natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Firstly, the Union industry has not been completely ousted from the market for larger, uniform batches of product, notwithstanding the fact that the pressure of low-priced Chinese imports is particularly strong in that sector.
Esiteks ei olnud liidu tootmisharu suurte ja ühetaoliste partiide sektorist täiesti välja tõrjutud hoolimata sellest, et Hiina madala hinnaga impordi surve on tugev just selles turusektoris.
Secondly, the Union industry was able to maintain its presence on the whole market by means of a compression of its sales prices and the production of a costlier product-mix, which led to falling profitability as mentioned in recital 100 of the provisional Regulation.
Teiseks suutis liidu tootmisharu kõigis turusektorites püsima jääda tänu müügihindade alandamisele ja kulukama tootevaliku pakkumisele, mis viis aga alla tema kasumlikkuse, nagu on selgitatud ajutise määruse põhjenduses 100.
Therefore, the fact that the Union industry did not lose a larger portion of the market is explained by the choice to keep a presence on the market despite price pressure from China.
Seega ei kaotanud liidu tootmisharu suuremat turuosa seetõttu, et tehti valik jääda turule püsima hoolimata Hiina impordi hinnasurvest.
Profitability, cash flow, return on investments and wages
Kasumlikkus, rahavood, investeeringutasuvus ja palgad
One party held that there are large differences in profitability between large and small companies.
Üks isik väitis, et suurte ja väikeste ettevõtete kasumlikkus erineb märgatavalt.
For this reason it was claimed that the average profit had to be considered as unrepresentative as the sample only contained data from one large company.
Seetõttu väitis ta, et keskmist kasumit ei saa pidada representatiivseks, kuna valim sisaldas vaid ühelt suurettevõttelt saadud andmeid.
Another party claimed that the large Union producers are in good financial condition.
Üks teine isik väitis, et suurte liidu tootjate finantsolukord on hea.
The same party argued that since there were no losses even when adding the small companies in the average profit margin of the Union industry as shown in recital 101 and Table 12 of the provisional Regulation, no overall injury could be demonstrated.
Sama isik märkis, et kuna isegi väikeste ettevõtete lisamisel liidu keskmisse kasumimarginaali ei ilmnenud kahjumit, nagu nähtub ajutise määruse põhjendusest 101 ja tabelist 12, ei olnud võimalik tõendada kahju olemasolu.
It should be noted that in order to ensure the consistency of the findings with the representativeness of the sampling, all the injury indicators (including profit) have been weighted against the share of each segment in the total Union production.
Olgu märgitud, et uurimistulemuste ja valimi representatiivsuse kooskõla tagamiseks on kõigi kahjunäitajate (sh kasumi) puhul arvesse võetud iga ettevõttekategooria osakaalu liidu kogutoodangus.
On the other hand, the representativeness of the large company of the situation of the larger segment is confirmed.
Teisalt leidis tõestust kõnealuse suurettevõtte representatiivsus suuremate ettevõtete kategoorias.
Therefore, the overall indicators as obtained from the analysis of the sampled companies are representative of the situation of the whole Union industry and the abovementioned claim had to be rejected.
Sellepärast tuleb valimisse kuuluvate ettevõtete analüüsimisel saadud üldnäitajaid pidada liidu tootmisharu olukorra kajastamisel representatiivseks ja eelnev väide lükatakse tagasi.
In relation to the claim that the large companies suffered no injury, it should be noted that in accordance with Article 4(1) of the basic Regulation the analysis should be made in relation to the Union industry as a whole and not to certain groups or types of companies.
Vastuseks väitele, nagu ei oleks suured ettevõtted kahju kandnud, tuleb märkida, et kooskõlas algmääruse artikli 4 lõikega 1 tuleb analüüsida liidu tootmisharu tervikuna, mitte teatavaid ettevõtterühmi või -liike.
As mentioned already in recital 130, the fact that no losses are made in the IP does not per se mean that no injury occurred.
