the day shift for the four months\n sampled. Consequently, the Postal Service underbilled the\n Massachusetts Highway Department by $468. While this\n sample does not permit us to statistically estimate an\n error rate, it does suggest that problems existed in the\n billing process. See Appendix C for a detailed explanation\n of the net underbilling.\n\n\n\n\n 5\n\x0cUse of Postal Police Officers on the Central OV-MA-01-001\n Artery/Tunnel Construction Project\n\n\n\n The errors occurred because the Inspection Service did not\n accumulate and provide all project-related timecards to the\n Postal Service project coordinator. Also, there were no\n controls to ensure that the coordinator accurately\n accumulated the hours billed from employee timecards.\n Specifically, the project coordinator prepared handwritten\n spreadsheets listing hours by timecard to accumulate total\n hours worked on the project. This process resulted in an\n increased risk of calculation and transfer errors.\n Management controls, such as the use of the payroll system\n to capture hours paid to postal police officers for services\n provided in support of the construction project, did not exist\n to ensure all hours worked were appropriately billed. In\n addition, Inspection Service officials did not compare the\n amounts reimbursed to actual costs to ensure that they\n were appropriately reimbursed for all services provided.\n Establishing management controls will help ensure that the\n Postal Service appropriately bills the Massachusetts\n Highway Department for services provided by postal police\n officers and that the Inspection Service is ultimately\n reimbursed for costs incurred.\n\nSuggestions \t We suggested the vice president, Northeast Area\n Operations, and the chief postal inspector:\n\n 1. Bill the Massachusetts Highway Department at the\n current rates for future services and recover $25,734 in\n underbilled rates and $468 in unbilled labor hours.\n\nManagement\xe2\x80\x99s Management agreed with our suggestion and stated that\nComments they have billed the Massachusetts Highway Department at\n the current rates since September 2000. Management\n further stated that they will demand reimbursement for the\n $25,734 in underbilled rates and $468 in unbilled labor\n hours by March 10, 2001.\n\nEvaluation of Management\xe2\x80\x99s actions are responsive to our suggestion.\n\nManagement\xe2\x80\x99s\n\nComments \n\n\n\n\n\n 6\n\x0cUse of Postal Police Officers on the Central OV-MA-01-001\n Artery/Tunnel Construction Project\n\n\n\n\nSuggestion 2. Adjust labor rates to include all indirect expenses\n associated with postal police services.\n\nManagement\xe2\x80\x99s Management agreed with our suggestion and stated that,\nComments beginning in September 2000, they adjusted rates billed to\n include indirect expenses associated with postal police\n services. Management also stated that the Northeast Area\n Finance office agreed with the current rates established by\n the Postal Inspection Service.\n\nEvaluation of Management\xe2\x80\x99s actions are responsive to our suggestion.\n\nManagement\xe2\x80\x99s\n\nComments \n\n\nSuggestion 3. Ensure all time cards are accumulated and provided to\n the Postal Service project coordinator and the\n automated payroll system be used as the source for\n billable labor hours.\n\nManagement\xe2\x80\x99s Management agreed with our suggestion to accumulate and\nComments provide time cards to the Postal Service project coordinator,\n but disagreed with using the automated payroll system as\n the source for billable hours. Management stated that using\n the automated payroll system, as the source of billable\n hours is not feasible because the system cannot produce\n reports that will isolate project hours. Management also\n stated that the project coordinator will recalculate labor\n hours prior to billing, and the reduction of manual time cards\n will be discussed with the Massachusetts Highway\n Department.\n\nEvaluation of Management\xe2\x80\x99s actions are responsive to our suggestion.\nManagement\xe2\x80\x99s Although management disagreed with using the automated\nComments payroll system as the source for billable hours, actions\n taken and planned by management, including totaling labor\n hours on time cards before they are provided to the project\n coordinator, should significantly increase the accuracy of\n billable hour calculations.\n\n\n\n\n 7\n\x0cUse of Postal Police Officers on the Central OV-MA-01-001\n Artery/Tunnel Construction Project\n\n\nSuggestion We suggest that the chief postal inspector:\n\n 4. Reconcile actual costs incurred to amounts reimbursed.