natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Government's mandated purchase of biodiesel for more than adequate remuneration (‘Biodiesel Supply Agreement’);
kupnje biodizela koju je odobrila vlada za višu naknadu od primjerene („ugovor o opskrbi biodizelom”);
Provision of loans and export financing on preferential terms and preferential lending by the National Bank of Argentina (Banco de la Nación Argentina, ‘BNA’);
davanja zajmova i financiranja izvoza po povlaštenim uvjetima, uključujući povlaštene zajmove koje odobrava Narodna banka Argentine (Banco de la Nación Argentina, „BNA”);
Government's revenue forgone or not collected, such as accelerated depreciation for biodiesel producers under the Biofuels Law of 2006, exemption and deferral of the minimum presumed income tax for biodiesel producers under the Biofuels Law of 2006; and
prihoda kojih se vlada odrekla ili ih nije naplatila, kao što su ubrzane amortizacije za proizvođače biodizela na temelju Zakona o biogorivima iz 2006., odgoda i oslobođenje od plaćanja minimalnog pretpostavljenog poreza na dohodak za proizvođače biodizela na temelju Zakona o biogorivima iz 2006.; te
Provincial and municipal tax exemptions:
oslobođenja od pokrajinskih i općinskih poreza:
Provincial tax exemptions provided by the Province of Cordoba;
oslobođenja od pokrajinskih poreza koja omogućuje pokrajina Cordoba;
Provincial tax exemptions provided by the Province of Buenos Aires;
oslobođenja od pokrajinskih poreza koja omogućuje pokrajina Buenos Aires;
Province of Santiago del Estero System of Promotion and Industrial Development (‘PSPID’) — Provincial Law No 6.750;
sustava promicanja i industrijskog razvoja („PSPID”) pokrajine Santiago del Estero – Pokrajinski zakon br. 6.750:
Agreement on municipal taxes between Louis Dreyfus Argentina and the Municipality of General Lagos;
sporazuma o općinskim porezima između društva Louis Dreyfus Argentina i općine General Lagos;
Percentage tax rate reduction under the ‘Pacto Fiscal’ (Decree 14/1994);
smanjenja postotne porezne stope na temelju sporazuma „Pacto Fiscal” (Odluka 14/1994);
Real Estate exemption under the Santa Fe Industrial Law: exemption from paying real estate tax under Provincial Law No 8.478/1979 (Article 4) of Industrial Promotion;
oslobođenja za nekretnine na temelju Industrijskog zakona pokrajine Santa Fe: oslobođenje od plaćanja poreza na nekretnine na temelju Pokrajinskog zakona br. 8.478/1979 (članak 4.) o promicanju industrije;
Provincial tax exemptions provided by the Province of Santa Fe;
oslobođenja od pokrajinskih poreza koje omogućuje pokrajina Santa Fe;
Article 183.29 Santa Fe Stamp Tax Exemption;
oslobođenje od upravne pristojbe u pokrajini Santa Fe na temelju članka 183.29;
Article 127 Santa Fe turnover tax exemption for export sales.
oslobođenje od plaćanja poreza na promet za izvoznu prodaju u pokrajini Santa Fe na temelju članka 127.
Government's support to the biodiesel industry including through the provision of soybeans for less than adequate remuneration
Vladina potpora industriji biodizela, uključujući dobavu soje uz naknadu manju od primjerene
The application of the provisions of Article 28(1) of the basic Regulation
Primjena odredbi članka 28. stavka 1. osnovne uredbe
The Commission informed the GOA that it might have to resort to the use of facts available under Article 28(1) of the basic Regulation when examining the existence and the extent of the alleged support granted to the biodiesel industry including through the provision of soybeans for less than adequate remuneration.
Komisija je vladu Argentine obavijestila da će za ispitivanje postojanja i opsega navodne potpore odobrene industriji biodizela, uključujući dobavu soje uz naknadu manju od primjerene, možda morati upotrijebiti raspoložive podatke u skladu s člankom 28. stavkom 1. osnovne uredbe.
At initiation, the Commission requested the GOA to provide the contact details (names, addresses and email) of all the companies supplying the main input (soybeans) for the production of the product concerned.
Komisija je pri pokretanju postupka od vlade Argentine zatražila da dostavi podatke za kontakt (nazive, adrese i e-poštu) svih društava koja dostavljaju glavnu sirovinu (soju) za proizvodnju predmetnog proizvoda.
The GOA did not provide those contact details.
Vlada Argentine nije dostavila te podatke za kontakt.
