natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In the light of the Panel's finding, the Commission, having again reviewed the information on the record concerning Community wages, both in isolation and together with the other injury factors set out in Article 8(5) of the basic Regulation, provides herein a written record of its evaluation of the wages factor.
V zvezi s tem Komisija glede na ugotovitve preiskovalnega odbora in po ponovni preučitvi razpoložljivih podatkov v zvezi s plačami v Skupnosti, in sicer ločeno ali skupaj z drugimi škodljivimi dejavniki, navedenimi v členu 8(5) osnove uredbe, oblikuje poročilo o svoji oceni dejavnika „mezde“.
The Commission examined the average cost of wages per employee for the Community industry during the IP, and in the three prior years.
Komisija je preverila povprečne stroške za plače na zaposlenega v industriji Skupnosti v OP in v predhodnih treh letih.
The indexed results are shown in the following table [70].
Rezultati v obliki indeksa so prikazani v naslednji tabeli [70].
Average cost for wages per employee
Povprečni stroški za plače na zaposlenega
The table shows that the average cost of the Community industry for wages and salaries during the period under consideration varied, decreasing and increasing over time.
Iz tabele je razvidno, da so bili povprečni stroški za plače v industriji Skupnosti v OP različni, in sicer so se v tem obdobju zmanjševali in povečevali.
In 2000, it increased by 15 %.
Leta 2000 so se stroški povečali za 15 %.
In 2001, compared to 1998, it had increased by 9 %.
Leta 2001 so se stroški v primerjavi z letom 1998 povečali za 9 %.
Overall, the increase was lower than the increase of the total hourly labour costs in the euro area during this period [71].
Na splošno je bilo povečanje manjše kot povečanje skupnih stroškov dela na uro v euroobmočju v tem obdobju [71].
Thus, there were no unusual developments in wages during the relevant period, and any developments only had very limited effects on the financial situation of the domestic industry as a whole [72].
Tako v zadevnem obdobju ni bilo neobičajnih sprememb na področju plač, vse spremembe pa so imele le zelo omejen vpliv na finančno stanje domače industrije kot celote [72].
Furthermore, the Commission recalls that DRAMs are capital intensive products and, thus, labour may only have a limited contribution to their cost of production (see also recital 41 above).
Komisija poleg tega opozarja, da je DRAM kapitalno intenziven izdelek, zato lahko stroški dela predstavljajo le majhen del proizvodnih stroškov za DRAM (glej tudi uvodno izjavo 41).
Consequently, this relatively small increase in wages had hardly any effect on the overall financial situation of the Community industry.
Zato sorazmerno majhno povišanje plač ni imelo skoraj nobenega vpliva na splošno finančno stanje industrije Skupnosti.
Given its negligible impact, consideration of the wages factor together with the other factors referred to in Article 8(5) of the basic Regulation is not such as to alter the conclusion that the Community industry suffered material injury [73].
Kljub zanemarljivemu vplivu dejavnika „mezde“ in drugih dejavnikov, omenjenih v členu 8(5) osnovne uredbe, pa to ne spremeni sklepne ugotovitve, da je bila industriji Skupnosti povzročena znatna škoda [73].
Based on the foregoing, the conclusion set out in recital 188 of the definitive Regulation that the Community industry suffered material injury within the meaning of Article 8 of the basic Regulation is hereby confirmed.
Na podlagi zgoraj navedenega se potrdi sklepna ugotovitev iz uvodne izjave 188 dokončne uredbe, da je bila industriji Skupnosti povzročena znatna škoda v smislu člena 8 osnovne uredbe.
Causation
Vzročna zveza
This part sets out the reassessed findings based on the recommendations of the Panel report concerning the non-attribution to the subsidised imports of any injury caused by other factors (in particular, decline in demand, overcapacity and other, non-subsidised imports) within the meaning of Article 8(7) of the basic Regulation.