\n\nManagement\xe2\x80\x99s Management disagreed with our suggestion to reconcile\nComments actual costs incurred to amounts reimbursed. Management\n stated that a reconciliation would not be cost effective due\n to recent controls instituted and the immaterial value of the\n underbillings identified in the report. However, to ensure\n proper billings, management now requires each Postal\n Service police officer to complete a separate timecard each\n day for work performed on the Central Artery/Tunnel\n Project.\n\nEvaluation of Although management disagreed with our suggestion,\nManagement\xe2\x80\x99s actions taken and planned, including controls established to\nComments ensure current rates are appropriately billed for postal police\n services, are responsive to the recommendation.\n Specifically, these controls should help ensure that the\n Inspection Service is appropriately reimbursed for future\n services provided.\n\n We appreciate the cooperation and courtesies provided by\n your staff during the review. If you have any questions,\n please contact Cathleen Berrick, director, Oversight, at\n (703) 248-4543, or me at (703) 248-2300.\n\n\n\n Ronald K. Stith\n Assistant Inspector General\n for Oversight and Business Evaluations\n\n cc: \tJames K. Belz\n John R. Gunnels\n\n\n\n\n 8\n\x0cUse of Postal Police Officers on the Central OV-MA-01-001\n Artery/Tunnel Construction Project\n\n\n APPENDIX A. UNDERBILLINGS FOR DAY SHIFT\n Recalculated\n Hourly Rate Rate Difference of\n Grade 6 (Salary (Hourly Rate Hourly Recalculated\n Step 19 Divided by Multiplied by Rate Rate and Billed Hours Over/(Under)\nMonth/Year Salary 2080 hr/yr) 1.5) Billed Rate Billed Billing\n\n May - 97 38,651 18.58 27.87 27.87 0.00 (00.00)\n Jun 39,525 19.00 28.50 27.87 (0.63) 848.0 (534.24)\n Jul 39,525 19.00 28.50 27.87 (0.63) 514.5 (324.13)\n Aug 39,525 19.00 28.50 27.87 (0.63) 473.0 (297.99)\n Sep 39,525 19.00 28.50 27.87 (0.63) 541.0 (340.83)\n Oct 39,525 19.00 28.50 27.87 (0.63) 607.0 (382.41)\n Nov 39,525 19.00 28.50 27.87 (0.63) 440.0 (277.20)\n Dec 39,525 19.00 28.50 27.87 (0.63) 20.5 (12.92)\n Jan - 98 39,525 19.00 28.50 27.87 (0.63) 786.0 (495.18)\n Feb 39,525 19.00 28.50 27.87 (0.63) 591.5 (372.64)\n Mar 39,525 19.00 28.50 27.87 (0.63) 782.4 (492.91)\n Apr 39,525 19.00 28.50 27.87 (0.63) 865.5 (545.26)\n May 39,525 19.00 28.50 27.87 (0.63) 780.3 (491.59)\n Jun 40,618 19.53 29.30 28.50 (0.80) 838.5 (670.80)\n Jul 40,618 19.53 29.30 28.50 (0.80) 823.4 (658.72)\n Aug 40,618 19.53 29.30 28.50 (0.80) 805.5 (644.40)\n Sep 40,618 19.53 29.30 28.50 (0.80) 820.0 (656.00)\n Oct 40,618 19.53 29.30 28.50 (0.80) 846.0 (676.80)\n Nov 40,618 19.53 29.30 28.50 (0.80) 807.5 (646.00)\n Dec 40,618 19.53 29.30 28.50 (0.80) 759.0 (607.20)\n Jan - 99 40,618 19.53 29.30 28.50 (0.80) 769.0 (615.20)\n Feb 40,618 19.53 29.30 28.50 (0.80) 743.5 (594.80)\n Mar 40,618 19.53 29.30 28.50 (0.80) 871.0 (696.80)\n Apr 40,618 19.53 29.30 28.50 (0.80) 932.0 (745.60)\n May 40,618 19.53 29.30 28.50 (0.80) 1009.0 (807.20)\n Jun 40,618 19.53 29.30 28.50 (0.80) 944.0 (755.20)\n Jul 40,618 19.53 29.30 28.50 (0.80) 948.0 (758.40)\n Aug 40,618 19.53 29.30 28.50 (0.80) 948.5 (758.80)\n Sep 40,618 19.53 29.30 28.50 (0.80) 982.0 (785.60)\n Oct 40,618 19.53 29.30 28.50 (0.80) 1007.0 (805.60)\n Nov 40,618 19.53 29.30 28.50 (0.80) 988.5 (790.80)\n Dec 40,618 19.53 29.30 28.50 (0.80) 832.0 (665.60)\n Jan - 00 40,618 19.53 29.30 28.50 (0.80) 782.5 (626.00)\n Feb 40,618 19.53 29.30 28.50 (0.80) 904.0 (723.20)\n Mar 40,618 19.53 29.30 28.50 (0.80) 600.0 (480.00)\n\nTotal ($19,736.02)\n\n\n\n\n 9\n\x0cUse of Postal Police Officers on the Central OV-MA-01-001\n Artery/Tunnel Construction Project\n\n\n APPENDIX B. UNDERBILLINGS FOR NIGHT SHIFT\n\n Hourly Night Shift\n Rate Recalculated Premium Difference of\n Grade 6 (Salary Rate (Hourly (Overtime Hourly Recalculated Over/\nMonth/ Step 19 Divided by Rate Multiplied Rate Plus 10 Rate Rate and Billed Hours (Under)\n Year Salary 2080 hr/yr) by 1.5) Percent) Billed Rate Billed Billing\n\n\n May \xe2\x80\x93 38,651 18.58 27.87 29.73 29.73 0.00 Included in\n 97 June\xe2\x80\x99s billing\n Jun 39,525 19.00 28.50 30.40 29.73 (0.67) 81.0 (54.27)\n Jul 39,525 19.00 28.50 30.40 29.73 (0.67) 42.5 (28.47)\n Aug 39,525 19.00 28.50 30.40 29.73 (0.67) 60.5 (40.53)\n Sep 39,525 19.00 28.50 30.40 29.73 (0.67) 109.0 (73.03)\n Oct 39,525 19.00 28.50 30.40 29.73 (0.67) 149.0 (99.83)\n Nov 39,525 19.00 28.50 30.40 29.73 (0.67) 178.0 (119.26)\n Dec 39,525 19.00 28.50 30.40 29.73 (0.67) 16.5 (11.06)\nJan - 98 39,525 19.00 28.50 30.40 29.73 (0.67) 496.0 (332.32)\n Feb 39,525 19.00 28.50 30.40 29.73 (0.67) 214.5 (143.72)\n Mar 39,525 19.00 28.50 30.40 29.73 (0.67) 496.0 (332.32)\n Apr 39,525 19.00 28.50 30.40 29.73 (0.67) 387.5 (259.62)\n May 39,525 19.00 28.50 30.40 29.73 (0.67) 488.4 (327.23)\n Jun 40,618 19.53 29.30 31.25 31.00 (0.25) 429.5 (107.38)\n Jul 40,618 19.53 29.30 31.25 