natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
This was done by establishing the proportion of profitable domestic sales to independent customers, of each exported product type: (a) for those product types where more than 80 % by volume of sales on the domestic market were not below unit costs, and where the weighted average sales price was equal to or higher than the unit cost, normal value, by product type, was calculated as the weighted average of all domestic sales prices of the type in question; (b) for those product types where at least 10 %, but no more than 80 %, by volume of sales on the domestic market were not below unit costs, normal value, by product type, was calculated as the weighted average of domestic sales prices which were found to be equal to or above unit costs only, of the type in question; (c) for those product types where less than 10 %, by volume of sales, on the domestic market, were not below unit costs, it was considered that the product type concerned was not sold in the ordinary course of trade.
Selleks määrati iga eksporditava tooteliigi puhul kindlaks, kui suure osa moodustas tulutoov omamaine müük sõltumatutele klientidele: a) nende tooteliikide puhul, mille omamaisest müügist toimus üle 80 % hinnaga, mis ei olnud ühikuhinnast madalam, ja mille keskmine kaalutud müügihind oli vähemalt võrdne tootmiskuluga või sellest kõrgem, arvutati tooteliigi normaalväärtus kõnealuse tooteliigi kogu omamaise müügi hindade kaalutud keskmisena; b) nende tooteliikide puhul, mille omamaise müügi mahust toimus 10–80 % hinnaga, mis ei olnud ühikuhinnast madalam, arvutati tooteliigi normaalväärtus kõnealuse tooteliigi ühikuhinnaga võrdsete või seda ületavate omamaise müügi hindade kaalutud keskmisena; c) nende tooteliikide puhul, mille omamaisest müügist toimus alla 10 % hinnaga, mis ei olnud ühikuhinnast madalam, ei loetud vaatlusaluse tooteliigi müüki toimunuks tavakaubanduse raames.
For sales of product types not made in the ordinary course of trade, as well as for product types which were not sold in representative quantities on the domestic market, normal value had to be constructed.
Nende tooteliikide müügi puhul, mida ei loetud toimunuks tavakaubanduse raames, ning samuti nende tooteliikide puhul, mida ei müüdud omamaisel turul tüüpilistes kogustes, tuli normaalväärtus konstrueerida.
To construct normal value pursuant to Article 2(3) of the basic Regulation, the selling, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses incurred and the weighted average profit realised by each of the co-operating exporting producers concerned on its domestic sales of the like product, in the ordinary course of trade, during the investigation period, was added to their own average cost of production during the investigation period.
Normaalväärtuse konstrueerimiseks algmääruse artikli 2 lõike 3 kohaselt liideti kantud müügi-, üld- ja halduskulud ning kaalutud keskmine kasum, mida asjaomased koostööd tegevad eksportivad tootjad said samasuguse toote tavakaubanduse raames toimuvalt omamaiselt müügilt, nende uurimisperioodi aegsele keskmisele tootmiskulule.
Where necessary, the costs of production and SG&A expenses reported were adjusted, before being used in the ordinary course of trade test and in constructing normal values.
Vajaduse korral korrigeeriti tootmiskulusid ning müügi-, üld- ja halduskulusid enne nende kasutamist tavapärase kaubandustegevuse hindamisel ja normaalväärtuse arvutamisel.
Most sales of each of the exporting producers concerned were made to related importers in the Community.
Kõigi asjaomaste eksportivate tootjate puhul toimus suurem osa ühendusse suunatud müügist nendega seotud importijatele.
For those sales, the export price was established on the basis of the resale price to independent customers in accordance with Article 2(9) of the basic Regulation.
Selle müügi puhul määrati ekspordihind vastavalt algmääruse artikli 2 lõikele 9 sõltumatutele klientidele suunatud edasimüügi hindade põhjal.
Adjustments were made to the resale price to the first independent buyer in the Community for all costs including duties and taxes, incurred between importation and resale, in order to establish a reliable export price at Community frontier level.