V tem delu so navedene ugotovitve, ponovno ocenjene na podlagi priporočil iz poročila preiskovalnega odbora o tem, da se škoda, ki so jo povzročili drugi dejavniki (zlasti zmanjšanje povpraševanja, presežna zmogljivost in druge vrste nesubvencioniranega uvoza), v smislu člena 8(7) osnovne uredbe ne pripiše subvencioniranemu uvozu.
The Panel's determination in paragraph 7.437 of its report does not preclude a conclusion of a causal relationship between subsidised imports and the material injury suffered by the Community industry, but added that a satisfactory explanation of the nature and extent of the injurious effects of those other factors, preferably with quantitative analysis, as distinguished from the effects of the subsidised imports, is required.
Preiskovalni odbor v sklepni ugotovitvi iz odstavka 7.437 svojega poročila ne izključuje možnosti, da med subvencioniranim uvozom in znatno škodo, povzročeno Skupnosti, obstaja vzročna povezava, vendar pa dodaja, da je treba poleg škodljivih učinkov subvencioniranega uvoza zadovoljivo razložiti vrsto in obseg škodljivih učinkov navedenih drugih dejavnikov, po možnosti v okviru kvantitativne analize.
Decline (contraction) in demand and economic downturn
Zmanjšanje povpraševanja in gospodarski upad
Article 8(7) of the basic Regulation (which generally corresponds to Article 15.5 of the SCM Agreement) requires examination of any known factors other than subsidised imports which at the same time are injuring the Community industry, and not to attribute injury caused by these other factors to subsidised imports.
V skladu s členom 8(7) osnovne uredbe (ki na splošno ustreza členu 15.5 Sporazuma SIU) je treba preučiti vse znane dejavnike, razen subvencioniranega uvoza, ki istočasno povzročajo škodo industriji Skupnosti, da se škode, ki jo povzročijo ti drugi dejavniki, ne pripiše subvencioniranemu uvozu.
One of the factors referred to is ‘contraction in demand’.
Eden od omenjenih dejavnikov je „zmanjšanje povpraševanja“.
The Panel found in paragraph 8.1(e) of its report that the EC had failed to make sure that the injury caused by ‘decline in demand’ was not attributed to the subsidised imports.
Preiskovalni odbor je v odstavku 8.1(e) svojega poročila ugotovil, da ES ni uspela zagotoviti, da se škoda, ki jo je povzročilo „zmanjšanje povpraševanja“, ne bi pripisala subvencioniranemu uvozu.
This conclusion was reached in the light of the Panel’s findings in paragraphs 7.411 to 7.414 of its report, which treat a ‘decline in demand’ as synonymous with a ‘general economic downturn’.
To pa je bilo ugotovljeno na podlagi ugotovitev preiskovalnega odbora iz odstavkov 7.411 do 7.414 njegovega poročila, v katerih se „zmanjšanje povpraševanja“ obravnava kot „splošen gospodarski upad“.
EC consumption
Poraba ES
DRAMs in ’000 Mbits
DRAM v ‘000 Mbit-ih
The Commission recalls that, all other things being equal, demand (i.e., the willingness and ability to obtain an amount of a particular good) may generally be considered to be equivalent to consumption (i.e., the actual physical process of using a good irrespective of the level of trade).
Komisija opozarja, da se ob upoštevanju enakovrednosti vseh stvari, šteje, da je povpraševanje (tj. pripravljenost in sposobnost pridobiti določeno količino posameznega blaga) na splošno šteje kot enako porabi (tj. dejanski fizični proces uporabe blaga ne glede na trgovinsko raven).
The above table sets out EC consumption during the relevant period in terms of Mbits.
Iz zgornje tabele je razvidna poraba ES v zvezi z Mbit-i v zadevnem obdobju.
The use of this unit of measurement was not disputed before the Panel.
Uporabi te merske enote ni pri preiskovalnem odboru oporekal nihče.
It appears from the above table that because the actual consumption in the Community for DRAMs increased constantly and significantly during the period under consideration, it is incorrect to allege that the level of demand for DRAMs in the Community declined during the same period.
Domneva, da se je zaradi stalnega in znatnega povečevanja dejanske porabe DRAM-a v Skupnosti v obravnavanem obdobju obseg povpraševanja po DRAM-u v Skupnosti v istem obdobju povečal, je napačna, kot je razvidno iz zgornje tabele.