31.00 (0.25) 590.0 (147.50)\n Aug 40,618 19.53 29.30 31.25 31.00 (0.25) 498.0 (124.50)\n Sep 40,618 19.53 29.30 31.25 31.00 (0.25) 614.0 (153.50)\n Oct 40,618 19.53 29.30 31.25 31.00 (0.25) 595.0 (148.75)\n Nov 40,618 19.53 29.30 31.25 31.00 (0.25) 532.5 (133.13)\n Dec 40,618 19.53 29.30 31.25 31.00 (0.25) 559.5 (139.88)\nJan - 99 40,618 19.53 29.30 31.25 31.00 (0.25) 561.0 (140.25)\n Feb 40,618 19.53 29.30 31.25 31.00 (0.25) 500.5 (125.13)\n Mar 40,618 19.53 29.30 31.25 31.00 (0.25) 664.5 (166.13)\n Apr 40,618 19.53 29.30 31.25 31.00 (0.25) 1039.5 (259.88)\n May 40,618 19.53 29.30 31.25 31.00 (0.25) 1023.5 (255.88)\n Jun 40,618 19.53 29.30 31.25 31.00 (0.25) 981.5 (245.38)\n Jul 40,618 19.53 29.30 31.25 31.00 (0.25) 978.0 (244.50)\n Aug 40,618 19.53 29.30 31.25 31.00 (0.25) 1000.0 (250.00)\n Sep 40,618 19.53 29.30 31.25 31.00 (0.25) 943.0 (235.75)\n Oct 40,618 19.53 29.30 31.25 31.00 (0.25) 989.0 (247.25)\n Nov 40,618 19.53 29.30 31.25 31.00 (0.25) 866.5 (216.63)\n Dec 40,618 19.53 29.30 31.25 31.00 (0.25) 859.5 (214.88)\n\n\n\n\n 10\n\x0cUse of Postal Police Officers on the Central OV-MA-01-001\n Artery/Tunnel Construction Project\n\n\n\n\n Hourly Night Shift\n Rate Recalculated Premium Difference of\n Grade 6 (Salary Rate (Hourly (Overtime Hourly Recalculated Over/\nMonth/ Step 19 Divided by Rate Multiplied Rate Plus 10 Rate Rate and Billed Hours (Under)\n Year Salary 2080 hr/yr) by 1.5) Percent) Billed Rate Billed Billing\n\nJan - 00 40,618 19.53 29.30 31.25 31.00 (0.25) 782.0 (195.50)\n Feb 40,618 19.53 29.30 31.25 31.00 (0.25) 804.0 (201.00)\n Mar 40,618 19.53 29.30 31.25 31.00 (0.25) 900.0 (225.00)\n\n Total ($5,999.46)\n Add: Day Shift (19,736.02)*\n\n Total Day and Night Shift ($25,735.48)\n\n\n\n * Underbilling for day shift obtained from Appendix A.\n\n\n\n\n 11\n\x0cUse of Postal Police Officers on the Central OV-MA-01-001\n Artery/Tunnel Construction Project\n\n\n APPENDIX C. NET UNDERBILLING FROM ERRORS IN\n ACCUMULATING HOURS WORKED FROM TIMECARDS\n\n\n Difference of Total Hours\n Month Total Hourly Total Hours Less Recalculated Hours Over/(Under)\n Worked Hours Rate Wage Cost Recalculated Over/(Under) charged Charged\n A B C BxC=D G B-G=H HxC\n\n\n Day Shift\n\nJan - 97 52 $27.87 $1,449.24 53 (1.00)* ($27.87)\nNov - 97 440 27.87 12,262.80 414.1 25.90 721.83\nApr - 98 865.5 27.87 24,121.49 850.91 14.59 406.62\nMay - 99 1009 28.50 28,756.50 1017.5 (8.50) (242.25)\n\n Total - Day Shift $858.33\n\nNight Shift\n\nJan - 97 27.5 $29.73 817.58 27.5 0.00 $0.00\nNov - 97 178 29.73 5,291.94 210.68 (32.68) (971.58)\nApr - 98 387.5 29.73 11,520.38 401.5 (14.00) (416.22)\nMay - 99 1023.5 31.00 31,728.50 1021.5 2.00 62.00\n\n Total - Night Shift ($1,325.80)\n\nNet Underbilling ($ 467.47)\n\n* Difference was due to a footing error by the Central Artery/Tunnel coordinator\n\n\n\n\n 12\n\x0cUse of Postal Police Officers on the Central OV-MA-01-001\n Artery/Tunnel Construction Project\n\n\n APPENDIX D. MANAGEMENT\xe2\x80\x99S COMMENTS\n\n\n\n\n 13\n\x0cUse of Postal Police Officers on the Central OV-MA-01-001\n Artery/Tunnel Construction Project\n\n\n\n\n 14\n\x0c"


type: wikipedia

text:
Síntese total define o conjunto de processos de síntese química em que partindo-se de moléculas não biológicas (sem fontes de seres vivos), como derivados de petróleo e carvão, e até inorgânicas, chegando-se a moléculas extremamente complexas.
 Em outras palavras, também pode ser definida como a completa síntese de moléculas orgânicas complexas a partir de peças mais simples, sem a colaboração de processos biológicos.
 Algumas destas sínteses são viáveis economicamente, outras não, como o são, respectivamente, a síntese do ácido lisérgico e a da cocaína.
 Na prática, estas peças mais simples são comercialmente disponíveis em escalas grandes e pequenas, e são frequentemente precursores oriundos da petroquímica e da destilação da hulha. Algumas vezes, produtos de escala industrial massiva de produção (e.g. açúcares) são usados como matérias primas de partida para tais processos e se admite que estes podem ou não ser produzidos a partir de seus mais simples elementos constituintes. As moléculas objetivo (aquelas que pretende-se no final do processo obter) podem ser produtos naturais, ingredientes ativos medicamente, ou compostos orgânicos de interesse teórico em química ou biologia. Uma nova rota (marcha de diversos passos) para síntese é desenvolvida no curso da pesquisa, e a rota pode ser a primeira a ser desenvolvida para a substância.
 Um dos primeiros casos de síntese total partindo-se inclusive de substâncias inorgânicas foi a síntese da ureia, em 1828, por Friedrich Wöhler.
 Referências
 Nicolaou, K. C.; Sorensen, E. J. Classics in Total Synthesis, 1996.
 Nicolaou, K. C.; Snyder, S. A. Classics in Total Synthesis II, 2003.