Following the absence of a reply to that question, a request for additional information was sent to the GOA on 17 April 2018 regarding information in relation to the largest producers/suppliers of soybeans that have provided inputs to the Argentinian producers of biodiesel.
Budući da nije dostavila odgovor na to pitanje, vladi Argentine poslan je 17. travnja 2018. zahtjev za dostavljanje dodatnih informacija o najvećim proizvođačima/dobavljačima soje koji su argentinskim proizvođačima biodizela dostavljali sirovine.
Given the significant number of companies providing the main input for the product concerned, in the spirit of good cooperation and in order to collect at least some relevant data for the investigation, the Commission limited its request to data from only the ten most important producers/suppliers of soybeans.
S obzirom na znatan broj društava koja su dostavljala glavnu sirovinu za predmetni proizvod, u duhu dobre suradnje i kako bi prikupila barem neke podatke relevantne za ispitni postupak, Komisija je zahtjev ograničila na podatke o samo deset najvažnijih proizvođača/dobavljača soje.
The Commission did not receive full information for most of these producers/suppliers of inputs for the production of the product concerned.
Komisija nije primila sve informacije za većinu tih proizvođača/dobavljača sirovina za proizvodnju predmetnog proizvoda.
In fact the Commission received only information from biodiesel producers who themselves produced soybean oil (not soybeans).
Primila je zapravo samo informacije od proizvođača biodizela koji su sami proizvodili sojino ulje (ne soju).
No information was received from the ten largest soybean producers, as requested.
Deset najvećih proizvođača soje nije dostavilo nikakve zatražene informacije.
In the absence of such information, the Commission considered that it had not received crucial information relevant to this aspect of the investigation.
Budući da nije dobila te informacije, Komisija je smatrala da nije primila ključne informacije koje su relevantne za taj aspekt ispitnog postupka.
Furthermore, the Commission requested any available information requested in the preceding recital for those providers of soybeans in the years 2014, 2015, 2016 and the investigation period in which the GOA has no shareholding or is not the largest shareholder.
Nadalje, Komisija je zatražila bilo kakve raspoložive informacije iz prethodne uvodne izjave za dobavljače soje u 2014., 2015., 2016. i razdoblju ispitnog postupka u kojima vlada Argentine nema nikakvih udjela ili nije najveći dioničar.
That information was required to assess whether the soybeans supplier and the biodiesel producer were unrelated, related or part of the same entity.
Te su informacije zatražene kako bi se procijenilo jesu li dobavljač soje i proizvođač biodizela bili nepovezani, povezani ili dio istog subjekta.
The Commission requested evidence that the GOA attempted to contact those suppliers or to indicate to the Commission how such information could be obtained (e.g. through relevant associations).
Komisija je zatražila dokaze da je vlada Argentine pokušala kontaktirati s tim dobavljačima ili da Komisiji navede kako bi se te informacije mogle dobiti (npr. preko relevantnih udruženja).
The GOA did not include the information requested, or any evidence of the GOA's attempts to even contact those suppliers.
Vlada Argentine nije uključila zatražene informacije niti bilo kakve dokaze da je barem pokušala kontaktirati s tim dobavljačima.
The GOA's reply of 15 February 2018 advised that the data requested by the Commission on the soybean growers could be provided by four bodies, two of which being ACSOJA (Asociación de la Cadena de la Soja Argentina) and CARBIO.
U odgovoru vlade Argentine od 15. veljače 2018. navedeno je da bi podatke koje je Komisija zatražila u pogledu uzgajivača soje mogla dostaviti četiri tijela, od kojih su dva ACSOJA (Asociación de la Cadena de la Soja Argentina) i CARBIO.
The Commission services met with both bodies during the verification visit in Argentina but no data on soybean suppliers was received.
Službe Komisije sastale su se s oba tijela tijekom posjeta radi provjere u Argentini, ali nisu primljeni nikakvi podaci o dobavljačima soje.
The other two bodies were not inspected given the limited amount of time available.
Ta druga dva tijela nisu ispitana s obzirom na ograničeno raspoloživo vrijeme.
ACSOJA and CARBIO were chosen to be inspected as the two most likely to be able to assist with the investigation.
ACSOJA i CARBIO odabrani su za ispitivanje kao dva tijela koja bi najvjerojatnije mogla moći pomoći u ispitnom postupku.
During the meeting with ACSOJA, the Commission representatives asked a number of questions on the market situation of soybeans in Argentina, on their supply relationship with the biodiesel producers and on the impact of the export tax on their activity.
Tijekom sastanka s ACSOJA-om predstavnici Komisije postavili su niz pitanja o stanju na tržištu soje u Argentini, o odnosu dobavljača soje i proizvođača biodizela te o utjecaju poreza na izvoz na njihovu djelatnost.