Nagu mainitud põhjenduses 130, ei tuvastatud uurimisperioodil küll kahjumit, kuid see iseenesest ei tähenda, et ettevõtted ei kandnud kahju.
One interested party challenged the conclusion that the cost of production of the Union industry had risen by 14 % as a consequence of the increase in stocks and change in product mix.
Üks huvitatud isik vaidlustas järelduse, mille kohaselt kasvasid varude suurenemise ja tootevaliku muutuste tõttu liidu tootmisharu tootmiskulud 14 %.
According to this party, this conclusion would not hold true as stock levels as well as product mix are not part of the cost of production.
Selle isiku arvates on kõnealune järeldus vale, sest varude tase ja tootevalik ei sisaldu tootmiskuludes.
This claim has to be rejected since high stock levels represent a considerable financial cost, which is included in the analysis of the cost of production.
See väide lükati tagasi, kuna suured varud toovad kaasa olulised finantskulud, mida arvestatakse tootmiskulude analüüsis.
On the other hand, the repeated change in product mix entails additional production costs as the producer has to frequently revise the production process: this operation can be costly since it causes idle times and sub-optimal utilisation of the machineries.
Teisest küljest toob tootevaliku pidev muutmine kaasa täiendavad tootmiskulud, kuna tootja peab tootmisprotsessi sageli kohandama; see võib osutuda kulukaks, põhjustades tootmisliinide ebaoptimaalse kasutuse ja tööpausid.
One interested party questioned the conclusion in recital 107 of the provisional Regulation that the decrease in consumption had a negative effect on the Union industry.
Üks huvitatud isik seadis kahtluse alla ajutise määruse põhjenduses 107 esitatud järelduse, mille kohaselt kahjustas tarbimise vähenemine liidu tootmisharu.
According to this party, there could be no injury as a consequence of the decrease in consumption as the overall market share remained the same.
Selle isiku sõnul ei olnud tarbimise vähenemisel kahjustavat mõju, kuna üldine turuosa jäi samaks.
As for the comment on the stability of the Union producers’ market share despite falling consumption, it should be noted that market share is not the only relevant indicator of injury.
Kuigi liidu tootjate turuosa jäi ka kahaneva tarbimise kontekstis stabiilseks, ei ole turuosa ainus asjakohane kahjunäitaja.
The Union producers managed to keep their share in the Union market only to the detriment of profitability, which fell during the period under consideration.
Liidu tootjatel õnnestus säilitada oma turuosa kasumlikkuse arvel, mis vaatlusalusel perioodil langes.
It cannot therefore be concluded that the stability of the Union producers’ market share excludes the presence of injury.
Sellepärast ei saa teha järeldust, nagu välistaks liidu tootjate turuosa stabiilsus igasuguse kahju olemasolu.
Considering the above, the conclusions on injury as set out in recitals 107 to 111 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Eelnevat arvestades kinnitatakse ajutise määruse põhjendustes 107–111 esitatud järeldused kahju kohta.
The Commission received comments on the provisional findings concerning causation.
Komisjonile laekus põhjuslikku seost käsitlevate esialgsete järelduste kohta mitmeid märkusi.
Therefore, the conclusions as set out in recitals 135 and 136 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Seega kinnitatakse ajutise määruse põhjendustes 135 ja 136 esitatud järeldused põhjusliku seose kohta.
In accordance with Article 3(6) and (7) of the basic Regulation, at provisional stage it was examined whether the dumped imports of the product concerned originating in China had caused material injury to the Union industry.
Kooskõlas algmääruse artikli 3 lõigetega 6 ja 7 uuriti esialgu, kas Hiinast pärit vaatlusaluse toote dumpinguhinnaga import tekitas liidu tootmisharule kahju sellisel määral, et seda on võimalik pidada oluliseks.
Some parties claimed that the decline in the Union industry’s production and sales was a result of decreasing consumption.