 Ligações externas
 Química orgânica


type: caselaw

jurisdiction: EU

text:
Nr. C 9/4 DA De Europæiske Fællesskabers Tidende 11 . 1 . 97
 DOMSTOLENS DOM DOMSTOLENS DOM
 ( Sjette Afdeling ) ( Sjette Afdeling)
 af 24 . oktober 1996 af 24 . oktober 1996
 i sag C-217/94, Eismann Alto Adige Srl mod Ufficio IVA i sag C-3 17/94, Elida Gibs Ltd mod Commissioners of
 di Bolzano ( anmodning om præjudiciel afgørelse fra Com Customs and Excise ( anmodning om præjudiciel afgørelse
 missione Tributaria di primo grado di Bolzano ) (*) fra Value Added Tax Tribunal ) (')
 (Moms — fortolkning af artikel 22, stk. 8, i sjette direktiv (Merværdiafgift — sjette direktiv — cash-back- og money
 77/388/EØF, som ændret ved direktiv 91/680/EØF — li off-kuponer — beskatningsgrundlag)
 gebehandling af afgiftspligtiges transaktioner i indlandet i 97/C 9/07 )
 og transaktioner mellem medlemsstater)
 ( 97/C 9/06 )
 (Processprog: engelsk)
 (Processprog: italiensk)
 (Foreløbig oversættelse. Den endelige oversættelse vil blive
 offentliggjort i Samling af Afgørelser)
 (Foreløbig oversættelse. Den endelige oversættelse vil blive
 offentliggjort i Samling af Afgørelser) I sag C-3 17/94, angående en anmodning, som Value Ad
 ded Tax Tribunal, London, i medfør af EF-traktatens
 artikel 177 har indgivet til Domstolen for i den for nævnte
 ret verserende sag, Elida Gibbs Ltd mod Commissioners
 I sag C-2 17/94, angående en anmodning, som Commis of Customs and Excise, at opnå en præjudiciel afgørelse
 sione Tributaria di primo grado di Bolzano i medfør af vedrørende fortolkningen af artikel 11 i Rådets sjette di
 EF-traktatens artikel 177 har indgivet til Domstolen for i rektiv 77/388/EØF af 17. maj 1977 om harmonisering af
 den for nævnte ret verserende sag, Eismann Alto Adige Sri medlemsstaternes lovgivning om omsætningsafgifter —
 mod Ufficio IVA di Bolzano, at opnå en præjudiciel afgø Det fælles merværdiafgiftssystem: ensartet beregnings
 relse vedrørende fortolkningen af artikel 22, stk. 8 , i Rå grundlag ( EFT nr. L 145 af 13 . 6 . 1977, s . 1 ), har Domsto
 dets sjette direktiv 77/388/EØF af 17. maj 1977 om har len ( Sjette Afdeling ), sammensat af afdelingsformanden,
 monisering af medlemsstaternes lovgivning om G. F. Mancini, og dommerne C. N. Kakouris ( refererende
 omsætningsafgifter — Det fælles merværdiafgiftssystem: dommer) og G. Hirsch; generaladvokat: N. Fennelly; ju
 ensartet beregningsgrundlag ( EFT nr. L 145 af 13 . 6 . stitssekretær: fuldmægtig L. Hewlett, den 24 . oktober
 1977, s . 1 ), som ændret ved artikel 28h i Rådets direktiv 1996 afsagt dom, hvis konklusion lyder således:
 91 /680/EØF af 16 . december 1991 om tilføjelse til det fæl
 les merværdiafgiftssystem og om ændring, med henblik på
 afskaffelse af de fiskale grænser, af direktiv 77/388/EØF 1 ) Artikel 11 , punkt A, stk. 1 , litra a), og punkt C, stk. 1 ,
 (EFT nr. L 376 af 31 . 12 . 1991 , s. 1 ), har Domstolen i Rådets sjette direktiv 77/388/EØF af 17. maj 1977
 ( Sjette Afdeling), sammensat af afdelingsformanden, G. F. om harmonisering af medlemsstaternes lovgivning om
 Mancini, og dommerne C. N. Kakouris og G. Hirsch ( refe omsætningsafgifter — Det fælles merværdiafgiftssy
 rerende dommer ); generaladvokat: M. B. Elmer; justitsse stem: ensartet beregningsgrundlag, skal fortolkes såle
 kretær: assisterende justitssekretær H. von Holstein, den des, at når en producent udsteder en » money-off«-ku
 24 . oktober 1996 afsagt dom, hvis konklusion lyder såle pon, som detailhandleren kan få indløst med det på
 des : kuponen angivne beløb hos producenten eller for den
 nes regning, når kuponen, der er blevet overdraget en
 potentiel kunde som led i et salgsfremstød, kan accep
 Artikel 22, stk. 8, i Rådets sjette direktiv 77/388/EØF af teres af detailhandleren ved køb af et bestemt produkt,
 17. maj 1977 om harmonisering af medlemsstaternes lov når producenten har solgt dette produkt til » oprindelig
 givning om omsætningsafgifter — Det fælles merværdiaf leverandørpris « direkte til detailhandleren, og denne
 giftssystem: ensartet beregningsgrundlag, som ændret ved accepterer kuponen ved salg af produktet til kunden,
 Rådets direktiv 91 /680/EØF af 16. december 1991 om til fremsender den til producenten og får udbetalt det an
 føjelse til det fælles merværdiafgiftssystem og om ændring givne beløb, er beskatningsgrundlaget lig med den
 med henblik på afskaffelse af de fiskale grænser, af direk salgspris, som producenten anvender, med fradrag af
 tiv 77/388/EØF, skal fortolkes således, at bestemmelsen det på kuponen angivne og indløste beløb. Det samme
 ikke er til hinder for, at der ved en national bestemmelse gælder, såfremt producenten foretager den første leve
 pålægges en forpligtelse til at udstede ledsagedokumenter ring til en grossist i stedet for direkte til en detailhand
 for varer, der udelukkende transporteres inden for ved ler.
 kommende medlemsstats område.
 2 ) Dernæst må det andet spørgsmål besvares med, at
 (M EFT nr. C 275 af 1 . 10 . 1994, s . 15 . artikel 11 , punkt A, stk . 1 , litra a), og punkt C, stk. 1 ,
 i sjette direktiv, skal fortolkes således, at når en produ
 cent som led i en salgsfremmende ordning sælger pro
 dukter til »producentprisen « direkte til en detailhand
 ---pagebreak--- 11.1.97 | DA 1 De Europæiske Fællesskabers Tidende Nr. C 9/5
 ler, når en » casb-back«-kupon gældende for et beløb, P. J. G. Kapteyn og H. Ragnemalm (refererende dommer);
 der er angivet på produkternes emballage, hvorefter en generaladvokat: A. La Pergola; justitssekretær: R. Grass,
 kunde, der godtgør at have købt et produkt som om den 24 . oktober 1996 afsagt dom, hvis konklusion lyder
 handlet og opfylder de øvrige på kuponen anførte be således :
 tingelser, kan fremsende kuponen til producenten, som
 derefter vil udbetale kunden det angivne beløb, og når
 kunden køber et produkt som omhandlet af en detail 1 ) Appelen forkastes.
 handler, fremsender kuponen til producenten og får
 udbetalt det angivne beløb, er beskatningsgrundlaget
 lig med den salgspris, som producenten anvender, med
 2 ) Appellanten betaler sagens omkostninger.
 fradrag af det på kuponen angivne og indløste beløb.
 Det samme gælder, såfremt producenten foretager den
 første levering til en grossist i stedet for direkte til en (!) EFT nr. C 87 af 8 . 4 . 1995 , s. 5 .
 detailhandler.
 (M EFT nr. C 386 af 31 . 12 . 1994, s . 8 .