Thus, all of the relevant argumentation concerning the impact of the ‘decline in demand’ on the injurious situation of the Community industry (in particular its prices) raised by the GOK and Hynix is irrelevant, because, as shown above, the level of demand increased.
Tako so vsi argumenti v zvezi z vplivom „zmanjšanja povpraševanja“ na škodljive razmere v industriji Skupnosti (zlasti na njene cene), ki sta jih navedla KV in Hynix, neutemeljeni, saj se je obseg povpraševanja povečal, kot je prikazano zgoraj.
With respect to the claim by the GOK and Hynix that the alleged decline in demand affected the Community industry's prices, this is unfounded in light of the fact that there was no decline in the level of demand.
Trditev KV in Hynixa, da je domnevno zmanjšanje povpraševanja vplivalo na cene industrije Skupnosti, je neutemeljena, glede na to, da se obseg povpraševanja ni zmanjšal.
On the contrary, the subsidised imports had a significant impact on the prices of the Community industry and, thus, on its injurious condition (see recitals 191 and 192 of the definitive Regulation).
Nasprotno pa je subvencionirani uvoz znatno vplival na cene industrije Skupnosti in zato tudi na škodljive razmere v industriji Skupnosti (glej uvodni izjavi 191 in 192 dokončne uredbe).
Hynix and the GOK noted that worldwide demand for DRAMs grew in 2001 by only 59 % compared to the average year on year growth rate of 75 %, apparently contending that in 2000 to 2001 there was a huge slowdown in the growth rate of demand (see recital 193 of the definitive Regulation).
Hynix in KV sta ugotovila, da se je v primerjavi s povprečno 75-odstotno letno stopnjo rasti svetovno povpraševanje po DRAM-u leta 2001 povečalo samo za 59 %, kar naj bi potrjevalo dejstvo, da se je v obdobju 2000–2001 stopnja rasti povpraševanja znatno upočasnila (glej uvodno izjavo 193 dokončne uredbe).
The Commission does not agree.
Komisija se s tem ne strinja.
Hynix and the GOK correctly point out that the DRAMs market is cyclical (see recital 193 of the definitive Regulation).
Hynix in KV utemeljeno poudarjata, da je trg DRAM cikličen (glej uvodno izjavo 193 dokončne uredbe).
However, in cyclical markets, demand growth rates vary sharply from one year to another, and it would be unreasonable to expect the growth rate of demand in a particular year to reflect the average growth rate of demand for an entire business cycle.
Vendar pa se na cikličnih trgih stopnje rasti povpraševanja iz leta v leto spreminjajo in bi bilo nesmiselno pričakovati, da bo stopnja rasti povpraševanja v določenem letu odražala povprečno stopnjo rasti povpraševanja v celotnem gospodarskem ciklusu.
A reasonable way to assess whether demand growth slowed significantly in 2000 to 2001, taking into account the cyclical nature of the market, would be to compare the growth rate of demand in 2000 to 2001, which was a cyclical trough, with the average growth of demand during troughs in previous cycles.
Pri ocenjevanju, če se je rast povpraševanja v obdobju 2000–2001 znatno upočasnila, bi bilo ob upoštevanju ciklične narave trga smiselno primerjati stopnjo rasti povpraševanja v obdobju 2000-2001, ko je bila stopnja rasti najnižja, s povprečno stopnjo rasti v predhodnih obdobjih z nizko stopnjo rasti.
Neither Hynix nor the GOK made any arguments nor submitted any data in support of such a comparison.
Hynix in KV nista navedla argumentov ali predložila podatkov v podporo taki primerjavi.
Accordingly, record evidence does not support the conclusion that in 2000 to 2001 the growth rate of demand slowed down significantly, considering the cyclical nature of the DRAMs market.
Zato glede na ciklično naravo trga DRAM zabeleženi podatki ne podpirajo ugotovitve, da se je stopnja rasti povpraševanja v obdobju 2000–2001 znatno upočasnila.