The ACSOJA representative did not provide any meaningful reply to those questions, and did not provide specific data and evidence useful for the investigation.
Predstavnik ACSOJA-e nije dao nikakav smislen odgovor na ta pitanja ni dostavio konkretne podatke i dokaze korisne za ispitni postupak.
It was clear that ACSOJA simply represented other representative bodies in the soybean value chain and was unable to answer detailed enquiries, or give the Commission services the information requested in the questionnaire with regard to the production of soybeans.
Bilo je jasno da ACSOJA samo predstavlja druga predstavnička tijela u sojinom vrijednosnom lancu i da nije mogla detaljnije odgovoriti na upite ili službama Komisije dati informacije o proizvodnji soje koje su zatražene u upitniku.
Also, ACSOJA committed during the verification visit to sending press releases concerning the export tax on soybeans and its downstream production.
Jednako tako, ACSOJA se tijekom posjeta radi provjere obvezala poslati priopćenja za medije o porezu na izvoz soje i kraju njezina proizvodnog lanca.
The Commission never received such press releases.
Komisija nikad nije primila ta priopćenja za medije.
As CARBIO is an association of biodiesel producers, it was not able to give the Commission the details on soybean producers that were required.
Budući da je CARBIO udruženje proizvođača biodizela, Komisiji nije mogao dati zatražene podatke o proizvođačima soje.
Consequently, with regard to the alleged government provision of soybeans for less than adequate remuneration, the GOA did not provide the necessary information and evidence as requested by the Commission in its questionnaire, in the letter of 17 April 2018 and during the verification visit.
Stoga, u pogledu navodne vladine dobave soje uz naknadu manju od primjerene, vlada Argentine nije dostavila potrebne informacije i dokaze koje je Komisija zatražila u upitniku, u dopisu od 17. travnja 2018. i tijekom posjeta radi provjere.
The absence of sufficient cooperation did not allow the Commission to collect all the information it considers relevant for its findings in this investigation.
Zbog nedostatne suradnje Komisija nije mogla prikupiti sve informacije koje smatra relevantnima za svoje nalaze u ovom ispitnom postupku.
More specifically, the Commission could not obtain information and data on the market for soybeans producers, the impact of the government measures (such as the export tax of soybeans) on their behaviour as well as on the supply of soybeans to the biodiesel producers.
Točnije, Komisija nije mogla dobiti informacije i podatke o tržištu za proizvođače soje, utjecaju vladinih mjera (kao što je porez na izvoz soje) na njihovo ponašanje te o opskrbi proizvođača biodizela sojom.
That information included the behaviour and decisions of soybeans producers prior and subsequent to the introduction and the various changes of the export taxes and other similarly restrictive measures, their production strategies and the possibility to switch to alternative crops, the availability and access to arable land, the market features and dynamics with regard to the differentiation between large companies and SMEs, the sales and marketing channels and strategies for their domestic and export markets, the prices and pricing policies in their domestic and export markets, the impact of the international price on their pricing policies, the competition situation domestically and in export markets, their profitability over the years, the impact of possible overcapacity and stockpiling strategies, the imports and exports of their main customers domestically and in export markets including the role of the soybean crushers' industry and the added-value achieved by the crushers' industry as well as the competition situation of the crushers' industry in Argentina and in international markets.
Te su informacije uključivale ponašanje i odluke proizvođača soje prije i poslije uvođenja te različitih izmjena poreza na izvoz i drugih sličnih mjera ograničavanja, njihove proizvodne strategije i mogućnost prelaska na druge poljoprivredne kulture, dostupnost obradivog zemljišta i pristup njemu, obilježja i dinamiku tržišta s obzirom na razlikovanje velikih društava i MSP-ova, kanale za prodaju i stavljanje proizvoda na tržište te strategije za njihova domaća i izvozna tržišta, cijene i politike određivanja cijena na njihovim domaćim i izvoznim tržištima, utjecaj međunarodne cijene na njihove politike određivanja cijena, situaciju u pogledu tržišnog natjecanja u zemlji i na izvoznim tržištima, njihovu profitabilnost tijekom godina, utjecaj mogućeg prekomjernog kapaciteta i strategije stvaranja zaliha, uvoz i izvoz njihovih glavnih kupaca u zemlji i na izvoznim tržištima, uključujući ulogu industrije drobljenja soje i dodanu vrijednost ostvarenu u industriji drobljenja te situaciju u pogledu tržišnog natjecanja u industriji mljevenja u Argentini i na međunarodnim tržištima.