 DOMSTOLENS DOM
 af 24 . oktober 1996
 i sag C-72/95 , Aannemersbedrijf P. K. Kraaijeveld BV
 DOMSTOLENS DOM
 m.fl. mod Geduputeerde Staten van Zuid-Holland ( an
 ( Sjette Afdeling) modning om præjudiciel afgørelse fra Nederlandenes Raad
 van State ) ( ] )
 af 24 . oktober 1996
 (Miljø — direktiv 85/337/EØF — vurdering af visse of
 i sag C-32/95 P, Kommissionen for De Europæiske Fælles fentlige og private projekters indvirkning)
 skaber mod Lisrestal — Organização Gestão de Restau
 rantes Colectivos Lda m.fl. ( ] ) ( 97/C 9/09 )
 (Den Europæiske Socialfond — beslutning om nedsættelse
 af et oprindeligt bevilget tilskud — tilsidesættelse af retten (Processprog: nederlandsk)
 til kontradiktion — ret til at blive hørt)
 ( 97/C 9/08
 (Foreløbig oversættelse. Den endelige oversættelse vil blive
 offentliggjort i Samling af Afgørelser)
 (Processprog: portugisisk)
 I sag C-72/95 , angående en anmodning, som Nederlande
 nes Raad van State ( Nederlandene ) i medfør af EF-trakta
 (Foreløbig oversættelse. Den endelige oversættelse vil blive tens artikel 177 har indgivet til Domstolen for i den for
 offentliggjort i Samling af Afgørelser) nævnte ret verserende sag, Aannemersbedrijf P. K. Kraaije
 veld BV m.fl . mod Gedeputeerde Staten van Zuid-Holland,
 at opnå en præjudiciel afgørelse vedrørende fortolkningen
 I sag C-32/95 P, Kommissionen for De Europæiske Fælles af Rådets direktiv 85/337/EØF af 27. juni 1985 om vurde
 skaber ( befuldmægtigede : Ana Maria Alves Vieira og Ni ring af visse offentlige og private projekters indvirkning på
 cholas Khan ), angående appel af dom afsagt den 6 . decem miljøet ( EFT nr. L 175 af 5 . 7. 1985, s. 40 ), og vedrørende
 ber 1994 af De Europæiske Fællesskabers Ret i Første en national domstols forpligtelse til at sikre overholdelse
 Instans i sag T-450/93 , Lisrestal m.fl. mod Kommissionen af et direktiv, der har direkte virkning, men som en borger
 ( Sml. II, s. 1177 ), hvori der er nedlagt påstand om ophæ ikke har påberåbt sig, har Domstolen, sammensat af præ
 velse af dommen; de øvrige parter i appelsagen er: Lisre sidenten, G. C. Rodríguez Iglesias, afdelingsformændene
 stal — Organização Gestão de Restaurantes Colectivos G. F. Mancini, J. L. Murray og L. Sevón ( refererende dom
 Lda, Almada (Portugal ), Gabinete Técnico de Informática mer) samt dommerne C. N. Kakouris, P. J. G. Kapteyn, C.
 Lda ( GTI ), Lissabon, Lisnico — Serviço Maritimo Interna Gulmann, D. A. O. Edward, J.-P. Puissochet, G. Hirsch og
 cional Lda, Almada, Rebocalis — Rebocagem e Assistên M. Wathelet; generaladvokat: M. B. Elmer; justitssekretær:
 cia Maritima Lda, Almada, og Gaslimpo — Sociedade de ekspeditionssekretær D. Louterman-Hubeau, den 24. okto
 Desgasificação de Navios SA, Almada, ved advokat Manu ber 1996 afsagt dom, hvis konklusion lyder således:
 el Rodrigues, Lissabon, og med valgt adresse i Luxem
 bourg hos Angelo Alves Azevedo, 61 , rue de Gasperich,
 har Domstolen ( Sjette Afdeling ), sammensat af fungerende 1 ) Udtrykket »anlæg til regulering af vandløb «, som er
 formand for Sjette Afdeling, C. N. Kakouris, og dommerne indeholdt i bilag II, punkt 1 0, litra e), til Rådets direk


text:
 15.10.2005
 LV
 Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis
 C 257/4
 Prasība pret Vācijas Republiku, ko Eiropas Kopienu Komisija iesniedza 2005. gada 17. augustā
 (lieta C-318/05)
 (2005/C 257/08)
 tiesvedības valoda — vācu
 Eiropas Kopienu Tiesā 2005. gada 17. augustā izskatīšanai ir iesniegta prasība pret Vācijas Republiku, ko cēla Eiropas Kopienu Komisija, kuru pārstāv Ričards Liāls [Richard Lyal] un Kilians Gross [Kilian Gross], pārstāvji, kas norādīja adresi Luksemburgā.
 Prasītājas prasījumi Tiesai ir šādi:
 1)
 atzīt, ka, izslēdzot pilnīgi visus skolas naudas maksājumus saistībā ar ārvalstīs apmeklētu mācību iestādi no Einkommensteurgesetz (EStG) (Ienākuma nodokļa likuma) 10. panta 1. punkta 9) apakšpunktā paredzētajiem īpašajiem no nodokļiem atskaitāmajiem izdevumiem, Vācijas Republika nav izpildījusi pienākumus, ko tai uzliek EKL 18., 39., 43. un 49. pants;
 2)
 piespriest Vācijas Republikai atlīdzināt tiesāšanās izdevumus.
 Pamati un galvenie argumenti
 Eiropas Komisija uzskata, ka EStG 10. panta 1. punkta 9) apakšpunktā paredzētais noteikums ir nesaderīgs ar EK līgumā paredzēto pakalpojumu sniegšanas brīvību un pārvietošanās brīvību.
 Saskaņā ar EStG 10. panta 1. punkta 9) apakšpunktu nodokļu maksātāji Vācijā no visiem saviem ar nodokli apliekamajiem ienākumiem, kā īpašos izdevumus var atskaitīt 30 % no maksājumiem, kas veikti valsts apstiprinātajām vai atzītajām privātskolām. Tāda iespēja nepastāv attiecībā uz skolas naudas maksājumiem, kas veikti citās dalībvalstīs izveidotām privātskolām.
 Komisija uzskata, ka vispārīga ārvalsts privātskolu izslēgšana no iepriekš minētā nodokļa samazinājuma ir diskriminējoša. Pēc tās domām, mazāk izdevīgākā nodokļu sistēma, kas tiek piemērota ārvalsts privātskolām, pārkāpj gan ārvalsts skolu brīvību sniegt pakalpojumus, gan Vācijā reģistrētu nodokļu maksātāju, kas vēlas sūtīt savus bērnus ārvalsts privātskolā, brīvību.
 Turklāt ārvalsts privātskolām, ja tās vēlas izvairīties no neizdevīgāka stāvokļa konkurences ziņā, kas saistīts ar neizdevīgāku noteikumu nodokļu jomā piemērošanu to klientiem, ir jāreģistrējas Vācijā. Tas ir uzskatāms par nelikumīgu uzņēmējdarbības brīvības ierobežojumu.
