natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Prior to the imposition of the provisional duties, the two Russian exporting producers were informed forthwith of the basis on which it was intended to apply facts available at the stage of the provisional determination and were given the opportunity to provide further explanations, in accordance with Article 18(4) of the basic Regulation.
Pred uvedbo začasnih dajatev sta bila oba ruska proizvajalca izvoznika vnaprej obveščena, na kakšni podlagi se namerava uporabiti razpoložljiva dejstva v fazi začasne določitve, in sta imela možnost predložiti nadaljnje razlage v skladu s členom 18(4) osnovne uredbe.
The two Russian exporting producers claimed that they cooperated to the best of their abilities and that the full application of facts available was therefore disproportionate.
Oba ruska proizvajalca izvoznika sta trdila, da sta sodelovala po svojih najboljših možnostih in da je bila celotna uporaba razpoložljivih dejstev nesorazmerna.
They argued that in accordance with Article 18(3) of the basic Regulation, the companies’ own data, although not in all respects ideal, should have been used.
Trdila sta, da bi se v skladu s členom 18(3) osnovne uredbe morali uporabiti podatki samih družb, čeprav niso bili popolni v vseh pogledih.
In this respect, and as outlined in recitals 70 to 74 of the provisional Regulation, it is recalled first of all that both companies submitted incomplete, incorrect and misleading information.
V zvezi s tem in kot je v uvodnih izjavah (70) do (74) začasne uredbe poudarjeno, je treba najprej opozoriti, da sta obe družbi predložili nepopolne, nepravilne in zavajajoče informacije.
Moreover, one company refused to submit information for the calculation of the dumping margin or did not provide such information in a timely manner thus, it was no longer verifiable.
Poleg tega družba ni hotela predložiti potrebnih informacij za izračun stopnje dampinga ali pa teh podatkov ni predložila pravočasno, tako da jih ni bilo več mogoče preveriti.
Finally, a trader in Russia related to one of the exporting producers did not cooperate.
Nazadnje, trgovec v Rusiji, povezan z enim od proizvajalcev izvoznikov, ni sodeloval.
Both companies already admitted the existence of deficiencies in their responses to the questionnaires, as well as during the on-the-spot verification, but alleged that these were not such as to cause undue difficulty in arriving at a reasonably accurate finding.
Obe družbi sta pomanjkljivosti priznali že v izpolnjenih vprašalnikih ter med preverjanjem na kraju samem, vendar sta trdili, da te pomanjkljivosti niso bile takšne, ki bi povzročile pretirane težave pri doseganju sprejemljivo natančnih ugotovitev.
It was claimed that the deficiencies would only have a minor impact on the findings and that the figures supplied by the companies would, overall, be sufficiently reliable to be used for the determination of dumping.
Trdili so, da so pomanjkljivosti le malo vplivale na ugotovitve in da so bili podatki, ki sta jih družbi predložili, na splošno dovolj zanesljivi za določitev dampinga.
A re-examination was made of all information submitted by the two companies in their responses to the questionnaire and during the on-the-spot verification, as well as of all the information submitted by the companies following the disclosure of the provisional findings.
Vse informacije, ki sta jih družbi predložili v izpolnjenih vprašalnikih in med preverjanjem na kraju samem ter vse informacije, ki sta jih družbi predložili po razkritju začasnih ugotovitev, so bile ponovno proučene.
However, none of the companies’ explanations submitted could alter the provisional conclusions.
Vendar nobena razlaga, ki sta jo predložili družbi, ni spremenila začasnih sklepov.
It is reiterated that the data provided by the companies in their questionnaire reply could not be reconciled with their audited accounts.
Ponovno je treba poudariti, da podatki, ki sta jih predložili družbi v izpolnjenih vprašalnikih, niso mogli biti usklajeni z revidiranimi izkazi.
This was considered a serious deficiency.
To se je štelo za resno pomanjkljivost.