Esimeselt sõltumatult ostjalt küsitud edasimüügihinda korrigeeriti kõigi importimise ja edasimüügi vahel kantud kuludega (sh tolli- ja muud maksud), et määrata kindlaks usaldusväärne ekspordihind ühenduse piiril.
These costs were freight, handling, loading, insurance and ancillary expenses, as well as SG&A expenses incurred by the related importers.
Need kulud hõlmasid veo-, käitlemis-, laadimis-, kindlustus- ja lisakulusid ning samuti seotud importijate müügi-, üld- ja halduskulusid.
The resale price was further adjusted for a reasonable profit margin which was found in the investigation to have been attained by an independent importer of the product concerned.
Edasimüügihinda korrigeeriti ka kasumimarginaaliga, mida uurimise käigus saadud andmete alusel sai vaatlusaluse toote sõltumatu importija.
The remaining exports of the product concerned by each of the exporting producers were made directly to independent customers in the Community.
Ülejäänud osa eksportivate tootjate ekspordist müüdi otse ühenduse sõltumatutele tarbijatele.
For those sales, the export price was established in accordance with Article 2(8) of the basic Regulation, on the basis of prices actually paid or payable.
Selle müügi puhule määrati ekspordihind kindlaks vastavalt algmääruse artikli 2 lõikele 8 tegelikult makstud või makstavate hindade põhjal.
In order to ensure a fair comparison, account was taken, in accordance with Article 2(10) of the basic Regulation, of differences in factors which affect price comparability.
Õiglase võrdluse tagamiseks võeti vastavalt algmääruse artikli 2 lõikele 10 arvesse hindade võrreldavust mõjutavate tegurite erinevusi.
Allowances for differences in packing costs, transport costs, ocean freight and insurance costs, handling costs, loading and ancillary costs, duty drawback, level of trade, after-sales costs, commissions, discounts, rebates and advertising costs were granted where applicable and justified, duly adjusted where necessary.
Vajaduse korral võeti arvesse erinevusi pakendamis-, veo-, mereveo- ja kindlustuskuludes, käitlemis-, laadimis- ja lisakuludes, tollimaksu tagastamises, kaubandustasandis, müügijärgsetes kuludes, vahendustasudes, allahindlustes ja hinnavähendites ning reklaamikuludes, mida nõuetekohaselt kohandati.
All three exporting producers submitted a comparison table between domestically sold models and partly comparable models sold for export to the Community, claiming, pursuant to Article 2(10)(a), an adjustment for the remaining differences in physical characteristics.
Kõik kolm eksportivat tootjat esitasid tabeli, milles on võrreldud siseturul müüdavate mudelite ja ühendusse ekspordiks müüdavate osaliselt võrreldavate mudelite andmeid, nõudes algmääruse artikli 2 lõike 10 punkti a kohaselt kohandamist füüsiliste omaduste erinevuste alusel.
For two companies, the claimed allowances per model had to be adjusted in order to properly reflect the market value of the differences in physical characteristics.
Kahe äriühingu puhul tuli kohandamise nõutud ulatust korrigeerida, et see peegeldaks objektiivselt füüsiliste erinevuste turuväärtust.
On that basis, allowances for differences in physical characteristics were granted to all three exporting producers.
Sel alusel kasutati kohandamist seoses füüsiliste omadustega kõigi kolme eksportiva tootja puhul.
One company claimed a duty drawback adjustment pursuant to Article 2(10)(b) of the basic Regulation, basing its claim solely on the duties paid on raw materials allegedly used for the production of the product concerned.
Üks äriühing taotles vastavalt algmääruse artikli 2 lõike 10 punktile b kohandamist seoses tollimaksu tagastamisega, põhjendades oma taotlust ainult väidetavalt vaatlusaluse toote tootmiseks kasutatud toormaterjali eest tasutud tollimaksuga.
This company, however, did not substantiate the drawback of these duties upon exportation of the product concerned and, therefore, no refund of import duties could be established within the meaning of Article 2(10)(b) of the basic Regulation.