Furthermore, contrary to what the GOA had asserted in its reply to the questionnaire, during the verification visit the Commission services found that it transpired that the GOA had ownership of one provider of soybeans to the biodiesel industry, namely YPF.
Nadalje, suprotno tvrdnjama vlade Argentine u njezinu odgovoru na upitnik, tijekom posjeta radi provjere službe Komisije utvrdile su da se pokazalo da je vlada Argentine bila vlasnik jednog dobavljača soje za industriju biodizela, odnosno društva YPF.
However, as YPF is only one of the hundreds of suppliers of soybeans to the biodiesel industry, the information submitted by this provider, was insufficient to establish the behaviour of the remaining suppliers of soybeans to the biodiesel industry.
Međutim, s obzirom na to da je YPF tek jedan od stotina dobavljača soje za industriju biodizela, informacije koje je dostavio taj dobavljač nisu bile dostatne kako bi se utvrdilo ponašanje preostalih dobavljača soje za industriju biodizela.
In particular, YPF does not grow soybeans, but accepts soybeans as payment for its fertiliser and fuel and then sells the soybeans on the Argentinian domestic market.
Konkretno, YPF ne uzgaja soju, ali je prihvaća kao sredstvo plaćanja za svoje gnojivo i gorivo te je zatim prodaje na argentinskom domaćem tržištu.
It is therefore not representative of the soybean farmers who supply the biodiesel industry.
Stoga nije reprezentativan za uzgajivače soje koji opskrbljuju industriju biodizela.
In the absence of information to the contrary received from the GOA, the Commission partially relied on facts available for its findings regarding those aspects of the investigation in accordance with Article 28 of the basic Regulation.
Budući da vlada Argentine nije dostavila informacije koje bi to opovrgle, Komisija se za svoje nalaze o tim aspektima ispitnog postupka djelomično oslanjala na raspoložive podatke u skladu s člankom 28. osnovne uredbe.
The Commission reiterated that the GOA did not provide contact details for soybean growers and only partial information for soybean oil producers.
Komisija je ponovila da vlada Argentina nije dostavila podatke za kontakt uzgajivača soje te da je dostavila samo djelomične informacije o proizvođačima sojina ulja.
ACSOJA and CARBIO did not provide the information that the Commission had requested in the questionnaire nor during the meetings held with them.
ACSOJA i CARBIO nisu dostavili informacije koje je Komisija zatražila u upitniku i tijekom sastanaka koje je održala s njima.
Moreover, during those meetings it became clear that the representative of ACSOJA was not in a position to reply to detailed technical questions and that CARBIO was an association of biodiesel producers and not soybean producers.
Štoviše, tijekom tih je sastanaka postalo je jasno da predstavnik ACSOJA-e nije u mogućnosti odgovoriti na detaljna tehnička pitanja te da je CARBIO udruženje proizvođača biodizela, a ne proizvođača soje.
The Commission concluded that, with regard to the alleged GOA's support to the biodiesel industry in particular through various measures including the provision of soybeans for less than adequate remuneration, the GOA did not provide the necessary information and evidence as requested by the Commission in its questionnaire, in the letter of 17 April 2018 and during the verification visit.
Komisija je zaključila da, kad je riječ o navodnoj potpori vlade Argentine industriji biodizela, konkretno raznim mjerama među kojima je i nabava soje uz naknadu manju od primjerene, vlada Argentine nije dostavila potrebne informacije i dokaze koje je Komisija zatražila u svojem upitniku, dopisu od 17. travnja 2018. i tijekom posjeta radi provjere.
As a result, the Commission had to rely on facts available concerning that aspect of the investigation.
Komisija se stoga morala osloniti na raspoložive podatke o tom aspektu ispitnog postupka.
In the absence of data provided by the GOA on the sales of soybean growers in Argentina, the Commission relied on the data provided by the sampled exporting producers on the domestic price of soybeans.
Budući da vlada Argentine nije dostavila podatke o prodaji uzgajivača soje u Argentini, Komisija se oslonila na podatke o domaćoj cijeni soje koje su dostavili proizvođači izvoznici u uzorku.
Furthermore, the Commission relied on publicly available information with regard to the direction or entrustment of the soybean growers by the GOA to sell soybeans domestically for less than adequate remuneration and the GOA's intention to support the biodiesel industry through this and other related measures.
Nadalje, Komisija se oslonila na javno dostupne informacije o tome kako je vlada Argentine uzgajivače soje usmjeravala ili im je povjeravala da prodaju soju na domaćem tržištu uz naknadu manju od primjerene te o namjeri vlade Argentine da podupire industriju biodizela tim i drugim povezanim mjerama.