Mõni isik väitis, et liidu tootmisharu toodangu ja müügi kahanemine oli väheneva tarbimise tagajärg.
It was also held that the effects of Chinese imports must have been limited given that the Chinese market share only increased by 1,6 % out of which no more than 1 % could have related to the Union industry’s market share.
Samuti väideti, et Hiinast pärit impordi mõju oli piiratud, sest Hiina turuosa suurenes vaid 1,6 %, millest umbes 1 % võis mõjutada liidu turuosa.
In this context it is recalled that the investigation revealed a coincidence in time between the increased market share of the Chinese imports and the decrease of the Union industry’s profits and an increase of stock levels.
Uurimise käigus tuvastati tõepoolest ajaline seos Hiinast pärit impordi turuosa suurenemise ning liidu tootmisharu kasumi kahanemise / varude suurenemise vahel.
Furthermore, it is not only an increased market share that has put pressure on the Union industry but even more so the pricing behaviour and the high undercutting levels of the Chinese exporting producers.
Liidu tootmisharule ei avaldanud survet mitte niivõrd Hiina eksportivate tootjate turuosa suurenemine kui nende hinnapoliitika ja agressiivne hindade allalöömine.
As recalled in recital 113, the investigation revealed significant levels of price undercutting.
Nagu mainitud põhjenduses 113, näitas uurimine märkimisväärset hindade allalöömist.
It also showed that the Union industry and importers to a large extent were selling to the same customers which meant that the Union industry was in direct competition with the dumped imports for orders.
Samuti ilmnes, et liidu tootmisharu ja importijad müüvad valdavalt samadele klientidele – seega konkureerib liidu tootmisharu tellimuste pärast otseselt dumpinguhinnaga importijatega.
Overall this shows that it was the price pressure and not only the volumes of imports that caused the fall of the Union industry profitability figures and the deterioration of most injury indicators.
Kokkuvõttes näitab see, et liidu tootmisharu kasumlikkuse näitajate languse ja enamiku kahjunäitajate halvenemise tingis ka hinnasurve, mitte ainult impordimaht.
Lack of competition between tiles produced in the Union and the dumped tiles imported from China
Konkurentsi puudumine liidus toodetud plaatide ja Hiinast dumpinguhinnaga imporditud plaatide vahel
Several interested parties claimed that imports of ceramic tiles from China could not have caused injury to the Union industry as they are not comparable.
Mitmed huvitatud isikud väitsid, et keraamiliste plaatide import Hiinast ei saanud liidu tootmisharu kahjustada, sest tooted ei ole omavahel võrreldavad.
In this context it was held that ceramic tiles from China cater the market for homogeneous products while the Union industry produces to order, in smaller batches.
Nimelt väideti, et Hiina keraamiliste plaatide näol on tegemist laiatarbetoodetega, samas kui liidu tootjad valmistavad väiksemaid partiisid tellimuste peale.
It was also held that the Chinese and the Union industry are not in competition due to the fact that the Chinese operate in the low to mid-end segment while the Union industry operates in the mid to high-end segment.
Samuti väideti, et Hiina ja liidu tootjad ei konkureeri omavahel, sest hiinlased toodavad odavama ja keskmise hinnaklassi tooteid, aga liidu tootmisharu valmistab keskmise ja kallima hinnaklassi tooteid.
The limited loss of market share by the Union industry was put forward as evidence in this respect.
Tõendiks toodi liidu tootmisharu turuosa väike kahanemine.
While no substantive evidence has been supplied in support of the above claims, it was nevertheless carefully considered whether Chinese imports were indeed competing with the tiles produced in the Union.
Ehkki eelmainitud väidete toetuseks ei esitatud arvestatavaid tõendeid, uuriti siiski hoolikalt, kas Hiinast pärit import tõepoolest konkureerib liidus toodetud plaatidega.
In this context it should be noted that the Commission made very detailed comparisons, distinguishing between hundreds of different types of tiles.
