natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Den kendsgerning, at tolden udløber tidligere end de normale fem år, betyder for det andet ikke, at undersøgelsen er en de facto-undersøgelse.
Secondly, the fact that the duty will expire earlier than after the normal five years does not mean that the investigation is a de facto review.
I en række undersøgelser er der af forskellige årsager fastsat en varighed på under fem år.
In quite a number of investigations, for various reasons, durations of less than five years have been adopted.
I den foreliggende sag er det institutionernes opfattelse, at mens Since Hardware på den ene side ikke skal have fordel af at være påbegyndt dumping efter den første undersøgelse, skal virksomheden på den anden side ikke lide under uberettigede negative virkninger.
In this case, the Institutions consider that, whereas on the one hand Since Hardware should not derive any benefits from having started dumping after the first investigation, it should, on the other hand, not suffer any unjustified negative effects.
Eksempelvis indledes der ikke en udløbsundersøgelse af Rådets forordning (EF) nr. 452/2007, da det ville være diskriminerende at opretholde tolden på Since Hardware efter udløbet af nævnte forordning.
For instance, should, no expiry review be requested for Regulation (EC) No 452/2007, it would appear discriminatory to continue the duty on Since Hardware after the expiry of that Regulation.
Since Hardware påstod, at virksomhedens rettigheder overtrædes ved valget af en oprindelig undersøgelse, for hvis den var blevet undersøgt ved en fornyet undersøgelse, ville grundforordningens artikel 11, stk., 9, finde anvendelse ( der er en forpligtelse til ved en fornyet undersøgelse at anvende den samme metode som i den oprindelige undersøgelse).
Since Hardware argued that its rights are infringed by the choice for an original investigation, because if it had been investigated by means of a review, Article 11(9) of the basic Regulation would apply (there is an obligation, in a review, to use the same methodology as that used in the original investigation).
Since Hardware har dog ikke påpeget områder, hvor institutionerne skulle have anvendt en anden metode i denne undersøgelse end i den første undersøgelse. Selv om Since Hardware kunne påpege brugen af en eventuelt anderledes metode, ville det være et resultat af, at rapporten fra WTO-appelorganet fører til den konklusion, at det påhvilede institutionerne ikke at undersøge påstandene mod Since Hardware i en fornyet undersøgelse.
However, Since Hardware has not pointed to any issue which would indicate that in this investigation the Institutions used a methodology which was different to that used in the first investigation Secondly, even if Since Hardware could point to the use of a different methodology, this would be a result of the fact that the WTO Appellate Body report leads to the conclusion that it was incumbent on the Institutions to not investigate the claims against Since Hardware by means of a review.
Med forbehold af gyldigheden af disse påstande er det desuden klart, at en sådan handling kan føre til påstande om skade fra de pågældende virksomheder over for institutionerne.
Moreover, without prejudice to the validity of such claims, it is clear that such a course of action could lead to damage claims by the companies concerned against the Institutions.
Hvad angår konklusionerne om markedsøkonomisk behandling, påstod Since Hardware, at virksomheden var pålagt en urimelig byrde for at bevise, at den opfyldte kriterierne for markedsøkonomisk behandling for så vidt angår statens indgriben i priserne på den vigtigste råvare.
Regarding the MET findings, Since Hardware argued that it had an excessive burden to prove that it complied with the criteria for MET, in particular as far as State interference in the prices of its main raw materials were concerned.
Markedsøkonomisk behandling er dog en undtagelse for den generelle regel, og enhver afvigelse eller undtagelse fra den generelle regel skal fortolkes strengt.
However, MET is an exception to the general rule and any derogation from, or exception to, a general rule must be interpreted strictly.
Markedsøkonomisk behandling kan udelukkende indrømmes, hvis godtgøres, at den pågældende eksporterende procent arbejder på markedsøkonomiske vilkår.
MET can only be granted if it is shown that market economy conditions prevail for the exporting producer in question.
Bevisbyrden påhviler, jf. betragtning 40, den eksporterende producent, der ønsker at gøre brug af markedsøkonomisk status.
As already mentioned in recital (37), the burden of proof lies with the exporting producer wishing to avail itself of market economy status.
Anmodningen skal indeholde tilstrækkelige beviser for.
The claim must contain sufficient evidence.
Kommissionen er på ingen måde forpligtet til at bevise, at den eksporterende producent ikke opfylder kriterier for markedsøkonomisk behandling.
There is no obligation for the Commission to prove that the exporting producer does not satisfy the MET criteria.