It was also considered whether the growth rate of demand in the Community slowed down in 2000 to 2001 as compared to the actual growth rates observed in previous years.
Preučilo se je tudi, če se je v obdobju 2000–2001 stopnja rasti povpraševanja v Skupnosti upočasnila v primerjavi z dejanskimi stopnjami rasti, ugotovljenimi v predhodnih letih.
The demand for DRAMs in the Community, measured in terms of EC consumption, increased by 75 % in 1998 to 1999, 58 % in 1999 to 2000 and 51 % in 2000 to 2001.
Povpraševanje po DRAM-u v Skupnosti, izmerjeno na podlagi porabe ES, se je v obdobju 1998–1999 povečalo za 75 %, v obdobju 1999–2000 za 58 % in v obdobju 2000-2001 za 51 %.
Thus, while there was a constant increase in demand during the period under consideration, this increase followed a declining trend.
Tako je bila kljub stalnemu povečevanju povpraševanja v obravnavanem obdobju stopnja povečevanja vedno manjša.
Nevertheless, demand growth rate remained significant in the IP (51 %).
Vendar pa je bila stopnja rasti povpraševanja v OP še vedno znatna (51 %).
The declining trend in demand growth was more pronounced between 1999 and 2000 (where demand growth declined by 17 percentage points) than between 2000 and the IP (where demand growth declined by 8 percentage points).
Zmanjševanje rasti povpraševanja je bilo vidnejše med letoma 1999 in 2000 (ko se je rast povpraševanja zmanjšala za 17 odstotnih točk) kot med letom 2000 in OP (ko se je rast povpraševanja zmanjšala za 8 odstotnih točk).
This evolution of demand growth has to be assessed by comparison with the evolution of the sales prices of the Community industry, the primary cause of injury to the Community industry during the period under consideration (see recital 188 of the definitive Regulation).
To gibanje rasti povpraševanja je treba oceniti s primerjanjem gibanja prodajnih cen industrije Skupnosti, ki je najpomembnejši vzrok za škodo, povzročeno industriji Skupnosti v obravnavanem obdobju (glej uvodno izjavo 188 dokončne uredbe).
In particular, in 1999 to 2000, demand growth declined by a sizable 23 %, but the average sales price of the Community industry dropped by only 5 %.
Zlasti v obdobju 1999–2000 se je rast povpraševanja znatno zmanjšala, tj. za 23 %, povprečne prodajne cene industrije Skupnosti pa so se znižale le za 5 %.
Conversely, between 2000 and the IP demand growth declined moderately by 12 %, but the average sales price of the Community industry plummeted by 77 % (see recital 128 and the relevant table of the provisional Regulation).
Nasprotno se je med letom 2000 in OP rast povpraševanja zmerno zmanjšala, tj. za 12 %, povprečne prodajne cene industrije Skupnosti pa so močno znižale, tj. za 77 % (glej uvodno izjavo 128 in ustrezno tabelo v začasni uredbi).
If slowing demand growth had been a cause of injury, one would have expected the sales prices of the Community industry to decline more sharply in the period when demand growth declined more steeply.
Če bi upočasnitev rasti povpraševanja povzročila škodo, potem bi se morale prodajne cene industrije Skupnosti močneje znižati v obdobju, ko se je rast povpraševanja znatno zmanjšala.
Record evidence shows no such relationship between trends in demand growth and trends in the sales prices of the Community industry.
Iz zabeleženih podatkov je razvidno, da med gibanjem rasti povpraševanja in gibanjem prodajnih cen v industriji Skupnosti ni povezave.
It is therefore concluded that there is no apparent link between demand growth and the sales prices of the Community industry which could indicate that slowing demand growth contributed to the injury suffered by the Community industry.
Zato se sklene, da med rastjo povpraševanja in prodajnimi cenami industrije Skupnosti ni vidne povezave, ki bi lahko nakazovala, da je upočasnitev rasti povpraševanja prispevala k škodi, povzročeni industriji Skupnosti.
This approach is consistent with the findings of recent WTO panels reviewing determinations in respect of non-attribution.
