natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Kun tre af de fem producenter, der besvarede stikprøvespørgsmålene jf. betragtning 14, indgik i EU-erhvervsgrenen i den oprindelige undersøgelse.
As stated in recital (11), from the five producers which replied to the sampling questions only the three complainants formed part of the Union industry in the first investigation.
Som det fremgår af det ovenstående blev der på grund af de særlige forhold ved denne sag kun sendt spørgeskemaer til de tre udvalgte EU-producenter, der også indgik i EU-erhvervsgrenen i den første undersøgelse.
As stated above, in light of the specificities of this case, questionnaires were sent only to the three selected Union producers that also formed part of the Union industry in the first investigation.
Der er strygebrætproducenter i mange medlemsstater, f.eks. Belgien, Tjekkiet, Frankrig, Tyskland, Italien, Polen, Portugal, Nederlandene, Spanien og Det Forenede Kongerige.
Ironing board producers can be found in several Member States including Belgium, the Czech Republic, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Portugal, the Netherlands, Spain and the United Kingdom.
Den samlede årlige EU-produktion af strygebrætter kan anslås til over 5 mio. enheder.
The total volume of annual Union production of ironing boards can be estimated at above 5 million units.
Import fra Since Hardware
Imports from Since Hardware
Importens niveau
Status of imports
Undersøgelsen viste, jf. betragtning 25–57, at importen fra Since Hardware blev dumpet på EU-markedet.
As described in recitals (22) to (54), this investigation has shown that imports from Since Hardware have been dumped on the Union market.
I den betragtede periode øgedes Since Hardware eksport til Unionen markant med 64 % [9].
Over the period considered, Since Hardware’s exports to the Union increased strongly, by 64 % [9].
Importen fra andre kinesiske og ukrainske producenter faldt derimod efter indførelsen af den midlertidige told i 2006 (fortrolige data baseret på medlemsstaternes indberetninger i henhold til grundforordningens artikel 14, stk. 6):
On the other hand, the imports of other Chinese and Ukrainian producers have constantly decreased following the imposition of provisional duties in 2006 (confidential data based on Member States’ reports in accordance with Article 14(6) of the basic Regulation):
Mængden af importerede strygebrætter produceret af Since Hardware
Volume of imports of ironing boards produced by Since Hardware
Indeks af fortrolighedshensyn
Indices for confidentiality reasons
Kina (ekskl. Since Hardware) og Ukraine
PRC (excluding Since Hardware) and Ukraine
Da EU-forbruget generelt var stabilt i den betragtede periode med undtagelse af den lille stigning mellem 2006 og 2007, jf. betragtning 64, udviklede Since Hardwares markedsandel sig i tråd med importmængden, jf. ovenfor.
Given that Union consumption has remained substantially stable over the period considered except for the slight increase between 2006 and 2007, as mentioned in recital (61), the market share of Since Hardware has developed in line with its import volumes shown.
Det skal bemærkes, at Since Hardwares andel på EU-markedet i 2006 udgjorde ca. en femtedel af de øvrige kinesiske og ukrainske producenters samlede markedsandel, hvorimod Since Hardwares markedsandel i UP udgjorde næsten halvdelen af de øvrige kinesiske og ukrainske producenters samlede markedsandel.
It should be noted that in 2006, the Union market share of Since Hardware represented about one fifth of the total market share of the other Chinese and Ukrainian producers, whereas by the IP, Since Hardware’s market share amounted to almost half of the total market share of the other Chinese and Ukrainian producers.
Både den markante stigning i importmængden fra Since Hardware og i virksomhedens markedsandel kan forklares ved, at virksomheden var den eneste kinesiske producent, der var pålagt en nultold, og derfor forbedredes virksomhedens markedsmuligheder efter indførelsen af den midlertidige told i 2006.
Both the substantial increase of Since Hardware’s import volume and its market share can be explained by the fact that it has been the only Chinese producer that has had a zero anti-dumping duty and therefore its market opportunities have actually improved since the imposition of provisional duties in 2006.
Dette bekræftes endvidere af den markante, positive udvikling i deres importmængder i forhold til den forværrede tendens i importmængderne fra de øvrige kinesiske og ukrainske producenter.
This can also be confirmed by the pronounced opposite, positive development of their import volumes as compared to the deteriorating trend of the import volumes of the other Chinese and Ukrainian producers.