Kommissionen skal vurdere, om de beviser, som de eksporterende producent indsender, er tilstrækkelige til at godtgøre, at kriterierne for markedsøkonomisk behandling er opfyldt.
The Commission has to assess whether the evidence supplied by the exporting producer is sufficient to show that the MET criteria are fulfilled.
Da Kommissionen konstaterede en række elementer, der pegede i retning af væsentlig statslig indgriben vedrørende omkostningerne til de vigtigste input, skal virksomheden følgelig bevise, at denne statslige indgriben ikke forefindes og/eller at den ikke påvirkede virksomhedens beslutninger (første kriterium i grundforordningens artikel 2, stk. 7, litra c)).
As the Commission established a number of elements pointing to significant State interference concerning the cost of major inputs, it is consequently for the company to demonstrate that this State interference does not exist and/or that it did not affect the company’s decisions (criterion 1 of Article 2(7)(c) of the basic Regulation).
Under alle omstændigheder forelagde Since Hardware, jf. betragtning 34 og 43, heller ingen beviser for, at den opfylder kriterium 2 i grundforordningens artikel 2, stk. 7, litra c), vedrørende regnskaberne, og påstod igen, at det var en urimelig byrde at bevise dette.
In any event, as set out in recitals (31) and (40), Since Hardware has also failed to show that it fulfils criterion 2 of Article 2(7)(c) of the basic Regulation concerning accounting for which it has claimed an excessive burden to prove.
I tillæg til ovenstående fremsatte Since Hardware to nye påstande i sine bemærkninger til fremlæggelse af de endelige undersøgelsesresultater.
Further to the above, Since Hardware made two new claims in its comments on the final disclosure document.
Først påstod Since Hardware, at den normale værdi skulle have været justering i henhold til grundforordningens artikel 2, stk. 10, litra k), idet priserne på råvarerne (stålprodukter) i Kina er lavere end på referencelandets marked.
First, Since Hardware claimed that the normal value should have been adjusted in accordance with Article 2(10)(k) of the basic Regulation because the raw materials (steel products) in the PRC are lower-priced than in the analogue country market.
Det skal bemærkes, at Since Hardware ikke blev indrømmet markedsøkonomisk behandling.
Indeed, it is recalled that Since Hardware was denied MET.
Den normale værdi fastlægges følgelig i henhold til grundforordningens artikel 2, stk. 7, litra a), på grundlag af prisen eller den beregnede værdi i et tredjeland med markedsøkonomi.
Consequently, the normal value is established in accordance with Article 2(7)(a) of the basic Regulation on the basis of the price or constructed value in a market economy third country.
Dette indebærer nødvendigvis, at priser og omkostningerne i Kina betragtes som upålidelige til etablering af den normale værdi og ikke kan anvendes til at fastlægge eller på anden måde justere denne.
This necessarily implies that prices and costs in the PRC are considered to be unreliable for the establishment of normal value and may not be used to determine or otherwise adjust the latter.
Det skal desuden bemærkes, at en justering i henhold til grundforordningens artikel 2, stk. 10, litra k), som påstået af Since Hardware ikke kan foretages, hvis det ikke godtgøres, at kunderne konsekvent betaler andre priser for den samme vare på hjemmemarkedet, i dette tilfælde referencelandets marked, på grund af en forskel i råvarepriserne.
It is further noted that an adjustment under Article 2(10)(k) of the basic Regulation as claimed by Since Hardware cannot be made if it is not shown that customers would consistently pay different prices for the like product on the domestic market, in this case in the analogue country market, because of a difference in raw material prices.
Since Hardware påviste ikke denne prisforskel.
Since Hardware has not demonstrated any such price difference.
Dernæst påstod Since Hardware, at Kommissionen ikke gennemførte en tilstrækkeligt grundig skadesanalyse i den nuværende undersøgelse.
Second, Since Hardware has claimed that the Commission did not carry out a sufficiently detailed injury analysis in the present investigation.
Virksomheden påstod desuden, at Kommissionen i henhold til grundforordningens artikel 3, stk. 3, skulle have undersøgt samtlige skadesindikatorer.
It also claimed that in line with Article 3(3) of the basic Regulation, the Commission should have investigated all injury indicators.
Det skal dog bemærkes, at Kommissionen konstaterede (jf. afsnit D), at dumpingimporten fra Since Hardware øgedes væsentligt i den betragtede periode, samtidig med at salgspriserne i vidt omfang underbød EU-erhvervsgrenens priser.