Under these circumstances, a reliable individual dumping margin cannot be established and recourse has to be made to facts available.
V teh okoliščinah se ne more uvesti zanesljive individualne stopnje dampinga, zato je treba upoštevati obstoječa dejstva.
In this regard and as already mentioned in recital 72 of the provisional Regulation, it is recalled that one company provided significantly misleading information concerning its company structure which ultimately did not allow the reconciliation of the figures reported.
V zvezi s tem je treba opozoriti, kot je že omenjeno v uvodni izjavi (72) začasne uredbe, da je ena družba predložila zelo zavajajoče informacije o organizacijski strukturi svoje družbe, kar je preprečilo uskladitev poročanih podatkov.
The reply of this company was also significantly incomplete and of low quality.
Odgovor te družbe je bil tudi zelo nepopoln in slab.
For the other company, while each deficiency taken separately may not have a major impact on the dumping calculations, the accumulation of such deficiencies casts serious doubts on the overall reliability of the data.
Pri drugi družbi posamezne pomanjkljivosti morda niso imele velikega vpliva na izračun dampinga, vendar je kopičenje takšnih pomanjkljivosti povzročilo resne dvome glede splošne zanesljivosti podatkov.
Therefore, and for the reasons set out in recital 71 of the provisional Regulation, available facts had to be used in accordance with Article 18 of the basic Regulation.
Zato in zaradi razlogov, določenih v uvodni izjavi (71) začasne uredbe, so se morali razpoložljivi podatki uporabiti v skladu s členom 18 osnovne uredbe.
No new evidence was provided which could alter these findings.
Predložen ni bil noben nov dokaz, ki bi te ugotovitve spremenil.
Due to the serious deficiencies outlined above and the impossibility of verifying the information submitted, it had to be concluded that data submitted were overall unreliable and inaccurate.
Zaradi zgoraj izpostavljenih resnih pomanjkljivosti in nezmožnosti preveriti predložene informacije, je bilo treba skleniti, da so bili predloženi podatki na splošno nezanesljivi in netočni.
Therefore, the questionnaire replies of both companies had to be rejected as a whole.
Zato je bilo treba izpolnjene vprašalnike obeh družb v celoti zavrniti.
Consequently, the findings of recitals 70 to 74 and the conclusion in recital 75 of the provisional Regulation, namely that the dumping margins for both exporting producers could not be established on the basis of their own data but had to be based on facts available in accordance with Article 18 of the basic Regulation, is hereby confirmed.
Zato se potrdijo ugotovitve iz uvodnih izjav (70) do (74) in sklepi iz uvodne izjave (75) začasne uredbe, tj. da se stopnje dampinga za oba proizvajalca izvoznika niso mogle določiti na podlagi njunih podatkov, ampak so morale biti določene na podlagi razpoložljivih dejstev v skladu s členom 18 osnovne uredbe.
In the absence of any comments by the interested parties, the methodology set out in recital 76 of the provisional Regulation is hereby confirmed.
Ker ni bilo nobenih novih pripomb zainteresiranih strank, se potrdi metodologija, določena v uvodni izjavi (76) začasne uredbe.
Both companies claimed that the calculation of the export price was wrongly based on prices, as recorded by Eurostat, for imports falling under the CN code ex39046100, since apart from the product concerned this code also includes other products not subject to the present proceeding.
Obe družbi sta trdili, da je izračun izvoznih cen napačno temeljil na cenah, ki jih je Eurostat zabeležil za uvoz, uvrščen pod oznako KN ex39046100, saj ta oznaka poleg zadevnega izdelka vključuje tudi druge izdelke, ki niso predmet tega postopka.
In this regard, it should be noted that the large majority of imports under the abovementioned CN code falls under the product concerned.
V zvezi s tem je treba opomniti, da velika večina uvoza, uvrščenega pod zgoraj omenjene oznake KN, spada pod zadevni izdelek.