Hvad angår den betragtede periode, ses følgende modsatrettede udviklinger i markedsandele:
Indeed when looking at the period considered, the following converse evolution of market shares has been found:
Markedsandel for importerede strygebrætter produceret af Since Hardware
Market share of imports of ironing boards produced by Since Hardware
Det fremgår tydeligt af ovenstående tabeller, at Since Hardware havde en væsentlig stigning i importmængden og markedsandelen [10].
It is clear from the above tables that Since Hardware has managed to significantly increase its import volumes and market share [10].
Derudover påstod EU-erhvervsgrenen, at den havde miste mange kundeordrer til Since Hardware i de senere år.
In addition, the Union industry has claimed to have lost numerous client orders to Since Hardware in the past years.
Der er ganske rigtigt tydelige tegn på, at visse af EU-erhvervsgrenens store kunder har skiftet leverandør og nu overvejende køber varer fra Since Hardware og mindre fra EU-erhvervsgrenen end tidligere.
Indeed clear indications have been found that certain important customers of the Union industry have changed suppliers, sourcing more products from Since Hardware and fewer from the Union industry than before.
Eksempelvis fremgår det af data, som Kommissionen indhentede i den første undersøgelse, at en EU-producent solgte et betydeligt antal strygebrætter til en EU-kunde i UP i den oprindelige undersøgelse (2005), mens den nuværende undersøgelse viste, at den pågældende producent solgte betydeligt færre strygebrætter (mellem 10 og 30 % af den pågældende mængde) til den samme kunder i den nuværende UP.
For instance, the data gathered by the Commission in the first investigation show that a Union producer sold a significant number of pieces to a Union customer in the IP of the first investigation (2005), whereas in the current investigation it has stated that it sold considerably less (between 10 % and 30 % of that quantity) to the same customer in the current IP.
Til sammenligning solgte Since Hardware et lille antal strygebrætter til denne EU-kunde i den første UP, men solgte langt flere (mellem 300 og 500 % af den pågældende mængde) til samme kunde i UP i den nuværende undersøgelse.
By contrast, Since Hardware sold a small number of pieces to this Union customer in the IP of the first investigation, but sold much more (between 300 % and 500 % of that quantity) to that customer during the IP of the current investigation.
De data, som Kommissionen indhentede i den første undersøgelse, viser desuden, at en EU-producents salg til en anden EU-kunde i UP i den første undersøgelse faldt markant (mellem 30 og 50 %) i den nuværende UP.
Furthermore, the data gathered by the Commission in the first investigation show that the sales of an Union producer to another Union customer in the IP of the first investigation dropped considerably (between 30 % and 50 %) in the current IP.
Til sammenligning solgte Since Hardware intet til denne kunde i den første UP, men solgte en væsentlig mængde i den nuværende UP.
Again by contrast, whereas Since Hardware sold nothing to this customer in the IP of the first investigation, it sold a substantial quantity in the current IP.
Denne mængde er på mellem 60 og 80 % af den mængde, som udgjorde faldet i EU-producentens salg til den pågældende kunde mellem UP i den første undersøgelse og den nuværende UP.
That quantity is between 60 % and 80 % of the quantity by which the Union producer’s sales to that customer went down between the IP of the first investigation and the current IP.
Med henblik på en analyse af prisunderbuddet blev Since Hardwares importpriser sammenlignet med EU-erhvervsgrenens priser på grundlag af et vejet gennemsnit for sammenlignelige varetyper i UP.
For the purpose of analysing price undercutting, the import prices of Since Hardware were compared to the Union industry’s prices, on the basis of weighted averages for comparable product types during the IP.
EU-erhvervsgrenens priser blev justeret til ab fabrik-niveau og sammenlignet med cif-importpriser, Unionens grænse plus eventuelle toldafgifter.
The Union industry’s prices were adjusted to an ex-works level, and compared to CIF Union frontier import prices, plus customs duties where applicable.
Den gennemsnitlige underbudsmargen, der blev konstateret for Since Hardware, er på 16,1 %, udtrykt i procent af EU-erhvervsgrenens priser.
The average undercutting margin found for Since Hardware, expressed as a percentage of the Union industry’s price, is 16,1 %.
Det skal bemærkes, at EU-erhvervsgrenen generelt led tab på sine priser i UP.
It is noted that the Union industry’s prices were found to be overall loss-making in the IP.
Ovenstående kendsgerninger viser, at EU-erhvervsgrenen led væsentlig skade som følge af dumpingimporterede varer solgt af Since Hardware på EU-markedet, som ellers ville være blevet leveret af EU-erhvervsgrenen.
The above-mentioned facts show that the Union industry suffered injury due to the dumped quantities sold by Since Hardware on the Union market which might otherwise have been supplied by the Union industry.