Siinkohal tuleb märkida, et komisjon teostas väga üksikasjaliku võrdluse, milles eristati sadu erinevaid plaaditüüpe.
In this case, the investigation showed a significant level of matching types between the Union industry and the exporters.
Uurimine näitas siiski, et paljud Hiinas ja liidus toodetud plaaditüübid kattusid.
This clearly shows that the Union industry and the Chinese imports are competing in terms of product types.
Sellest nähtub selgelt, et liidu tootmisharu ja Hiinast pärit import konkureerivad tootetüüpide lõikes.
It is also recalled that it has been established in the investigation that the Union industry and the exporting producers are in direct competition as they share the same client base.
Olgu märgitud, et uurimise käigus tehti kindlaks, et liidu tootmisharu ja eksportivad tootjad on otseses konkurentsis, kuna neil on sama kliendibaas.
In respect of the claim that ceramic tiles from China cater the market for homogeneous products while the Union industry produces to order, in smaller batches, it is recalled – see recital 95 of the provisional Regulation – that it was exactly the pressure from the Chinese imports that forced the Union industry to move towards smaller batches of products with larger varieties in terms of colours and size.
Vastuseks väitele, et Hiina keraamilised plaadid on laiatarbetooted, samas kui liidu tootjad valmistavad väiksemaid partiisid tellimuste peale, meenutatakse (vt ajutise määruse põhjendus 95), et just Hiinast pärit impordi survel hakkasid liidu tootjad valmistama väiksemaid tootepartiisid, mis pakkusid värvide ja mõõtmete poolest laiemat sortimenti.
The Union industry still has a presence in all segments of the market and unlike what was claimed above, the pattern showing that the Union industry had to focus on specific product types must be seen as an indication that direct competition was at hand.
Liidu tootmisharu valmistab küll endiselt kõiki tootekategooriaid, aga erinevalt eespool väidetust tuleb tõsiasjas, et liidu tootjad pidid keskenduma teatavat tüüpi toodetele, näha tõendit selle kohta, et nad tegutsesid otsese konkurentsi tingimustes.
In view of the above, the argument that the Chinese imports did not cause injury to the Union industry as they were not competing cannot be upheld.
Eelöeldut arvestades tuleb väide, et Hiinast pärit import ei kahjustanud liidu tootmisharu konkurentsi puudumise tõttu, lugeda alusetuks.
Some parties maintained the argument that the impact of the Turkish imports had to be considered as significant.
Mõned isikud väitsid uuesti, et Türgist pärineva impordi mõju tuleks pidada oluliseks.
In terms of prices one party challenged the conclusion that the increase of 19 % of Turkish prices was substantial.
Samuti vaidlustas üks isik järelduse, mille kohaselt oli Türgi hindade 19 % tõus märkimisväärne.
This argument was discussed in recital 118 of the provisional Regulation and no new evidence was found which would invalidate the conclusion made at provisional stage.
Seda argumenti käsitleti ajutise määruse põhjenduses 118, kuid ei leitud mingeid tõendeid, mis oleksid uurimise esialgses etapis tehtud järelduse kummutanud.
In this context it is confirmed that the increase of 19 % of the Turkish prices must be considered as substantial.
Sellest lähtuvalt kinnitatakse, et Türgi hindade 19 % tõusu tuleb pidada märkimisväärseks.
It is furthermore recalled, as indicated in recital 41, that there was no evidence of dumped imports that caused injury to the Union industry from this country and therefore this argument cannot be upheld.
Lisaks tuletatakse meelde, et vastavalt põhjendusele 41 puuduvad tõendid sellest riigist pärineva dumpinguhinnaga impordi kohta, mis oleks kahjustanud liidu tootmisharu, mistõttu kõnealune argument lükatakse tagasi.
Impact of decrease in consumption
Tarbimise languse mõju
One interested party claimed that the decrease in consumption affected mainly Spain and Italy where allegedly injury was most present.