Nevertheless, in the provisional determinations, adjustments were made to the data recorded by Eurostat on the basis of information available (estimates of the Community industry).
Kljub temu so bile v začasnih določitvah opravljene uskladitve informacij, ki jih je Eurostat zabeležil na podlagi razpoložljivih informacij (ocene industrije Skupnosti).
In the absence of any more reliable information available, this methodology was maintained for the determination of the definitive dumping margin.
Ker zanesljivejših razpoložljivih informacij ni bilo, se je ta metodologija še naprej uporabljala za določitev dokončne stopnje dampinga.
One company claimed that in order to establish its export price, the information of two unrelated importers accounting for more than 80 % of its sales to the Community during the investigation period should be used.
Ena družba je trdila, da bi morali za določitev njene izvozne cene uporabiti informacije dveh nepovezanih uvoznikov, ki sta med obdobjem preiskave predstavljala več kot 80 % prodaje v Skupnost.
However, one of these importers did not fully cooperate during the investigation.
Vendar eden od teh uvoznikov med preiskavo ni v celoti sodeloval.
In addition, the data provided by the fully cooperating unrelated importer could not be linked with those provided by the exporting producer concerned.
Poleg tega med podatki, ki jih je predložil v celoti sodelujoči nepovezan uvoznik, in podatki, ki jih je predložil zadevni proizvajalec izvoznik, ni bilo mogoče vzpostaviti povezave.
Therefore, the data provided did not allow a determination of the export price on that basis and the claim had to be rejected.
Zato na navedeni podlagi s predloženimi podatki ni bilo mogoče določiti izvozne cene in je bilo treba zahtevek zavrniti.
In the absence of any other information, the methodology as outlined in recital 77 of the provisional Regulation was maintained and the export price was calculated on the basis of Eurostat data.
Ker drugih informacij ni bilo, se je metodologija, kakor je bilo poudarjeno v uvodni izjavi (77) začasne uredbe, uporabljala še naprej, izvozna cena pa se je izračunala na podlagi podatkov Eurostata.
In the absence of any comments by the interested parties, the findings of recitals 78 and 79 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Ker ni bilo nobenih pripomb zainteresiranih strank, se potrdijo ugotovitve iz uvodnih izjav (78) in (79) začasne uredbe.
In the absence of any comments by the interested parties, the methodology for the calculation of the dumping margins as set out in recitals 24, 65 to 68 and 80 to 82 of the provisional Regulation are herewith confirmed.
Ker ni bilo nobenih novih pripomb zainteresiranih strank, se potrdi metodologija za izračun stopenj dampinga, kakor je določena v uvodnih izjavah (24), (65) do (68) in (80) do (82) začasne uredbe.
Considering the above, the definitive dumping margins, expressed as a percentage of the cif import price at the Community border, are:
Ob upoštevanju zgoraj navedenega veljajo naslednje dokončne stopnje dampinga, izražene kot odstotek uvozne cene CIF na meji Skupnosti:
Community production, Community industry and Community consumption
Proizvodnja Skupnosti, industrija Skupnosti in potrošnja Skupnosti
In the absence of any comments in this particular respect, the findings in recitals 83 to 87 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Ker glede tega ni bilo nobenih pripomb, se potrdijo ugotovitve iz uvodnih izjav (83) do (87) začasne uredbe.
The two Russian exporting producers reiterated that for the purpose of assessing injury, imports of granular PTFE originating in Russia should be decumulated for the reasons set out in recital 91 of the provisional Regulation.
Oba ruska proizvajalca izvoznika sta ponovno poudarila, da se pri oceni škode uvoz granuliranega PTFE s poreklom iz Rusije ne bi smel združevati z uvozom iz LRK iz razlogov, določenih v uvodni izjavi (91) začasne uredbe.