Ta pristop je v skladu z ugotovitvami preiskovalnih odborov STO, ki so pred kratkim preučili trditve, da se škode, ki so jo povzročili drugi dejavniki, ne pripiše subvencioniranemu uvozu.
In particular, WTO panels have upheld non-attribution findings where record evidence showed that the factor concerned could not have caused injury because trends in such factor were independent from trends in key indicators of the domestic industry.
Preiskovalni odbori STO so potrdili ugotovitve v zvezi z nepripisovanjem škode zlasti v primerih, ko je bilo iz zabeleženih podatkov razvidno, da zadevni dejavnik ni mogel povzročiti škode, saj gibanje tega dejavnika ni bilo odvisno od gibanja ključnih kazalnikov domače industrije.
Specifically, in US-Steel, the Panel noted that the facts appeared to support the investigating authority’s finding, in respect of hot-rolled bar, that cost increases had not caused injury because trends in operating margin (a key measure of profitability) were unrelated to trends in the cost of goods sold (COGS) [74].
Zlasti v primeru US-Steel je preiskovalni odbor ugotovil, da glede vroče valjanih palic dejstva očitno podpirajo ugotovitve preiskovalnega organa, da dvig stroškov ni povzročil škode, ker gibanje stopnje dobička iz poslovanja (bistveni kazalnik dobičkonosnosti) ni bilo povezano z gibanjem stroškov prodanega blaga [74].
Similarly, while the Panel concluded that the investigating authority’s finding, in respect of stainless steel bar, concerning demand as a factor of injury, did not satisfy the non-attribution requirement, the Panel noted that the investigating authority could have met this requirement, through a ‘reasoned and adequate explanation’, simply by showing that trends in demand had no connection with trends in a key variable attesting to the condition of the domestic industry [75].
Podobno je preiskovalni odbor sklenil, da glede palic iz nerjavnega jekla ugotovitve preiskovalnega organa v zvezi s povpraševanjem kot škodljivim dejavnikom ne izpolnjujejo zahtev glede nepripisovanja škode, hkrati pa je preiskovalni odbor ugotovil, da bi preiskovalni organ to zahtevo lahko izpolnil z „utemeljeno in ustrezno razlago“, in sicer, da bi preprosto prikazal, da gibanje povpraševanja ni povezano z gibanjem spremenljivega ključnega kazalnika, ki odraža stanje domače industrije [75].
Accordingly, the Commission is of the view that its redetermination satisfies the non-attribution requirement under Article 8(7) of the basic Regulation (which generally corresponds to Article 15.5 of the SCM Agreement) in respect of demand growth by showing that, during the period under consideration, trends in demand growth were independent from trends in the sales prices of the Community industry.
Zato Komisija meni, da se v skladu s členom 8(7) osnovne uredbe (ki na splošno ustreza členu 15.5 Sporazuma SIU) s ponovno preučitvijo izpolnjuje zahteva glede nepripisovanja škode v zvezi z rastjo povpraševanja, saj je iz te preučitve razvidno, da je v obdobju obravnave gibanje rasti povpraševanja ni bilo odvisno od gibanja prodajnih cen industrije Skupnosti.
The Commission is also of the view that its redetermination satisfies the non-attribution requirement in respect of declines in the level of demand by showing that during the period under consideration no such demand declines took place.
Komisija meni tudi, da ponovna preučitev izpolnjuje zahtevo glede nepripisovanja stroškov v zvezi z zmanjšanjem povpraševanja, saj je iz nje razvidno, da se v obdobju obravnave obseg povpraševanja ni zmanjšal.
Overcapacity
Presežna zmogljivost
The Panel noted in paragraph 7.421 of its report that the question of separating and distinguishing the effects of overcapacity in driving prices down should be addressed, irrespective of who is to blame for such overcapacity.
Preiskovalni odbor je v odstavku 7.421 svojega poročila navedel, da je treba obravnavati vprašanje v zvezi z ločevanjem in razlikovanjem vplivov presežne zmogljivosti od vpliva subvencioniranega uvoza na znižanje cen, ne glede na to, kaj je vzrok za to presežno zmogljivost.