Üks huvitatud isik märkis, et tarbimise langust võis täheldada peamiselt Hispaanias ja Itaalias, kus kahju oli väidetavalt kõige suurem.
Conversely, the main destination of the Chinese exports was the northern Member States that did not show a decrease in consumption and where Union producers were allegedly less injured.
Ometigi oli Hiina eksport suunatud peamiselt põhjapoolsetesse liikmesriikidesse, kus tarbimine ei langenud ja tootjad kannatasid väidetavalt vähem kahju.
The same party also held that the Spanish ceramic tiles industry has recovered in 2010 which shows that there is no link between Chinese exports and the production and sales figures of the Union industry.
Sama isik väitis veel, et Hispaania keraamiliste plaatide tööstus taastus 2010. aastaks, mis tõendab, et Hiina ekspordi ning liidu tootmisharu toodangu- ja müüginumbrite vahel ei ole seost.
One party claimed that the increase of stocks registered by the Union industry should be attributed to a fall in Union consumption, and not to the dumped Chinese imports.
Üks isik väitis, et liidu tootmisharu varude kasvu põhjus on tarbimise langus liidus, mitte Hiinast pärit dumpinguhinnaga import.
The claims that the northern European Member States were not affected by the decrease in consumption and that imports from China would have been directed only towards northern Europe, was not supported by any substantiated evidence.
Väiteid, mille kohaselt ei kahanenud Euroopa põhjaosas asuvates liikmesriikides tarbimine ja Hiinast pärit import suundus üksnes Põhja-Euroopasse, ei suudetud piisavalt tõendada.
To the contrary, data from the sampled Chinese exporting producers shows that these sales are evenly spread across the Union.
Vastupidi, valimisse kuuluvatelt Hiina eksportivatelt tootjatelt saadud andmetest ilmneb, et nad müüsid võrdselt kõikjal liidus.
Furthermore, Spain and Italy collectively account for 28 % of these sales, only slightly below sales to Germany (32 %).
Pealegi, kui Saksamaale suunatud müügi osa on 32 %, siis Hispaania ja Itaalia (koos arvestatuna) on kohe kannul 28 %-ga.
With regards to the claim that the increase of stocks registered by the Union industry should be attributed to a fall in Union consumption, the Commission recalls the reasoning contained in recital 108 of the provisional Regulation, i.e. that the pressure of Chinese imports was very strong especially in the sector of sales of big batches and that this had a clear impact on the Union producers’ stocks.
Mis puudutab väidet, nagu tuleneks liidu tootmisharu varude kasv tarbimise langusest liidus, siis osutab komisjon siinkohal ajutise määruse põhjenduses 108 esitatud argumendile, et Hiinast pärit impordi surve oli eriti tugev suurte partiide osas, mis mõjutas kahtlemata liidu tootjate varude taset.
The growth of the stock ratio over the period considered cannot be explained only by the difficulty in selling the products, but also by the necessity to keep an extremely high variety of products available in the stocks.
Varude protsendi kasvu vaatlusalusel perioodil ei saa seletada üksnes müügiraskustega, vaid ka vajadusega hoida äärmiselt laia tootesortimenti varudes kättesaadavana.
The conclusion on the injurious effect of Chinese imports on stocks is therefore confirmed.
Seega leiab kinnitust järeldus Hiinast pärit impordi kahjustava mõju kohta.
Several interested parties maintained that the economic crisis was the real cause of the difficulties facing the Union industry.
Mitmed huvitatud isikud väitsid, et liidu tootmisharu raskuste tegelik põhjus oli majanduskriis.
This was evidenced by the fact that the main deteriorations took place between 2008 and 2009, i.e. in the year that the crisis hit, while the trend was less sharp in the following period.
Selle toetuseks väideti, et olukord halvenes tunduvalt 2008. ja 2009. aasta vahel, kui kriis vallandus, samas kui järgnevatel aastatel ei olnud see trend enam nii ilmne.