To support their claim, the exporting producers argued that the decrease in the Community industry’s profitability from 2002 onwards coincided with a decrease of imports originating in Russia, while in 2001, when imports from Russia were at their highest, the Community industry enjoyed high profit margins.
Da bi podprla svojo trditev, sta proizvajalca izvoznika nadalje trdila, da je zmanjšanje dobičkonosnosti industrije Skupnosti od leta 2002 dalje sovpadlo z upadom uvoza s poreklom iz Rusije, medtem ko je leta 2001, ko je bil uvoz iz Rusije največji, industrija Skupnosti imela visoke stopnje dobička.
In contrast, imports originating in the PRC increased in parallel to the Community industry’s decline in profit margin.
V nasprotju s tem se je uvoz s poreklom iz LRK večal vzporedno z nižanjem stopnje dobička industrije Skupnosti.
The exporter concluded that on this basis material injury could not have been caused by imports originating in Russia and that cumulation was therefore not warranted.
Izvoznik je sklenil, da na tej podlagi znatne škode ne bi mogel povzročiti uvoz s poreklom iz Rusije in da kumulacija zato ni bila utemeljena.
It is noted that, as set out in recital 90 of the provisional Regulation, price trends from both Russia and the PRC, are similar.
Opomniti je treba, da je, kakor je določeno v uvodni izjavi (90) začasne uredbe, gibanje cen iz Rusije in LRK podobno.
They have a decreasing trend throughout the entire IP and dropped each year by a significant percentage.
Gre za nižanje v celotnem OP, in sicer vsako leto za precejšen odstotek.
Furthermore, both imports originating in Russia and those originating in the PRC undercut the Community industry’s prices substantially throughout the period from 1 January 2001 to the end of the IP (period considered).
Poleg tega sta tako uvoz s poreklom iz Rusije kot iz Kitajske močno in nelojalno nižala cene industrije Skupnosti v celotnem obdobju od 1. januarja 2001 do konca OP („obravnavano obdobje“).
In addition, it is noted that import trends from Russia, although decreasing in 2002, remained stable afterwards and even increased slightly during the IP.
Poleg tega je treba opomniti, da so gibanja uvoza iz Rusije kljub temu, da so se leta 2002 nižala, kasneje ostala stabilna in so se med OP celo nekoliko zvišala.
Finally, the definitive findings confirmed that imports of granular PTFE from the PRC and Russia were competing with each other on the Community market.
Končne ugotovitve so potrdile, da sta si uvoza granuliranega PTFE iz LRK in Rusije med seboj konkurirala na trgu Skupnosti.
Therefore, and in view of the arguments set out in recitals 89 to 92 of the provisional Regulation, there are no reasons to conclude that Russian imports should be decumulated.
Zato in glede na utemeljitve iz uvodnih izjav (89) do (92) začasne uredbe ni razlogov za sklep, da se uvoz iz Rusije ne bi smel združevati z uvozom iz LRK.
The abovementioned argument was consequently rejected.
Zgornja utemeljitev je bila zato zavrnjena.
In the absence of any further comments in this particular respect, the findings in recitals 88 to 93 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Ker glede tega ni bilo nobenih nadaljnjih pripomb, se potrdijo ugotovitve iz uvodnih izjav (88) do (93) začasne uredbe.
Volume, market share and prices of the imports concerned
Obseg, tržni delež in cene zadevnega uvoza
In the absence of any comments in this particular respect, the findings in recitals 94 to 96 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Ker glede tega ni bilo nobenih pripomb, se potrdijo ugotovitve iz uvodnih izjav (94) do (96) začasne uredbe.
One Chinese exporting producer expressed its concern with regard to the provisional determination of the post-importation costs when calculating the price of the Community industry.
En kitajski proizvajalec izvoznik je izrazil zaskrbljenost glede začasne določitve stroškov, nastalih po uvozu, pri izračunu cene industrije Skupnosti.
In particular, this exporter alleged that such cost would be higher than the one used in the provisional calculations, without however providing any supporting evidence in this regard.