It should be noted however, that the Commission has found (see in particular part D) that dumped imports from Since Hardware substantially increased over the period considered while their sales prices were found to be largely undercutting those of the Union industry.
Denne konklusion er baseret på en objektiv gennemgang af positivt bevismateriale.
This finding is based on an objective examination of positive evidence.
Undersøgelsen opfylder således kravene i grundforordningens artikel 3.
It thus complies with Article 3 of the basic Regulation.
Det er ikke sandt, at Kommissionen ikke undersøgte samtlige faktorer i grundforordningens artikel 3, stk. 5.
It is true that not all of the factors set out in Article 3(5) of the basic Regulation have been examined.
Det skal dog erindres, at i en situation, hvor der ikke var konstateret dumping for Since Hardwares vedkommende, nemlig den første undersøgelsen, blev det ved gennemgangen af disse faktorer allerede konstateret, at dumpingimporten fra Kina forvoldte skade.
However, it should be recalled that in a situation where Since Hardware was not yet found to be dumping, namely during the first investigation, it was already found, by examining those factors, that the dumped imports from the PRC caused injury.
En ny undersøgelse af disse faktorer ville være nyttesløs, selv hvis det antages, at disse faktorer nu ville være blevet positive, hvilket (i hvert fald delvist) ville skyldes, at EU-erhvervsgrenen nu er beskyttet mod al [13] dumpingeksport fra Kina og Ukraine (undtagen fra Since Hardware).
Examining those factors once again would have been of no use, since even assuming that all those factors would now have become positive, that would be (at least in part) due to the fact that the Union industry is now protected against all [13] dumped exports from the PRC and Ukraine (except those from Since Hardware).
Der blev desuden ikke konstateret nogen faktorer, der kunne bryde årsagssammenhængen mellem dumpingimporten fra Since Hardware og de negative virkninger for EU-erhvervsgrenen.
Moreover, no factor has been identified that would break the causal link between the dumped imports from Since Hardware and their negative effects on the Union industry.
Endelig ville det være diskriminerende over for de eksporterende producenter, der er pålagt en told som følge af den første undersøgelse, hvis der ikke indføres foranstaltninger over for Since Hardware.
Finally, not imposing measures against Since Hardware would be discriminatory vis-à-vis the exporting producers subject to the measure imposed following the first original investigation.
Ud fra ovenstående konklusioner om dumping, deraf følgende bidrag til skade, årsagssammenhæng og Unionens interesser bør der indføres endelige foranstaltninger på importen af den pågældende vare fra Kina produceret af Since Hardware.
In view of the above conclusions reached with regard to dumping, resulting contribution to injury, causation and Union interest, definitive measures on imports of the product concerned from the PRC, produced by Since Hardware, should be imposed.
Det blev konstateret, jf. betragtning 75, at EU-erhvervsgrenen generelt led tab på sine priser i UP.
Therefore, it would not be appropriate to base the duty merely on the margin of undercutting.
Det fremgår af betragtning 63 i forordning (EF9 nr. 452/2007, at det i den første undersøgelse blev bevist, at dette var den fortjenstmargen, der med rimelighed kunne forventes i en situation uden skadevoldende dumping.
As mentioned in recital (63) of Regulation (EC) No 452/2007, it was demonstrated in the course of the first investigation that this was the profit level that could reasonably be expected in the absence of injurious dumping.
På dette grundlag blev der beregnet en ikke-skadevoldende pris for samme vare for EU-erhvervsgrenen.
On this basis, a non-injurious price was calculated for the like product of the Union industry.
Der blev i den forbindelse indhentet oplysninger fra EU-erhvervsgrenen med henblik på beregningen af det vejede gennemsnit af deres faktisk fortjenstmargen/tabsmargen i den nuværende UP.
For this purpose, information was collected from the Union industry to calculate the weighted average of their actual profit/loss margin during the current IP.
Den ikke-skadevoldende pris blev beregnet ved at trække EU-erhvervsgrenens således beregnede faktiske fortjenstmargen/tabsmargen fra deres salgspriser og ved at tilføje førnævnte målfortjenstmargen på 7 %.
The non-injurious price has been obtained by deducting the thus calculated actual profit/loss margin of the Union industry from their sales prices and adding the above mentioned target profit margin of 7 %.
Den nødvendige prisforhøjelse blev så fastsat på grundlag af en sammenligning af det vejede gennemsnit af importprisen som fastsat i forbindelse med beregningen af underbud og den gennemsnitlige ikke-skadevoldende pris på varer, som EU-erhvervsgrenen solgte på EU-markedet.