See äriühing ei seostanud siiski tollimaksude tagastamist vaatlusaluse toote ekspordiga ning seepärast ei saa imporditollimaksude tagastamist algmääruse artikli 2 lõike 10 punkti b tähenduses tõestada.
Accordingly, this claim was rejected.
Seetõttu lükati see taotlus tagasi.
Two exporting producers made certain domestic sales via related retailers.
Kaks eksportivat tootjat müüsid teatava hulga oma toodangust siseturul seotud jaemüüjate vahendusel.
They requested, pursuant to Article 2(10)(d)(i), exclusion of these retailers’ sales from the normal value computation, as they would be at a level of trade nonexistent on the Community market.
Nad taotlesid vastavalt algmääruse artikli 2 lõike 10 punkti d alapunktile i, et nende jaemüüjate müüki normaalväärtuse arvutamisel ei arvestataks, kuna see toimub ühenduse turul puuduval kaubandustasandil.
The investigation showed that these related retailers sold the like product predominantly or exclusively to consumers, a level of trade which did not exist on the Community market.
Uurimise käigus selgus, et kõnealused seotud jaemüüjad müüsid samasugust toodet peamiselt või ainult tarbijatele; sellisel kaubandustasandil ühenduse turul müüki ei toimunud.
It was also established that the prices charged to consumers were consistently at a different level as compared to prices charged to other categories of customers.
Samuti selgus, et tarbijatelt küsitud hinnad erinesid pidevalt neist hindadest, mida küsiti teistelt kliendikategooriatelt.
In view of the above findings and as the remaining domestic sales of both companies were found to be sufficiently representative, it was decided to exclude these sales to consumers from the normal value computation.
Eespool nimetatut silmas pidades ja arvestades, et mõlema äriühingu muu omamaine müük oli piisavalt tüüpiline, otsustati kõnealust müüki tarbijatele normaalväärtuse arvutamisel mitte arvesse võtta.
One of the exporting producers had used a related company for the ocean transport of the product concerned.
Üks eksportiv tootja kasutas seotud äriühingut vaatlusaluse toote mereveoks.
The freight costs charged by this related party were found to be significantly below the market level.
Selle seotud äriühingu veotasu oli turuhindadest tunduvalt madalam.
Therefore, these costs were replaced with the costs of an unrelated freight forwarder of which ocean transport costs for shipping the product concerned to the Community could be obtained during the course of the investigation.
Seepärast asendati need kulud uurimise käigus kindlaks tehtud veotasuga, mida küsis vaatlusaluse toote mereveo eest sõltumatu ekspediitor.
All three exporting producers claimed, pursuant to Article 2(10)(g), an adjustment for credit costs allegedly incurred on their domestic sales.
Kõik kolm eksportivat tootjat taotlesid vastavalt artikli 2 lõike 10 punktile g kohandamist seoses väidetavalt siseturu müügiga seotud krediidikuludega.
These claims were based on the actual credit period taken by customers under the ‘open account’ payment system used on the Korean domestic market.
Taotlustes lähtuti klientide kasutatavast tegelikust krediidiperioodist Korea siseturul kasutatava avatud kontol põhineva maksesüsteemi puhul.
It was found that under such a system, generally, the exporting producers did not actually grant specific credit periods and the credit periods taken could not be accurately determined, as receipts could not be linked to specific invoices.
Leiti, et üldiselt ei määra eksportivad tootjad sellise süsteemi puhul konkreetseid krediidiperioode ja kasutatud krediidiperioode ei ole võimalik täpselt kindlaks teha, kuna kviitungeid ei saa seostada kindlate arvetega.
The exporting producers’ claims, therefore, had to be rejected.
Seetõttu tuli eksportivate tootjate taotlused tagasi lükata.
For all three exporting producers a clear pattern of export prices which significantly differed between regions was established.
Kõigi kolme eksportiva tootja puhul ilmnesid ekspordihindade suundumustes märkimisväärsed piirkondlikud erinevused.
It was indeed found that significant volumes at low prices were concentrated on the UK and French markets.