Ta izvoznik je zlasti trdil, da bi bil takšen strošek višji kot strošek, uporabljen pri začasnih izračunih, ne da bi v zvezi s tem predložil kakršne koli dokaze.
The determination of post-importation costs at provisional stage was based on actual data provided by the two cooperating importers.
V začasni fazi je določitev stroškov, nastalih po uvozu, temeljila na dejanskih podatkih, ki sta jih predložila dva sodelujoča uvoznika.
The reply of one of these importers was subject to verification.
Odgovor enega od teh uvoznikov je bil preverjen.
The information of the other importer, although not verified, was in line with the verified data of the first importer and was therefore considered sufficiently reliable.
Čeprav niso bile preverjene, so bile informacije drugega uvoznika v skladu s preverjenimi informacijami prvega uvoznika, zato so se štele za dovolj zanesljive.
It is therefore considered that the data provided by the importers were more reliable than the estimates made by the Chinese exporting producers, which were furthermore not substantiated by any evidence.
Zato velja, da so bili podatki, ki so jih predložili uvozniki, zanesljivejši kot ocene kitajskih proizvajalcev izvoznikov, ki niso bile ustrezno podkrepljene z dokazi.
This claim had consequently to be rejected.
Ta zahtevek je bilo zato treba zavrniti.
One Chinese exporting producer pointed to a clerical error when calculating the adjustment for import duties.
En kitajski proizvajalec izvoznik je opozoril na stvarno napako pri izračunu uskladitve za uvozne dajatve.
Accordingly, the adjustment for import duties for all Chinese exporting producers was corrected in accordance with the applicable duty rate during the IP.
Temu ustrezno je bila v skladu s stopnjo dajatve, veljavno v OP, popravljena uskladitev za uvozne dajatve za vse kitajske proizvajalce izvoznike.
As announced in recital 98 of the provisional Regulation, it was examined whether the adjustment provisionally granted for quality differences between the like product sold by the Community industry and the product concerned imported from Russia and the PRC was appropriate.
Kakor je navedeno v uvodni izjavi (98) začasne uredbe je bilo proučeno, ali je bila začasno odobrena uskladitev zaradi razlik v kakovosti med podobnim izdelkom, ki ga je prodajala industrija Skupnosti, in zadevnim izdelkom, uvoženim iz Rusije in LRK, ustrezna.
In this regard, the Community industry submitted that post-treatment would only be necessary for a limited number of the imported product types, i.e. the reactor bead.
V zvezi s tem je industrija Skupnosti trdila, da bi bila nadaljnja obdelava nujna le za omejeno število uvoženih vrst izdelkov, tj. za reakcijsko kapljico.
The Community industry further argued that in order to produce pre-sintered material, their products would also need further processing, and therefore no adjustment to the import price would be necessary.
Industrija Skupnosti je nadalje trdila, da bi za proizvodnjo predhodno sintranega materiala njihovi izdelki morali biti nadalje obdelani, zato ne bi bila potrebna nobena uskladitev z uvozno ceno.
Finally, information was submitted regarding sales of high quality product types produced by the Russian exporting producers, which did not need any post-treatment.
Nazadnje so bile predložene tudi informacije v zvezi s prodajo visoko kakovostnih vrst izdelka, ki so jih proizvedli ruski proizvajalci izvozniki in za katere ni bila potrebna nadaljnja obdelava.
It was found that certain granular PTFE types produced by Russian exporting producers indeed reached higher quality standards and could thus be used without any further treatment.
Ugotovljeno je bilo, da so določene vrste granuliranega PTFE, ki jih je proizvedel ruski proizvajalec izvoznik, dejansko dosegale višje standarde kakovosti, zato so se lahko uporabile brez nadaljnje obdelave.
However, these product types were only sold in negligible quantities during the IP and mainly for testing purposes.