Following final disclosure, the GOA and CARBIO once again showed their disagreement with the Commission's use of facts available in accordance with Article 28 of the basic Regulation.
Nakon konačne objave vlada Argentine i CARBIO ponovno su izrazili neslaganje s Komisijinim korištenjem raspoloživim podacima u skladu s člankom 28. osnovne uredbe.
They claimed that the use of facts available is justified only when an interested party fails to provide ‘necessary information’, indispensable to reach a specific determination.
Tvrdili su da je korištenje raspoloživim podacima opravdano samo ako zainteresirana strana ne dostavi „potrebne informacije”, nužne za određeni zaključak.
According to the GOA and CARBIO, the Commission never proved how the information requested was indispensable to reach a specific determination in this case and ignored the fact that the requested information was either unavailable for the GOA or strictly covered by tax secrecy law.
Prema mišljenju vlade Argentine i CARBIO-a, Komisija nikad nije dokazala kako su zatražene informacije bile nužne da se dođe do određenog zaključka u ovom predmetu i zanemarile su to što tražene informacije vladi Argentine nisu bile dostupne ili su strogo obuhvaćene zakonom o poreznoj tajni.
The Commission explained extensively in its communication with the GOA the reasons why it needed more detailed information on soybean growers and soybean oil producers.
Komisija je u svojoj komunikaciji s vladom Argentine opsežno obrazložila zašto su joj potrebno podrobnije informacije o uzgajivačima soje i proizvođačima sojina ulja.
The claim of the GOA and CARBIO that the GOA was not in the position to provide this information was not supported by any evidence proving that this was the case or that the Commission had other reasonable means available to obtain such information.
Tvrdnja vlade Argentine i CARBIO-a da vlada Argentine nije mogla dostaviti te informacije nije bila potkrijepljena nikakvim dokazima koji potvrđuju da je to bio slučaj ili da je Komisija imala na raspolaganju druga razumna sredstva da dođe do tih informacija.
The information requested was of such nature that the Commission could assume that it was either in the possession of the GOA and/or CARBIO or at least that the GOA had the regulatory control over the soybean growers and soybean oil producers to request this information.
Tražene su informacije bile takve da je Komisija mogla pretpostaviti da ih imaju vlada Argentine ili CARBIO ili barem da vlada Argentine ima regulatornu kontrolu nad uzgajivačima soje i proizvođačima sojina ulja da može zatražiti te informacije.
The Commission also expected better cooperation from soybean growers and soybean oil producers if those were contacted by the GOA directly and/or in close cooperation with the Commission.
Komisija je također očekivala veću suradnju od uzgajivača soje i proizvođača sojina ulja ako bi im se vlada Argentine obratila izravno ili u bliskoj suradnji s Komisijom.
The complainant alleged the existence of the GOA's support to the biodiesel industry through various measures.
Prema navodima podnositelja pritužbe vlada Argentine pruža potporu industriji biodizela putem različitih mjera.
In particular, the complainant claimed that the GOA had implemented a policy of imposing high export taxes and other regulations relating to soybeans and soybean oil, which is the key raw material used for the production of biodiesel in Argentina.
Konkretno, podnositelj pritužbe tvrdio je da je vlada Argentine provodila politiku uvođenja visokih poreza na izvoz i drugih propisa koji se odnose na soju i sojino ulje, ključnu sirovinu za proizvodnju biodizela u Argentini.
In doing so, according to the complainant, the GOA was ensuring that the price of raw materials for the production of biodiesel remained significantly lower than global prices.
Podnositelj pritužbe smatra da je vlada Argentine time zadržavala cijenu sirovina za proizvodnju biodizela na znatno nižoj razini od cijena na svjetskom tržištu.
As stated in the Commission's memorandum on sufficiency of evidence, the Commission considered that the export taxes appeared to be one of the tools devised by the GOA to direct soybean growers and soybean oil producers in assisting the Argentinian biodiesel industry.
Kako je navedeno u Komisijinu izvješću o dostatnosti dokaza, Komisija je smatrala kako se čini da su porezi na izvoz jedan od instrumenata vlade Argentine da se uzgajivače soje i proizvođače sojina ulja usmjeri na pomaganje argentinskoj industriji biodizela.
In this investigation, the Commission has examined the set of measures adopted by the GOA in order to support the Argentinian biodiesel industry artificially.
U ovom je ispitnom postupku Komisija ispitala skup mjera koje je vlada Argentine donijela kako bi umjetno pružila potporu argentinskoj industriji biodizela.