Leiti, et suures mahus madalahinnalist kaupa müüdi Suurbritannia ja Prantsusmaa turul.
These two markets were responsible for more than 50 % of the imports of the product concerned in the Community during the IP.
Nendel turgudel müüdi uurimisperioodi jooksul üle 50 % vaatlusaluse toote ühendusse suunatud impordist.
The dumping found on these markets would have been inappropriately disguised by the use of a comparison of a weighted average normal value with a weighted average of export prices to all Member States of the European Union, as the prices at dumped levels found for all three exporting producers on the UK and French markets were wholly or partly offset by higher and largely non-dumped prices on other Community markets.
Nendel turgudel kindlaks tehtud dumping oleks jäänud märkamata, kui oleks võrreldud kaalutud keskmist normaalväärtust ja Euroopa Liidu kõigi liikmesriikide kaalutud keskmist ekspordihinda, kuna kõigi kolme eksportiva tootja dumpinguhindu Suurbritannia ja Prantsusmaa turgudel tasakaalustasid täielikult või osaliselt dumpinguhindadest kõrgemad hinnad teistel ühenduse turgudel.
Such methodology would not, therefore, reflect the full degree of dumping being practised.
Seetõttu ei kajastaks selline meetod dumpingutegevust täies ulatuses.
It was accordingly found appropriate to reflect in the calculation of the dumping the significant differences in the pattern of export prices among different regions.
Seega peeti vajalikuks võtta dumpingumäära arvutamisel arvesse ekspordihindade erinevust eri piirkondades.
In this case, the transaction-to-transaction comparison was not found to be an appropriate alternative comparison method because the process of selecting individual transactions in order to make such a comparison was considered too impractical and arbitrary, with tens of thousands of export and domestic transactions.
Leiti, et võrdlemine tehingute kaupa ei ole asjakohane alternatiivne võrdlusmeetod; kuna ekspordi- ja siseturutehinguid on kümneid tuhandeid, peeti võrreldavate tehingute valimise protsessi liiga ebapraktiliseks ja suvaliseks.
Consequently, according to Article 2(11) of the basic Regulation, for each co-operating exporting producer, the weighted average normal value was compared to the prices of all individual export transactions to the Community.
Vastavalt algmääruse artikli 2 lõikele 11 võrreldi iga koostööd tegeva eksportiva tootja puhul kaalutud keskmist normaalväärtust kõigi ühendusse suunatud eksporditehingute hinnaga.
On this basis, the provisional dumping margins expressed as a percentage of the cif Community frontier price, duty unpaid, are:
Selle põhjal on leitud järgmised esialgsed dumpingumarginaalid (väljendatud protsendimäärana CIF-hinnast ühenduse piiril tollimakse maha arvamata):
Provisional dumping margin
Esialgne dumpingumarginaal
Since the level of cooperation was high (100 % of the exports of the product concerned from Korea to the Community), the residual provisional dumping margin was set at the level of the highest dumping margin established for a cooperating company, i.e. at the level established for LG Electronics Corporation, namely 14,3 %.
Kuna koostöö osatähtsus oli suur (100 % vaatlusaluse toote ekspordist Koreast ühendusse), määrati esialgseks dumpingu jääkmarginaaliks koostööd tegevate äriühingute puhul kindlaks tehtud kõrgeim dumpingumarginaal: LG Electronics Corporation’i puhul tuvastatud 14,3 %.
Within the Community, the like product is only manufactured by the complainant.
Ühenduses toodab samasugust toodet ainult kaebuse esitaja.
The complainant properly co-operated in the investigation.
Kaebuse esitaja tegi uurimisel täielikult koostööd.
Given that the complainant is the sole producer of the like product in the Community, its production represented, during the IP, 100 % of the Community production of the like product.
Kuna kaebuse esitaja on samasuguse toote ainus tootja ühenduses, moodustas tema toodang ühenduse toodangust uurimisperioodil 100 %.