Vendar so se te vrste izdelka v OP prodajale samo v zanemarljivih količinah in v glavnem za testiranje.
Thus, on the basis of the information available from the cooperating users, imports of such higher quality granular PTFE from Russia constituted only 1,4 % of their total imports from that country.
Tako je na podlagi informacij, ki so jih dali na voljo sodelujoči uporabniki, uvoz takšnega granuliranega PTFE višje kakovosti iz Rusije predstavljal samo 1,4 % njihovega celotnega uvoza iz navedene države.
It was further found that all other imported granular PTFE grades needed post-treatment, which consisted mainly in heating and further milling.
Poleg tega je bilo ugotovljeno, da je bilo treba vse druge vrste granuliranega PTFE nadalje obdelati, torej zlasti segrevati in mleti.
This process has to be distinguished from the processing needed for the production of pre-sintered PTFE, which is a specific process after post-treatment.
Ta postopek je treba razlikovati od postopka, potrebnega za proizvodnjo predhodno sintranega PTFE, ki je poseben postopek po nadaljnji obdelavi.
Thus, the adjustment granted at provisional stage correctly reflects the demonstrated quality differences between the like product manufactured by the Community industry and the product concerned and does not concern the additional processing costs of granular PTFE required for the production of pre-sintered grades.
Tako uskladitev, ki je bila odobrena v začasni fazi, ustrezno odraža dokazane razlike v kakovosti med podobnim izdelkom, ki ga je proizvedla industrija Skupnosti, in zadevnim izdelkom ter ne zadeva dodatnih stroškov predelave granuliranega PTFE, ki je potrebna za proizvodnjo predhodno sintranih vrst.
The Community industry’s arguments had therefore to be rejected.
Zato je bilo treba utemeljitve industrije Skupnosti zavrniti.
On the other hand, one Russian exporting producer and one importer of granular PTFE from Russia claimed that even after post-treatment the granular PTFE exported by this exporting producer would still be of a lower quality than the granular PTFE produced and sold by the Community industry on the Community market.
Po drugi strani sta en ruski proizvajalec izvoznik in en uvoznik granuliranega PTFE iz Rusije trdila, da je bil granulirani PTFE, ki ga je izvozil ta proizvajalec izvoznik, celo po nadaljnji obdelavi še vedno nižje kakovosti kot granulirani PTFE, ki ga je proizvedla in prodala industrija Skupnosti na trgu Skupnosti.
The exporting producer added that the post-treatment would only balance quality differences with regard to the particle size and the impurity of the product, excluding, however, other key quality parameters, such as tensile strength and elongation, which would have a considerable impact on the intrinsic quality of the Russian granular PTFE and consequently on the quality of the semi-finished product.
Proizvajalec izvoznik je dodal, da je nadaljnja obdelava samo uravnavala razlike v kakovosti glede velikosti delcev in nečistoče izdelka, ne da bi upoštevala druge ključne parametre kakovosti, kot sta natezna trdnost in raztezek, kar bi imelo precejšen vpliv na dejansko kakovost ruskega granuliranega PTFE in posledično na kakovost polizdelka.
In order to substantiate this claim, the abovementioned importer submitted information on testing results which allegedly showed quality differences between granular PTFE produced by Community producers and post-treated granular PTFE imported from Russia.
Za utemeljitev te trditve je zgoraj omenjeni uvoznik predložil informacije o testnih rezultatih, ki naj bi kazale razlike v kakovosti med granuliranim PTFE, ki so ga proizvedli proizvajalci Skupnosti, in nadalje obdelanim granuliranim PTFE, ki je bil uvožen iz Rusije.
On this basis, it was claimed that the adjustment should exceed the mere cost of post-treatment.
Na podlagi tega so trdili, da bi morala uskladitev preseči same stroške nadaljnje obdelave.
However, the investigation could not confirm these allegations.
Vendar preiskava tega ni mogla potrditi.