 Visbeidzot, iespējas saņemt nodokļu samazinājumu ierobežojums pārkāpj citu ES dalībvalstu pilsoņu, kas vēlas pārcelties uz Vāciju, bet tajā pašā laikā vēlas, lai to bērni mācītos to izcelsmes valstī, tiesības uz pārvietošanās brīvību. Tas pats attiecas uz Vācijas pilsoņiem, kas dzīvo citā dalībvalstī, bet kas joprojām visus nodokļus maksā Vācijā. Arī šie pilsoņi tiek nostādīti neizdevīgākā stāvoklī, ja tie vēlas sūtīt savus bērnus privātskolā, kas atrodas ārpus Vācijas.


type: contracts

text:
 27.3.2014
 RO
 Jurnalul Oficial al Uniunii Europene
 L 92/30
 DECIZIA NR. 204/2013 A COMITETULUI MIXT AL SEE
 din 8 noiembrie 2013
 de modificare a anexei XIII (Transporturile) la Acordul privind SEE
 COMITETUL MIXT AL SEE,
 având în vedere Acordul privind Spațiul Economic European (denumit în continuare „Acordul privind SEE”), în special articolul 98,
 întrucât:
 (1)
 Regulamentul de punere în aplicare (UE) nr. 428/2013 al Comisiei din 8 mai 2013 de modificare a Regulamentului (CE) nr. 1033/2006 în ceea ce privește dispozițiile OACI menționate la articolul 3 alineatul (1) și de abrogare a Regulamentului (UE) nr. 929/2010 (1) trebuie încorporat în Acordul privind SEE.
 (2)
 Regulamentul de punere în aplicare (UE) nr. 428/2013 abrogă Regulamentul (UE) nr. 929/2010 al Comisiei (2), care este încorporat în Acordul privind SEE și care, prin urmare, trebuie abrogat în cadrul Acordului privind SEE.
 (3)
 Prin urmare, anexa XIII la Acordul privind SEE ar trebui modificată în consecință,
 ADOPTĂ PREZENTA DECIZIE:
 Articolul 1
 Anexa XIII la Acordul privind SEE se modifică după cum urmează:
 1.
 La punctul 66wc [Regulamentul (CE) nr. 1033/2006 al Comisiei] se adaugă următoarea liniuță:
 „—
 32013 R 0428: Regulamentul de punere în aplicare (UE) nr. 428/2013 al Comisiei din 8 mai 2013 (JO L 127, 9.5.2013, p. 23).”
 2.
 La punctul 66wc [Regulamentul (CE) nr. 1033/2006 al Comisiei] se elimină textul de la prima liniuță [Regulamentul (UE) nr. 929/2010 al Comisiei].
 Articolul 2
 Textele Regulamentului de punere în aplicare (UE) nr. 428/2013 în limbile islandeză și norvegiană, care urmează să fie publicate în suplimentul SEE la Jurnalul Oficial al Uniunii Europene, sunt autentice.
 Articolul 3
 Prezenta decizie intră în vigoare la 9 noiembrie 2013, cu condiția să se fi efectuat toate notificările prevăzute la articolul 103 alineatul (1) din Acordul privind SEE (3).
 Articolul 4
 Prezenta decizie se publică în secțiunea SEE și în suplimentul SEE ale Jurnalului Oficial al Uniunii Europene.
 Adoptată la Bruxelles, 8 noiembrie 2013.
 Pentru Comitetul mixt al SEE
 Președintele
 Thórir IBSEN
 (1) JO L 127, 9.5.2013, p. 23.
 (2) JO L 273, 19.10.2010, p. 4.
 (3) Nu au fost semnalate obligații constituționale.


text:
 17.4.2010
 MT
 Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea
 C 100/26
 Talbiet għal deċiżjoni preliminari mressqa mill-Conseil d’État (Franza) fit-3 ta’ Frar 2010 fil-kawżi — Monsanto SAS, Monsanto Agriculture France SAS, Monsanto International SARL, Monsanto Technology LLC vs Ministre de l’Agriculture et de la Pêche — Monsanto SAS, Monsanto Agriculture France SAS, Monsanto International SARL, Monsanto Europe SA vs Ministre de l’Agriculture et de la Pêche — Association générale des producteurs de maïs (AGPM) vs Ministre de l’Agriculture et de la Pêche — SCEA de Malaprade, SCEA Coutin, Jérôme Huard, Dominique Richer, EARL de Candelon, Bernard Mir, EARL des Menirs, Marie-Jeanne Darricau, GAEC de Commenian vs Ministre de l’Agriculture et de la Pêche — Pioneer Génétique, Pioneer Semences vs Ministre de l’Agriculture et de la Pêche — Syndicat des établissements de semences agréés pour les semences de maïs (SEPROMA) vs Ministre de l’Agriculture et de la Pêche — Caussade Semences SA vs Ministre de l’Agriculture et de la Pêche Société Limagrain Verneuil Holding vs Ministre de l’Agriculture et de la Pêche — Société Maïsadour Semences vs Ministre de l’Agriculture et de la Pêche — Ragt Semences SA vs Ministre de l’Agriculture et de la Pêche — Euralis Semences SAS, Euralis Coop vs Ministre de l’Agriculture et de la Pêche
 ((Kawża C-58/10) - (Kawża C-59/10) - (Kawża C-60/10) - (Kawża C-61/10) - (Kawża C-62/10) - (Kawża C-63/10) - (Kawża C-64/10) - (Kawża C-65/10) - (Kawża C-66/10) - (Kawża C-67/10) - (Kawża C-68/10))
 2010/C 100/39
 Lingwa tal-kawża: il-franċiż
 Qorti tar-rinviju
 Conseil d’État
 Partijiet fil-kawża prinċipali
 Rikorrenti: Monsanto SAS, Monsanto Agriculture France SAS, Monsanto International SARL, Monsanto Technology LLC (C-58/10), Monsanto SAS, Monsanto Agriculture France SAS, Monsanto International SARL, Monsanto Europe SA (C-59/10), Association générale des producteurs de maïs (AGPM) (C-60/10), SCEA de Malaprade, SCEA Coutin, Jérôme Huard, Dominique Richer, EARL de Candelon, Bernard Mir, EARL des Menirs, Marie-Jeanne Darricau, GAEC de Commenian (C-61/10), Pioneer Génétique, Pioneer Semences (C-62/10), Syndicat des établissements de semences agréés pour les semences de maïs (SEPROMA) (C-63/10), Caussade Semences SA (C-64/10), Société Limagrain Verneuil Holding (C-65/10), Société Maïsadour Semences (C-66/10), Ragt Semences SA (C-67/10), Euralis Semences SAS, Euralis Coop (C-68/10)
 Konvenut: Ministre de l’Agriculture et de la Pêche
 Domandi preliminari
 (1)
 Meta organiżmu modifikat ġenetikament li jikkostitwixxi għalf għall-annimali tqiegħed fuq is-suq qabel il-pubblikazzjoni tar-Regolament (KE) Nru 1829/2003 (1) u li din l-awtorizzazzjoni nżammet fis-seħħ skont id-dispożizzjonijiet tal-Artikolu 20 ta’ dan ir-regolament, il-prodott inkwistjoni għandu jitqies, sakemm tingħata deċiżjoni fuq l-applikazzjoni għal awtorizzazzjoni ġdida li għandha tiġi ppreżentata skont dan ir-regolament, fost il-prodotti msemmija fid-dispożizzjonijiet tal-Artikolu 12 tad-Direttiva 2001/18/KE (2) iċċitati [f’dawn id-deċiżjonijiet] u, f’dan il-każ, dan l-organiżmu modifikat ġenetikament huwa suġġett, għal dak li jirrigwarda l-miżuri ta’ emerġenza li jistgħu jiġi adottati wara li tingħata l-awtorizzazzjoni ta’ tqiegħed fuq is-suq, biss għall-Artikolu 23 tad-Direttiva u tad-dispożizzjonijiet nazzjonali li jiżguraw it-traspożizzjoni tagħha?