The complainant therefore constitutes both the Community production within the meaning of Article 4(1) of the basic Regulation and the Community industry within the meaning of Article 4(1) and Article 5(4) of the basic Regulation.
Seetõttu moodustab kaebuse esitaja nii ühenduse tootmise algmääruse artikli 4 lõike 1 tähenduses kui ka ühenduse tootmisharu algmääruse artikli 4 lõike 1 ja artikli 5 lõike 4 tähenduses.
The complainant will also be referred to as the ‘Community industry’.
Edaspidi nimetatakse kaebuse esitajat ka ühenduse tootmisharuks.
During the start-up phase (2002), the Community industry had to resort to imports of the like product procured from its mother company in the USA.
Tootmise käivitamise etapil (2002) tuli ühenduse tootmisharul samasugust toodet importida oma emaettevõttest USAst.
The volumes procured from this source declined sharply from 2003 onwards as the production of the newly built plant gathered pace (see recitals (80) and (81) below).
Sellest allikast hangitud toodete maht vähenes järsult alates aastast 2003, kui uue tehase toodang jõudsalt suurenes (vt põhjendused 80 ja 81).
As for the assessment of the situation of the Community industry (see from recital (48) below), the analysis concerns only the Community industry’s own production and not its purchases from its mother company.
Ühenduse tootmisharu olukorra analüüs (vt põhjendus 48) põhineb ainult ühenduse tootmisharu enda toodangul ja selles pole arvesse võetud oste emaettevõttelt.
Community consumption was established on the basis of the sales volumes of the Community industry’s own production on the Community market, the import volumes data obtained from the three Korean co-operating exporting producers on the Community market, and the import volumes on the Community market from the USA, as obtained from the most widely used database in this particular business.
Ühenduse tarbimine määrati kindlaks ühenduse tootmisharu müügimahtude põhjal ühenduse turul, kolme Korea koostööd tegeva eksportiva tootja ühenduse turule suunatud impordimahtude põhjal ja ühenduse turul müüdud USA impordi põhjal; andmed saadi sellel tegevusalal kõige laialdasemalt kasutatavast andmebaasist.
The like product was not imported into the Community from any other country in the world during the period considered.
Vaatlusaluse perioodi jooksul ei imporditud samasugust toodet ühendusse ühestki muust riigist.
Given that the Community industry comprises only one producer, and given that the Community market for the product concerned and the like product is supplied by only three origins (the Community industry, the Korean producers and the USA), data relating to the market shares of the Community industry and of the USA are presented in an indexed format in order to preserve the confidentiality of the data submitted in confidence by the Community industry, pursuant to Article 19 of the basic Regulation.
Arvestades, et ühenduse tootmisharu koosneb ainult ühest tootjast ning et vaatlusalust toodet ja samasugust toodet tuuakse ühenduse turule ainult kolmest allikast (ühenduse tootmisharu, Korea tootjad ja USA), esitatakse andmed ühenduse tootmisharu ja USA turuosade kohta indekseeritud kujul, et säilitada ühenduse tootmisharu esitatud andmete konfidentsiaalsus kooskõlas algmääruse artikliga 19.
Between 2002 and the IP, the Community market for the product concerned and the like product has grown more than twofold.
aasta ja uurimisperioodi vahel on ühenduse vaatlusaluse toote ja samasuguse toote turg kasvanud enam kui kaks korda.
Community consumption was around 213000 pieces in 2002, and around 456000 in the IP.
aastal müüdi ühenduses 213000 külmikut, uurimisperioodil (UP) umbes 456000.
Specifically, it increased by 51 % in 2003, rose further by 54 percentage points in 2004, and by 10 percentage points in the IP.
aastal suurenes tarbimine 51 % võrra, 2004. aastal 54 protsendipunkti ja uurimisperioodil veel 10 protsendipunkti.
Total EC consumption (pieces)
EÜ kogutarbimine (tk)
The volume of imports of the product concerned from the Republic of Korea into the Community rose massively and steadily between 2002 and the IP.