It is also pointed out that the period considered included the high and low peaks of a cycle with the high point being characterised by the boom in the construction sector and the low point by the financial crisis and the decrease in exports due to the establishment of new production sites in third world countries.
Lisaks osutati, et vaatlusalust perioodi iseloomustasid tsüklilised kõrg- ja madalseisud, kusjuures kõrgseisuga kaasnesid ehitusbuum ning madalseisuga finantskriis ja ekspordilangus, mis tulenes tootmise üleviimisest kolmanda maailma riikidesse.
After final disclosure, one interested party maintained that the deterioration of a number of injury indicators was due to the economic crisis rather than the dumped imports.
Pärast lõplike järelduste teatavakstegemist väitis üks huvitatud isik, et kahjunäitajate halvenemine tulenes majanduskriisist, mitte dumpinguhinnaga impordist.
According to this party, the effect of the recession was to increase the demand of large bulk of low priced products.
Selle isiku sõnul kasvab majanduslanguse ajal nõudlus suurte partiidena müüdavate madalahinnaliste toodete järele.
As a result, the Union industry had to focus more into the production for large bulk orders, a segment where the Chinese were already operating, with an increase in stock level as a result.
Seetõttu pidi liidu tootmisharu keskenduma suurtele tellimustele, mis oli hiinlaste pärusmaa, ja varude tase kasvas.
Furthermore, the recession allegedly caused inflation in the Union, comparatively higher than in China, causing the increase in costs of production of the Union producers which allegedly led the Union industry to sell at prices below costs of production.
Lisaks põhjustas majanduslangus väidetavalt inflatsiooni, mis oli liidus suurem kui Hiinas ja kergitas liidu tootjate tootmiskulusid, mistõttu liidu tootmisharu pidi müüma väidetavalt omahinnast madalama hinnaga.
Another party claimed that the profit of the Union industry had gone up significantly in the last quarter of the IP and that this showed that the Union industry had recovered after the economic crisis.
Ühe isiku väitel paranes liidu tootmisharu kasumlikkus tunduvalt uurimisperioodi viimases kvartalis, mis tõendas tema sõnul liidu tootmisharu taastumist majanduskriisist.
This party requested that profit for the IP should be given per quarter which would likely indicate a significantly higher profitability towards the end of the IP.
Sama isik nõudis, et kasum esitataks kvartalite lõikes, et oleks näha, et kasumlikkus tõusis uurimisperioodi lõpu poole.
The fact that the economic downturn did have an effect on the performance of the Union industry was already acknowledged in recital 120 of the Regulation imposing provisional measures.
Juba ajutiste meetmete kehtestamise määruse põhjenduses 120 tunnistati, et majanduslangus mõjutas liidu tootmisharu näitajaid.
In this context it should be recalled that in order for causation to be established, the relevant legal standard stipulates that the dumped imports need to have caused material injury to the Union Industry.
Põhjusliku seose tuvastamise juriidiline kriteerium näeb ette, et dumpinguhinnaga import peab olema põhjustanud liidu tootmisharule olulist kahju.
Dumped imports however need not have been the sole cause of injury.
Dumpinguhinnaga import ei pea aga olema kahju ainus põhjus.
Furthermore the investigation showed that the Chinese trend of increasing exports could continue despite the economic crisis.
Lisaks näitas uurimine, et Hiina ekspordi kasv oleks jätkunud majanduskriisist hoolimata.
China was indeed the only actor in the market that was able to maintain its market share in the difficult economic situation.
Hiina oli ainus turuosaline, kes suutis majanduskriisis hoida oma turuosa.
As for the structural change in the Union demand mentioned in recital 156, no evidence was brought forward in support of this claim.
Põhjenduses 156 mainitud liidu nõudluse struktuurimuutuse kohta ei esitatud mingeid tõendeid.