Since Hardware solgte, jf. ovenfor, i UP ofte sine varer til stærkt dumpede priser, som markant underbød EU-erhvervsgrenens priser.
As shown above, Since Hardware offered its products, during the IP, at heavily dumped prices which strongly undercut the Union industry’s prices.
Det lykkedes således virksomheden at sælge endnu større mængder i UP end i f.eks. 2005 eller 2006.
As a result, it succeeded to sell quantities during the IP which were much higher than, for instance, in 2005 or 2006.
Since Hardware forvoldte således den skade, der er konstateret ovenfor.
Since Hardware thus caused the injury which was found above.
En importør anførte, at valutakursen mellem euro og dollar var årsagen til den markante tilstedeværelse af Since Hardwares strygebrætter på EU-markedet, og ikke dumpingpraksis.
One importer stated that the EUR/USD exchange rate was the cause of the strong presence of Since Hardware ironing boards on the Union market rather than dumping practices.
Hvis dette var sandt, ville al import faktureret i dollar have været fordelagtig i konkurrence med varer faktureret i euro.
However, if this was true, all imports invoiced in USD would have been advantaged in their competition with goods invoiced in euro.
Tværtimod faldt importen fra andre kinesiske og ukrainske producenter, jf. betragtning 67 og 68, konstant mellem 2006 og UP, dvs. i den periode, hvor der var store udsving i valutakursen mellem euro og dollar, i modsætning til stigningen i importen fra Since Hardware i samme periode.
Instead, as set out in recitals (64) and (65), imports from other Chinese and Ukrainian producers, also selling in USD, have constantly decreased between 2006 and the IP i.e. in the period during which the EUR/USD exchange rates have every so often changed, in contrast with the significant increase of imports from Since Hardware throughout the same period.
Der blev ikke modtaget andre bemærkninger.
No further comments were received.
Det konkluderes derfor, at ingen faktorer tilsyneladende kan bryde årsagssammenhængen mellem dumpingimporten fra Since Hardware og dennes bidrag til den skade, der blev konstateret ovenfor.
It is therefore concluded that no factor appears to exist that could break the causal link between the dumped imports from Since Hardware and their contribution to injury which was found above.
En erhvervssammenslutning samarbejdede, jf. betragtning 15, også i forbindelse med undersøgelsen.
As mentioned in recital (12), one trade association cooperated in the investigation.
De samarbejdsvillige EU-producenter og importører blev desuden også anmodet om at fremsætte bemærkninger til, om indførelsen af en eventuel antidumpingtold på Since Hardwares varer efter deres opfattelse ville ændre konklusionen vedrørende Unionens interesser, jf. betragtning 51-62 i forordning (EF) nr. 452/2007.
In addition, the cooperating Union producers and importers were also asked to comment on whether in their view the imposition of a possible anti-dumping duty on Since Hardware would change the conclusion regarding Union interest reached in recitals (51) to (62) of Regulation (EC) No 452/2007.
EU-producenterne mente ikke, at indførelsen af en eventuel antidumpingtold på Since Hardwares varer ville ændre konklusionerne vedrørende Unionens interesser i forordning (EF) nr. 452/2007.
According to the Union producers, the imposition of an anti-dumping duty on Since Hardware would not change the conclusions on Union interest as established by Regulation (EC) No 452/2007.
Den samarbejdsvillige erhvervssammenslutning anførte, at en antidumpingtold på Since Hardwares varer normalt ville have en negativ virkning på importørernes og detailhandlernes eller distributørernes rentabilitet.
The cooperating trade association stated that imposing an anti-dumping duty on Since Hardware would normally have a negative impact on the profitability of the importers and retailers or distributors concerned.
Erhvervssammenslutningen anførte dog også, at medlemmerne – herunder store detailforretninger – bekræftede, at prisstigninger på den pågældende vare såsom prisstigninger som følge af antidumpingforanstaltninger kan overføres uden væsentlige virkninger for forbrugernes opfattelse.
However, according to the trade association, their members – including large retail stores – also confirmed that the product under investigation is one upon which price increases such as those resulting from anti-dumping measures can be passed on without impacting substantially on consumers’ perception.
Der blev derfor ikke fremlagt konkrete oplysninger, der kunne ændre konklusionerne om Unionens interesse, jf. de to ovennævnte forordninger.
Therefore, no concrete element was submitted which would change the conclusions on Union interest as established by the above two Regulations.