 (2)
 Fil-każ li l-miżuri ta’ emerġenza jistgħu jiġu adottati biss fil-kuntest tad-dispożizzjonijiet tal-Artikolu 34 tar-Regolament (KE) 1829/2003, l-awtoritajiet ta’ Stat Membru jistgħu jadottaw, u taħt liema ċirkustanzi, miżura bħal dik tad-digriet kkontestat (3), skont il-kontroll tar-riskju msemmi fl-Artikolu 53 tar-Regolament (KE) Nru 178/2002 (4) jew miżuri kawtelatorji li jistgħu jiġu adottati minn Stat Membri abbażi tal-Artikolu 54 tal-istess regolament?
 (3)
 Fil-każ li l-awtoritajiet ta’ Stat Membru jistgħu jintervjenu abbażi tal-Artikolu 23 tad-Direttiva 2001/18/KE jew abbażi tal-Artikolu 34 tar-Regolament (KE) Nru 1829/2003, jew fuq dawn iż-żewġ bażijiet legali, ir-rikors iqajjem il-kwistjoni dwar liema livell ta’ rekwiżit, filwaqt li jittieħed inkunsiderazzjoni b’mod partikolari l-prinċipju ta’ prekawżjoni, huwa impost, rispettivament, mid-dispożizzjonijiet tal-Artikolu 23 tad-Direttiva li jissuġġetta l-adozzjoni ta’ miżuri ta’ emerġenza bħas-sospensjoni jew il-projbizzjoni mill-użu tal-prodott għall-kundizzjoni li l-Istat Membru jkollu “raġunijiet iktar dettaljati biex [j]ikkunsidra li GMO [...] jikkostitwixxi riskju [għal]l-ambjent” u dawk tal-Artikolu 34 tar-Regolament li jissuġġetta l-adozzjoni ta’ tali miżura għall-kundizzjoni li l-prodotti jkunu “x’aktarx jikkostitwixxu riskju serju [għal]l-ambjent” fir-rigward tal-identifikazzjoni tar-riskju, tal-evalwazzjoni tal-probabbiltà tiegħu u tal-eżami tan-natura tal-effetti tiegħu?
 (1) Regolament (KE) Nru 1829/2003 tal-Parlament Ewropew u tal-Kunsill, tat-22 ta’ Settembru 2003, dwar ikel u għalf modifikat ġenetikament (ĠU Edizzjoni Speċjali bil-Malti, Kapitolu 13, Vol. 32, p. 432 — 454).
 (2) Direttiva 2001/18/KE tal-Parlament Ewropew u tal-Kunsill, tat-12 ta’ Marzu 2001 dwar ir-rilaxx intenzjonat fl-ambjent ta’ organiżmi modifikati ġenetikament u li tħassar id-Direttiva tal-Kunsill 90/220/KEE (ĠU Edizzjoni Speċjali bil-Malti, Kapitolu 15, Vol. 6, p. 77 — 114).
 (3) Digriet tal-5 ta’ Diċembru 2007, fil-Kawża C-58/10; digriet tas-7 ta’ Frar 2008, emendat bid-digriet tat-13 ta’ Frar 2008, fil-Kawżi C-59/10 sa C-68/10.
 (4) Regolament tal-Parlament Ewropew u tal-Kunsill (KE) Nru 178/2002, tat-28 ta’ Jannar 2002, li jistabilixxi l-prinċipji ġenerali u l-ħtiġijiet tal-liġi dwar l-ikel, li jistabilixxi l-Awtorità Ewropea dwar is-Sigurtà fl-Ikel u jistabbilixxi l-proċeduri fi kwistjonijiet ta’ sigurtà tal-ikel (ĠU Edizzjoni Speċjali bil-Malti, Kapitolu 15, Vol. 6, p. 463 — 486).