The necessary price increase was then determined on the basis of a comparison of the weighted average import price, as established for the undercutting calculation, with the average non-injurious price of products sold by the Union industry on the Union market.
Der blev således fastlagt en skadestærskel på 35,8 %, hvilket var under dumpingmargenen for Since Hardware.
An injury elimination level of 35,8 % was thus established, which was below the dumping margin found for Since Hardware.
Udelukkelse af Since Hardware fra de endelige antidumpingforanstaltninger, der indførtes ved Rådets forordning (EF) nr. 452/2007
Exclusion of Since Hardware from the definitive anti-dumping measure imposed by Regulation (EC) No 452/2007
I forbindelse med den fornyede undersøgelse i henhold til forordning (EF) nr. 1515/2001 og i lyset af rapporten fra WTO-appelorganet, som blev vedtaget af WTO’s Tvistbilæggelsesorgan, og især punkt 305 og 306, udelukkede gennemførelsesforordning (EU) nr. 1241/2010 Since Hardware fra de endelige antidumpingforanstaltninger, der indførtes ved forordning (EF) nr. 452/2007.
In the context of the review pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1515/2001 and in the light of the WTO Appellate Body report as adopted by the WTO Dispute Settlement Body, and in particular paragraphs 305 and 306 thereof, Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1241/2010 excluded Since Hardware from the definitive anti-dumping measure imposed by Regulation (EC) No 452/2007.
Der kan derfor nu indføres en ny foranstaltning vedrørende Since Hardware.
A new measure may now be imposed on Since Hardware.
Foranstaltningens form og niveau
Form and level of measure
I lyset af ovenstående og i overensstemmelse med grundforordningens artikel 9, stk. 4, bør der indføres en endelig antidumpingtold på import af den pågældende vare med oprindelse i Kina og produceret af Since Hardware på et niveau svarende til skadestærsklen.
In the light of the foregoing, and in accordance with Article 9(4) of the basic Regulation, it is considered that a definitive anti-dumping duty should be imposed on imports of the product concerned originating in the PRC and produced by Since Hardware at the level eliminating the injury.
På grundlag af ovenstående bør den endelige toldsats være 35,8 %.
On the basis of the above, the definitive duty rate for these imports is 35,8 %.
Forlængelsen af foranstaltningerne vil i henhold til grundforordningens artikel 11, stk. 2, normalt gælde for fem år, medmindre der er særlige grunde eller omstændigheder til at fastsætte en kortere periode.
In accordance with Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation, anti-dumping measures normally apply for five years, unless there are specific grounds or circumstances which call for a shorter period.
I det foreliggende tilfælde findes det hensigtsmæssigt at begrænse foranstaltningens varighed, således at den varer indtil udløbet af de gældende antidumpingforanstaltninger på importen af den pågældende vare med oprindelse i bl.a. Kina, som indførtes ved forordning (EF) nr. 452/2007.
In the current case, it is considered appropriate to limit the duration of the measure so that it lasts until the expiry of the anti-dumping measures applicable to imports of the product concerned originating, inter alia, in the PRC imposed by Regulation (EC) No 452/2007.
Således bliver der mulighed for samtidig at behandle en eventuel anmodning om en udløbsundersøgelse af de gældende foranstaltninger på al import med oprindelse i bl.a. Kina.
This will give the opportunity to consider at the same time any request for expiry review of the measures in force for all imports originating, inter alia, in the PRC.
De berørte virksomheder, navnlig Since Hardware og/eller EU-erhvervsgrenen, kan naturligvis inden den 27. april 2012 anmode om andre undersøgelser, f.eks. en interimsundersøgelse, af denne forordning, forudsat at alle betingelser herfor er opfyldt.
Of course, operators concerned, and in particular Since Hardware and/or the Union industry may, before 27 April 2012, request other reviews, in particular an interim review, of this Regulation provided that all requirements for doing so are complied with.
Alle anmodninger om anvendelse af denne individuelle toldsats for virksomheder (f.eks. efter ændring af den pågældende enheds navn eller oprettelse af nye produktions- eller salgsenheder) indgives omgående til Kommissionen [14] med alle relevante oplysninger, især om ændringer i virksomhedens aktiviteter i forbindelse med produktion, hjemmemarkeds- og eksportsalg i tilknytning til f.eks. den pågældende navneændring eller den pågældende ændring i produktions- og salgsenheder.