På baggrund af ovenstående konkluderes det, at indførelsen af en antidumpingtold på Since Hardwares varer i alt væsentlig ikke vil ændre konklusionerne vedrørende Unionens interesser i betragtning 51-62 i forordning (EF) nr. 452/2007.
In view of the above it is concluded that the imposition of an anti-dumping duty on Since Hardware would leave the conclusions regarding Union interest reached in recitals (51) to(62) of Regulation (EC) No 452/2007 substantially unaffected.
Der blev ikke fremlagt begrundelser for, hvorfor denne analyse ikke skulle finde tilsvarende anvendelse på indførelsen af en antidumpingtold på Since Hardware.
No reasons were put forward as to why that analysis would not apply, mutatis mutandis, to the imposition of an anti-dumping duty on Since Hardware.
BEMÆRKNINGER MODTAGET FRA INTERESSEDE PARTER EFTER FREMLÆGGELSEN AF RESULTATERNE
COMMENTS FROM INTERESTED PARTIES FOLLOWING DISCLOSURE
Både EU-erhvervsgrenen og Since Hardware fremsatte skriftlige og mundtlige bemærkninger til den endelige fremlæggelse af undersøgelsesresultaterne.
Written and oral representations were made following final disclosure of the findings from the Union industry and from Since Hardware.
EU-erhvervsgrenen var enig i de fremlagte undersøgelsesresultater.
The Union industry agrees with the findings disclosed.
Since Hardwares bemærkninger blev undersøgt, men ingen af dem ændrede dog ovenstående konklusioner.
Since Hardware’s comments were examined, however, none of them were such as to alter the above conclusions.
De vigtigste påstande fra Since Hardware er behandlet herunder.
The main arguments raised by Since Hardware were as follows.
Since Hardware gentog sine tidligere påstande, nemlig at det angiveligt skulle være ulovligt at indlede en oprindelig undersøgelsen mod én virksomhed og om de angiveligt ukorrekte resultater af analysen vedrørende markedsøkonomisk behandling.
Since Hardware reiterated its earlier claims concerning the alleged illegality of initiating an original investigation against one company and concerning the allegedly incorrect MET findings.
Disse påstande er behandlet og afvist i betragtning 6-10 og 36-44.
These claims have been described and rebutted in recitals (4) to (10) and (33) to (41).
Vedrørende en række detaljerede punkter, som Since Hardware fremførte (en række af disse blev fremført under en høring) kan følgende bemærkes:
Regarding some detailed points made by Since Hardware on the first point (a number of which were made during a hearing) the following can be observed:
Since Hardware påstod, at grundforordningens artikel 9, stk. 3, sidste punktum, ikke er en gennemførelsesbestemmelse til WTO’s antidumpingaftale og derfor ikke kan påvirkes af et WTO-panels konklusioner.
Since Hardware argued that the last sentence of Article 9(3) of the basic Regulation is not a provision implementing any provision of the WTO AD Agreement, and as such cannot be affected by any findings made by a WTO Panel.
Artikel 9, stk. 3, forpligter dog ikke institutionerne til at gennemføre en undersøgelse for at undersøge påstande om dumping over for virksomheder, for hvilke der under en oprindelige undersøgelse blev konstateret dumping under bagatelgrænsen eller ingen dumping.
However, Article 9(3) does not oblige the Institutions to use a review to investigate claims of dumping against companies for whom, during an original investigation, de minimis or no dumping was found.
Det hedder blot, at disse »kan« blive undersøgt igen i forbindelse med en eventuel genoptagelse af en undersøgelse i henhold til artikel 11.
It merely foresees that these ‘may’ be investigated in any subsequent review carried out pursuant to Article 11of the basic Regulation.
Det er dog klart, at rapporten fra WTO-appelorganet efter vedtagelsen af denne bestemmelse har slået fast, at dette ville være i strid med WTO’s antidumpingaftale.
It is clear, however, that after the adoption of that provision, the WTO Appellate Body report, has established that doing so would violate the WTO ADA.
Det er således muligt for og påhviler [11] institutionerne at gøre brug af den fleksibilitet, der ligger i »kan«, og ikke gennemføre en undersøgelse for at undersøge sådanne påstande.
Therefore, it is possible for and incumbent upon [11] the Institutions to use the flexibility that the word ‘may’ provides, and not to use a review to investigate such claims.
Den samme konklusion blev allerede nået i mindst én tidligere undersøgelse [12].
The same conclusion has already been drawn in at least one earlier investigation [12].
Since Hardware gentog sit påstand om, at en oprindelig undersøgelse over for én virksomhed ikke ville være muligt i henhold til grundforordningen.