The Commission notes that ‘overcapacity’ is not expressly referred to in Article 8(7) of the basic Regulation (which generally corresponds to Article 15.5 of the SCM Agreement).
Komisija opozarja, da „presežna zmogljivost“ ni izrecno omenjena v členu 8(7) osnovne uredbe (ki na splošno ustreza členu 15.5 Sporazuma SIU).
The concept is discussed in the provisional and definitive Regulations insofar as it is invoked by certain of the interested parties.
Ta dejavnik se obravnava v začasni in dokončni uredbi v primeru, da so se nanj sklicevale nekatere zainteresirane stranke.
It is a relative concept, insofar as it depends on how much capacity is available and how much capacity is being used – that is, on the level of demand.
To je relativen koncept, saj je odvisen od razpoložljive zmogljivosti in izkoriščene zmogljivosti na ravni povpraševanja.
‘Overcapacity’ may thus arise either because capacity is increased, or demand falls.
„Presežno zmogljivost“ lahko tako povzroči povečanje zmogljivosti ali zmanjšanje povpraševanja.
‘Overcapacity’ as a possible factor of injury can be examined in the context of the world market or in the context of the Community market.
„Presežna zmogljivost“ kot možen škodljiv dejavnik se lahko preuči v okviru svetovnega trga ali v okviru trga Skupnosti.
The Commission considers both situations below.
Komisija oba primera obravnava v nadaljevanju.
As set out in recital 153 of the provisional Regulation and recital 197 of the definitive Regulation, some overcapacity existed worldwide during a number of years including the period under consideration.
Kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 153 začasne uredbe in uvodni izjavi 197 dokončne uredbe je določena presežna zmogljivost po vsem svetu obstajala že več let, tudi v obdobju obravnave.
This finding has not been disputed by any party concerned.
Tej ugotovitvi ni oporekala nobena zadevna stranka.
However, as set out in recital 147 of the provisional Regulation, the worldwide overcapacity was estimated to be approximately 20 % of the market.
Vendar pa se ocenjuje, kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 147 začasne uredbe, da je presežna zmogljivost po vsem svetu znašala približno 20 % trga.
Hynix accounted for around 17 % of worldwide production during the IP.
Hynix je predstavljal približno 17 % svetovne proizvodnje v OP.
Given that Hynix was virtually bankrupt during the IP and remained afloat only through the subsidies provided by the GOK, it can be concluded that the worldwide overcapacity situation has been artificially maintained through the subsidisation of Hynix.
Glede na to, da je bil Hynix v OP praktično v stečaju in se je finančno obdržal samo zaradi subvencij, ki jih je dodelil KV, se lahko sklene, da se je s subvencioniranjem Hynixa umetno vzdrževala presežna zmogljivost po vsem svetu.
Thus, the effect of worldwide overcapacity on the injurious situation of the Community industry was channelled through Hynix’s subsidised imports.
Tako je bil vpliv presežne zmogljivosti po vsem svetu na škodljive razmere v industriji Skupnosti posledica subvencioniranega uvoza Hynixa.
This effect has been analysed in recitals 144 to 149 of the provisional Regulation and recitals 191 and 192 of the definitive Regulation.
Ta vpliv je bil preučen v uvodnih izjavah 144 do 149 začasne uredbe ter v uvodnih izjavah 191 in 192 dokončne uredbe.
In this respect, the effect of worldwide overcapacity created by Hynix cannot be considered as a factor separate from the effects of the subsidised imports.
V zvezi s tem se vpliv presežne zmogljivosti po vsem svetu, ki ga je ustvaril Hynix, ne more šteti kot dejavnik, ki ni povezan s vplivi subvencioniranega uvoza.
In any event, even if the effect of worldwide overcapacity could be considered separately from the effect of subsidised imports, the following can be observed.
Vsekakor, tudi če bi se lahko vpliv presežne zmogljivosti po vsem svetu obravnaval ločeno od vpliva subvencioniranega uvoza, bi lahko ugotovili naslednje.