Any claim requesting the application of this individual company anti-dumping duty rate (e.g. following a change in the name of the entity or following the setting up of new production or sales entities) should be addressed to the Commission [14] forthwith with all relevant information, in particular any modification in the company’s activities linked to production, domestic and export sales associated with, for example, that name change or that change in the production and sales entities.
Denne forordning ændres i så fald tilsvarende —
If appropriate, this Regulation will then be amended accordingly,
Der indføres hermed en endelig antidumpingtold på importen af strygebrætter, også fritstående, også med suge- og/eller varme- og/eller blæsefunktion, herunder ærmebrætter, og væsentlige dele heraf, f.eks. ben, bræt og strygejernsholder, med oprindelse i Folkerepublikken Kina og produceret af Since Hardware (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd., normalt tariferet under KN-kode ex39249000, ex44219098, ex73239390, ex73239991, ex73239999, ex85167970 and ex85169000 (TARIC-koder 3924900010, 4421909810, 7323939010, 7323999110, 7323999910, 8516797010 og 8516900051).
A definitive anti-dumping duty is hereby imposed on imports of ironing boards, whether or not free-standing, with or without a steam soaking and/or heating top and/or blowing top, including sleeve boards, and essential parts thereof, i.e. the legs, the top and the iron rest originating in the People’s Republic of China and produced by Since Hardware (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd., falling within CN codes ex39249000, ex44219098, ex73239390, ex73239991, ex73239999, ex85167970 and ex85169000 (TARIC codes 3924900010, 4421909810, 7323939010, 7323999110, 7323999910, 8516797010 and 8516900051).
Den endelige antidumpingtold fastsættes til følgende af nettoprisen, frit Unionens grænse, ufortoldet, for varer fremstillet af følgende virksomhed:
The rate of the definitive anti-dumping duty applicable to the net, free-at-Union-frontier price, before duty, for products manufactured by the company specified below shall be as follows:
Medmindre forordningen revideres i henhold til artikel 11 i forordning (EF) nr. 1225/2009, gælder forordningen indtil den 27. april 2012.
Unless reviewed under Article 11 of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009, it shall remain in force until 27 April 2012.
WT/DS295/AB/R, 29. november 2005.
WT/DS295/AB/R, 29 November 2005.
»The State-Business Nexus in China’s Steel Industry — Chinese Market Distortions in Domestic and International Perspective« by Prof. Dr. Markus Taube & Dr. Christian Schmidkonz of THINK!DESK China Research & Consulting dated 25 February 2009; En undersøgelse udarbejdet af EU’s handelskammer i Kina med Roland Berger med fokus på overkapacitet som følge af bl.a. statslig indgriben, fra november 2009 (http://www.euccc.com.cn/view/static/?sid=6388); »Money for Metal: A detailed Examination of Chinese Government Subsidies to its Steel Industry« af Wiley Rein LLP, juli 2007, »China Government Subsidies Survey« af Anne Stevenson-Yang, februar 2007, »Shedding Light on Energy Subsidies in China: An Analysis of China’s Steel Industry from 2000-2007« af Usha C.V.
For instance ‘The State-Business Nexus in China’s Steel Industry — Chinese Market Distortions in Domestic and International Perspective’ by Prof. Dr. Markus Taube & Dr. Christian Schmidkonz of THINK!DESK China Research & Consulting dated 25 February 2009; the study prepared by the EU Chamber of Commerce in China with Roland Berger focusing on overcapacities which are the result inter alia of the state intervention dated November 2009 (http://www.euccc.com.cn/view/static/?sid=6388); ‘Money for Metal: A detailed Examination of Chinese Government Subsidies to its Steel Industry’ by Wiley Rein LLP, July 2007; ‘China Government Subsidies Survey’ by Anne Stevenson-Yang, February 2007; ‘Shedding Light on Energy Subsidies in China: An Analysis of China’s Steel Industry from 2000-2007’ by Usha C.V.
Haley, »China’s Specialty Steel Subsidies: Massive, Pervasive and Illegal« af Specialty Steel Industry of North America, »The China Syndrome: How Subsidies and Government Intervention Created the World’s Largest Steel Industry« af Wiley Rein & Fielding LLP, juli 2006.
Haley; ‘China’s Specialty Steel Subsidies: Massive, Pervasive and Illegal’ by the Specialty Steel Industry of North America; ‘The China Syndrome: How Subsidies and Government Intervention Created the World’s Largest Steel Industry’ by Wiley Rein & Fielding LLP, July 2006.
Kilde: Steel Business Briefing.
Source: Steel Business Briefing.