Since Hardware repeated that in its view an original investigation against one company would not be possible under the basic Regulation.
Følgende skal bemærkes som tillæg til forklaringerne i betragtning 7 og 8.
On top of what has been said on this in recitals (5) and (8) above, the following can be noted.
Mange af de bestemmelser, der henvises til af Since Hardware, er ganske rigtigt formuleret på en måde, som er baseret på en normal situation, nemlig en oprindelig undersøgelse af et helt land.
It is true that many of the provisions quoted by Since Hardware are phrased in a manner which reflects a normal situation, namely an original investigation against a country as a whole.
Since Hardware har dog ikke været i stand til at pege på en bestemmelse, som forbyder en oprindelig undersøgelse af kun én virksomhed under de særlige omstændigheder i denne sag.
However, Since Hardware has not been able to point to any provision which prohibits an original investigation against only one company in the specific circumstances of this case.
Since Hardware påstod, at det i henhold til forordning (EF) nr. 1515/2001 alene er tilladt at bringe gældende antidumpingforanstaltninger i overensstemmelse med afgørelser fra WTO’s Tvistbilæggelsesorgan.
Since Hardware argued that Regulation (EC) No 1515/2001 permits the bringing into conformity with WTO dispute settlement rulings of existing anti-dumping measures, but nothing else.
Dette betyder for det første, at Since Hardware ikke gør indsigelser mod artikel 1 i forordning (EF) nr. 1515/2001, som formelt udelukker Since Hardware fra anvendelsesområdet for forordning (EF) nr. 452/2007, således at det står klart, at virksomhedens import på grundlag af nævnte forordning ikke pålægges told.
This, firstly, means, that Since Hardware does not object to Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1515/2001, which formally excludes Since Hardware from the scope of Regulation (EC) No 452/2007 in a manner which makes clear that on the basis of that Regulation no duty will apply to its imports.
Hvad angår Since Hardware påstand om, at forordning (EF) nr. 1515/2001 ikke giver mulighed for andet, skal det dog bemærkes, at nærværende forordning er baseret på grundforordningen.
Regarding Since Hardware’s allegation that Regulation (EC) No 1515/2001 permits nothing else, it should however be emphasised that this Regulation is based on the basic Regulation.
Forordningen er især baseret på den kendsgerning, jf. ovenfor, at intet i nævnte forordning forbyder gennemførelsen af en oprindelig undersøgelse af kun én virksomhed under de særlige omstændigheder ved denne sag.
In particular, it is based on the fact, as explained above, that nothing in that Regulation prohibits conducting an original investigation against only one company in the specific circumstances of this case.
Som følge af Since Hardware forslag er visse udtryk i fremlæggelsen af oplysninger, som kunne være misvisende, blevet fjernet.
As suggested by Since Hardware, certain language in the disclosure which may have been confusing on this point has been removed.
Since Hardware påstod, at virksomheden var udsat for diskrimination, da resultaterne i rapporten fra WTO-appelorganet efter virksomhedens opfattelse ligeledes finder anvendelse på virksomheder, der blev pålagt en nultold i en fornyet undersøgelse.
Since Hardware claimed to be discriminated against, since in its view the findings in the WTO Appellate Body report are equally applicable to companies that received a zero duty in a review investigation.
Det vigtigste i denne sammenhæng er, at rapporten fra WTO-appelorganet ganske enkelt ikke vedrører denne situation.
The most important point that can be made here is that the WTO Appellate Body report simply does not concern that situation.
Disse virksomheder befinder sig derfor i en anderledes situation.
Those companies are therefore in a different situation.
Since Hardware påstod, at Kommissionen gennemførte en de facto-undersøgelse af virksomhedens nultold.
Since Hardware argued that the Commission was conducting a de facto review of its zero duty.
For det første er den skadesanalyse, der er gennemført ovenfor, i modsætning til Since Hardwares påstand ikke begrænset til at bekræfte, at der fandt skade sted i den første undersøgelse.
Firstly, contrary to what Since Hardware alleges, the injury analysis conducted above is not limited to confirming that during the first investigation injury was found.
Den fokuserer derimod på de faktiske skadevoldende virkninger af Since Hardwares adfærd for EU-erhvervsgrenen efter denne undersøgelse, samtidig med at der tages hensyn til, at der i denne sag ikke kan gennemføres en normal skadesanalyse.
On the contrary, it focuses on the actual detrimental effects of Since Hardware’s behaviour after that investigation on the Union industry, whilst taking into account that a normal injury analysis is not possible in this case.