text:
 Avis juridique important
 |
 21999D0722(04)
 Gemensamma EES-kommitténs beslut nr 85/98 av den 25 september 1998 om ändring av bilaga II (Tekniska föreskrifter, standarder, provning och certifiering) till EES-avtalet
 Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning nr L 189 , 22/07/1999 s. 0057 - 0057
 GEMENSAMMA EES-KOMMITTÉNS BESLUTnr 85/98av den 25 september 1998om ändring av bilaga II (Tekniska föreskrifter, standarder, provning och certifiering) till EES-avtaletGEMENSAMMA EES-KOMMITTÉN HAR BESLUTAT FÖLJANDEmed beaktande av Avtalet om Europeiska ekonomiska samarbetsområdet, justerat genom protokollet med justeringar av Avtalet om Europeiska ekonomiska samarbetsområdet, nedan kallat "avtalet", särskilt artikel 98 i detta, ochav följande skäl:Bilaga II till avtalet ändrades genom Gemensamma EES-kommitténs beslut nr 48/98 av den 29 maj 1998(1).Kommissionens förordning (EG) nr 1836/97 av den 24 september 1997 om ändring av bilagorna I och II till rådets förordning (EEG) nr 2377/90 om inrättandet av ett gemenskapsförfarande för att fastställa gränsvärden för högsta tillåtna restmängder av veterinärmedicinska läkemedel i livsmedel med animaliskt ursprung(2), (EG) nr 1837/97 av den 24 september 1997 rörande ändring av bilagorna I, II och III till rådets förordning (EEG) nr 2377/90(3), (EG) nr 1838/97 av den 24 september 1997 rörande ändring av bilagorna I, II och III till rådets förordning (EEG) nr 2377/90(4) och (EG) nr 1850/97 av den 25 september 1997 rörande ändring av bilaga III till rådets förordning (EEG) nr 2377/90(5), bör införlivas med avtalet.HÄRIGENOM FÖRESKRIVS FÖLJANDE.Artikel 1Följande nya strecksatser skall läggas till i punkt 14 (rådets förordning (EEG) nr 2377/90) i kapitel XIII i bilaga II till avtalet: "- 397 R 1836: Kommissionens förordning (EG) nr 1836/97 av den 24 september 1997 (EGT L 263, 25.9.1997, s. 6).- 397 R 1837: Kommissionens förordning (EG) nr 1837/97 av den 24 september 1997 (EGT L 263, 25.9.1997, s. 9)- 397 R 1838: Kommissionens förordning (EG) nr 1838/97 av den 24 september 1997 (EGT L 263, 25.9.1997, s. 14)- 397 R 1850: Kommissionens förordning (EG) nr 1850/97 av den 25 september 1997 (EGT L 264, 26.9.1997, s. 12)."Artikel 2Texterna till förordning (EG) nr 1836/97, (EG) nr 1837/97, (EG) nr 1838/97 och (EG) nr 1850/97 på isländska och norska, som bifogas respektive språkversion av detta beslut, är giltiga.Artikel 3Detta beslut träder i kraft den 26 september 1998 under förutsättning att alla anmälningar enligt artikel 103.1 i avtalet har gjorts till Gemensamma EES-kommittén.Artikel 4Detta beslut skall offentliggöras i EES-delen av och EES-supplementet till Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning.Utfärdat i Bryssel den 25 september 1998.På Gemensamma EES-kommitténs vägnarN. v. LIECHTENSTEINOrdförande(1) EGT L 30, 4.2.1999, s. 48.(2) EGT L 263, 25.9.1997, s. 6.(3) EGT L 263, 25.9.1997, s. 9.(4) EGT L 263, 25.9.1997, s. 14.(5) EGT L 264, 26.9.1997, s. 12.


text:
Ekonomické právne informácie - Daňová povinnosť pri predaji tovaru za symbolickú cenu
 Daňová povinnosť pri predaji tovaru za symbolickú cenu
 Rozudok Najvyššieho súdu SR k posúdeniu správnosti výšky odpočtu DPH v prípade predaja tovaru za zmluvne dohodnutú nižšiu cenu, ako je cena reálna.
 Dátum publikácie: 2. 1. 2019
 Právoplatný rozsudok Najvyššieho súdu SR č. 8Sžfk/3/2016 z 23. 8. 2018
 Podľa § 8 ods. 3 zákona o DPH ak platiteľ dodá tovar bezodplatne alebo dodá tovar na ďalší iný účel ako na podnikanie a pri kúpe alebo vytvorení tohto tovaru vlastnou činnosťou bola daň úplne alebo čiastočnej odpočítateľná, považuje sa takéto dodanie tovaru za dodanie tovaru za protihodnotu.
 Podľa § 22 ods. 5 zákona o DPH pri dodaní tovaru podľa § 8 ods. 3 zákona o DPH je základom dane cena, za ktorú bol tovar nadobudnutý vrátane nákladov súvisiacich s nadobudnutím, a ak bol tovar vytvorený vlastnou činnosťou, základom dane sú náklady na vytvorenie tovaru vlastnou činnosťou. Pri dodaní tovaru, ktorý je podľa osobitného predpisu odpisovaným majetkom, základom dane je zostatková cena majetku.
 Daňový úrad vyrubil platiteľovi DPH – s. r. o., rozdiel dane z pridanej hodnoty za zdaňovacie obdobie marec 2014 v sume 25 868,89 € z dôvodu, že predal tovar – ťahače výrazne pod cenu.
 Správca dane konštatoval, že s. r. o. vznikla daňová povinnosť dodaním tovaru podľa § 19 ods. 1 zákona o DPH a povinnosť platiť daň za dodaný tovar podľa § 69 ods. 1 zákona o DPH, pričom pri výpočte základu dane mala byť zohľadnená vstupná cena tohto hmotného majetku (105 000 €), deň nákupu 20. november 2013, odpisy majetku k 31. decembru 2013 (0 €), podľa daňového priznania dane z príjmu za rok 2013 (predmetom účtovania neboli účtovné odpisy).
 Daň mala byť odvedená z hodnoty 105 000,- €, t. j. vo výške 21 000 €, pričom odvedená bola len vo výške 0,60 €. Správca dane vyrubil rozdiel, t. j. 20 999,40 €.
 ...Žalobca v rámci odvolacieho konania opakovane namietal aplikáciu § 22 ods. 5 zákona o DPH, keď bol toho názoru, že ak sa zmluvné strany v obchodnom vzťah dohodli na odplate, nemožno ju spochybniť. Podľa odvolacieho súdu dodanie predmetného tovaru – 3 ks ťahačov v cene 1 €/kus bez DPH, pričom pri kúpe tohto tovaru bola daň odpočítateľná (vo výške 21 000 €), je v zmysle § 8 ods. 3 zákona o DPH nutné považovať za bezodplatné dodanie tovaru, čo odôvodňuje aplikáciu § 22 ods. 5 zákona o DPH tak, ako to ustálil správca dane.
 Preverovanie dodávateľského reťazca pri kontrole odpočítanej DPH (komentovaný rozsudok Najvyššieho súdu SR)
 Pokuta z dodatočného daňového priznania k DPH (komentovaný rozsudok Najvyššieho súdu SR)
 Nepriznané oslobodenie od DPH pri intrakomunitárnom dodaní
 Skrátenie dane a poistného - preukázanie chýbajúcej hospodárskej podstaty obchodných operácií
 Rozhodnutie o prerušení daňovej kontroly nie je samostatne preskúmateľné v správnom súdnictve
 Zásada objektívnej pravdy v daňovom konaní
 8Sžfk/3/2016 (Ostatné)