Ajavahemikul 2002. aastast kuni uurimisperioodini suurenes vaatlusaluse toote import Korea Vabariigist ühendusse jõudsalt ja pidevalt.
It rose by 157 % between 2002 and the IP.
Kokku kasvas see 2002. aasta ja uurimisperioodi vahel 157 protsendi võrra.
In detail, imports from the country concerned increased by 66 % between 2002 and 2003, by a further 77 percentage points in 2004 and by a further 14 percentage points in the IP.
Import asjaomasest riigist suurenes ajavahemikul 2002–2003 66 % võrra, 2004. aastal 77 protsendipunkti ja uurimisperioodil veel 14 protsendipunkti.
Volume of imports from the Republic of Korea (pieces)
Korea Vabariigi impordi maht (tk)
Market share of imports from the Republic of Korea
Korea Vabariigi impordi turuosa
Prices of imports from the Republic of Korea (EUR/piece)
Korea Vabariigi impordi hinnad (eurot/tk)
The market share held by exporters in the country concerned increased by around 13 percentage points during the period considered to reach a level of almost 80 % during the IP.
Asjaomase riigi eksportijate turuosa kasvas vaatlusalusel perioodil umbes 13 protsendipunkti ning jõudis uurimisperioodi jooksul peaaegu 80 protsendini.
Korean exporters gained almost 7 percentage points in 2003, and again almost 6 percentage points in 2004.
Korea eksportijate turuosa suurenes 2003. aastal peaaegu 7 protsendipunkti ja 2004. aastal veel peaaegu 6 protsendipunkti.
The Community market is therefore characterised by an overwhelming dominance of the Korean producers.
Seetõttu domineerivad ühenduse turul Korea tootjad.
Price evolution
Hindade muutumine
Between 2002 and the IP, the average price of imports of the product concerned originating in the Republic of Korea declined by 11 %, although there has been a constant improvement in the functionalities of the models offered for sale, year after year.
aasta ja uurimisperioodi vahel langes Korea Vabariigi vaatlusaluse toote import 11 % võrra, ehkki müügiks pakutavaid mudeleid on aasta-aastalt täiustatud.
Specifically, the drop in the price was concentrated in 2003 over 2002.
Eriti järsk hinnalangus leidis aset 2003. aastal (võrreldes 2002. aastaga).
After 2003, average prices have remained flat (see table above).
aastast alates on keskmised hinnad olnud stabiilsed (vt tabel eespool).
A comparison for comparable models of the product concerned and like product was made between the exporting producers’ and the Community industry's average selling prices in the Community.
Võrreldi vaatlusaluse toote ja samasuguse toote võrreldavate mudelite eksportivate tootjate ja ühenduse tootmisharu keskmisi müügihindu ühenduses.
To this end, Community industry’s ex-works prices to unrelated customers, net of all rebates and taxes have been compared with the cif Community frontier prices of exporting producers of the Republic of Korea, duly adjusted for unloading and customs clearance costs.
Selleks võrreldi ühenduse tootmisharu mahahindlusteta ja maksudeta tehasehindu müügil sõltumatutele tarbijatele Korea Vabariigi eksportivate tootjate CIF-hindadega ühenduse piiril, mida oli nõuetekohaselt korrigeeritud, et võtta arvesse mahalaadimis- ja tollivormistuskulusid.
The comparison showed that during the IP the product concerned originating in the Republic of Korea sold in the Community undercut the Community industry's prices by between 34 % and 42 %, depending on the exporter concerned.
Võrdlus näitas, et uurimisperioodil olid Korea Vabariigist pärit vaatlusaluse toote müügihinnad ühenduses 34 % kuni 42 % võrra madalamad kui ühenduse tootmisharu müügihinnad.
Pursuant to Article 3(5) of the basic Regulation, the Commission examined all relevant economic factors and indices having a bearing on the state of the Community industry.
Vastavalt algmääruse artikli 3 lõikele 5 uuris komisjon kõiki asjaomaseid majandustegureid ja -näitajaid, mis avaldavad mõju ühenduse tootmisharu olukorrale.