natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Third, it would clearly not be appropriate to use Citibank Seoul as a benchmark to determine the commercial reasonableness of participating in the syndicated loan, for the reasons set forth in recitals 130 to 133 of the definitive Regulation.
Tretjič, jasno je, da bi bilo neprimerno uporabiti Citibank Seoul za primerjavo pri ugotavljanju gospodarske primernosti sodelovanja pri posojilu bančnega konzorcija, in sicer zaradi razlogov iz uvodnih izjav 130 in 133 dokončne uredbe.
First, Citibank Seoul failed to cooperate in this investigation, thus forcing the Commission to rely on facts available regarding the participation of Citibank Seoul.
Prvič, Citibank Seoul ni sodelovala v tej preiskavi, zaradi česar je morala Komisija uporabiti dejstva v zvezi s sodelovanjem Citibank Seoul, ki so bila na voljo.
Second, the evidence on the record discussed in recital 133 of the definitive Regulation reflects an unusually close relationship between the GOK and Citibank that calls into question the impartiality of Citibank in lending to Hynix.
Drugič, zabeleženi dokazi, navedeni v uvodni izjavi 133 dokončne uredbe, kaže na nenavadno tesen odnos med KV in Citibank, ki postavlja pod vprašanje nepristranskost Citibank v zvezi s posojilom Hynixu.
Third, Citibank itself was a financial advisor to Hynix regarding its restructuring and thus had an inherent conflict with respect to participation in new lending to Hynix [26].
Tretjič, Citibank je finančno svetoval Hynixu v zvezi s prestrukturiranjem in se je zato znašla v konfliktu glede sodelovanja pri novem posojilu Hynixu [26].
It had not given financing to Hynix prior to becoming Hynix's financial advisor.
Preden je postala finančni svetovalec Hynixa, ni Citibank nikoli financirala te družbe.
Fourth, the Panel itself recognised that Citibank cannot serve as a basis for determining whether any of the loans to Hynix were made on the basis of commercial considerations [27].
Četrtič, tudi preiskovalni odbor je prišel do zaključka, da Citibank ne more biti uporabljena za izhodišče pri ugotavljanju, ali je bilo katero od posojil Hynixu odobreno na podlagi komercialnih premislekov [27].
Finally, it is important to note that Hynix defaulted on its interest payments on the syndicated loan almost as soon as the loan was given.
Nenazadnje je treba opozoriti, da Hynix ni bil sposoben plačati obresti posojila bančnega konzorcija že v trenutku, ko je bilo posojilo odobreno.
As noted in recital 87 of the definitive Regulation, Hynix had not been servicing the syndicated loan that it received in January 2001.
Kakor je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 87 dokončne uredbe, Hynix ni servisiral posojila bančnega konzorcija, ki ga je prejel januarja 2001.
Based on the foregoing, it may be concluded that none of the other seven participants in the syndicated loan can serve as an appropriate benchmark for measuring the commercial reasonableness or the amount of benefit to Hynix from the portions of the loan provided by KEB and KDB.
Na podlagi zgoraj navedenega je mogoče sklepati, da noben od ostalih sedmih sodelujočih pri posojilu bančnega konzorcija ne more biti uporabljen za ustrezno primerjavo pri ocenjevanju gospodarske primernosti ali višine ugodnosti, ki je bila dodeljena Hynixu iz deležev posojila, ki sta ga zagotovila KEB in KDB.
On this basis, the participation of KEB and KDB in the syndicated loan may still be considered to be a countervailable subsidy that provides a benefit to Hynix.
Na podlagi tega je še naprej mogoče sodelovanje KEB in KDB pri posojilu bančnega konzorcija šteti za subvencijo, proti kateri se lahko sprejmejo izravnalni ukrepi, ki Hynixu zagotavlja ugodnost.
However, as set out in recital 37 of the definitive Regulation, no subsidy amount has been countervailed under the syndicated loan in order to avoid double-counting, as the syndicated loan amount was subsequently rolled-over into the October 2001 measures.
Vendar pa, kakor je navedeno v izjavi (37) dokončne uredbe, niso bili pri posojilu bančnega konzorcija proti nobeni višini subvencije uvedeni izravnalni ukrepi, da bi se preprečilo dvojno štetje, saj je bilo posojilo bančnega konzorcija kasneje obnovljeno v okviru ukrepov oktobra 2001.
Thus, no amendment of the findings is necessary with regard to this measure.
Ugotovitev glede tega ukrepa zato ni treba spremeniti.
Calculation of the amount of benefit
Izračun višine ugodnosti
The Panel found, at para. 7.215 of its report, that the calculation of the amount of the benefit conferred by each of the financial contributions was inconsistent with Articles 1.1(b) and 14 of the SCM Agreement.
Preiskovalni odbor je v odstavku 7.215 svojega poročila ugotovil, da izračun višine ugodnosti, dodeljene z vsakim finančnim prispevkom ni v skladu s členom 1.1(b) in členom 14 Sporazuma SIU.
The GOK did not raise any claims challenging ‘as such’ provisions of the basic Regulation or the Guidelines [28] relating to the calculation of the amount of the benefit.
KV ni predložila nobenih razlogov za pritožbo proti takšnim določbam osnovne uredbe ali Smernic [28] v zvezi z izračunom višine ugodnosti.
Thus, the Panel report only addressed how the EC applied these provisions and calculated the amount of the benefit with respect to the measures at issue in this proceeding (the definitive Regulation).
Poročilo preiskovalnega odbora je torej obravnavalo samo način, na katerega je ES uporabila te določbe in izračunala višino ugodnosti ob upoštevanju ukrepov, obravnavanih v tem postopku (dokončna uredba).
In particular, the Panel considered that the EC acted inconsistently with Article 1.1(b) and 14 of the SCM Agreement by taking as a starting point that the amount of the benefit conferred by each of the financial contributions, which were generally in the form of loans, guarantees or equity, was to be calculated as if those financial contributions had been grants, irrespective of their terms and conditions.
Preiskovalni odbor je zlasti menil, da ES ni ravnala v skladu s členom 1.1(b) in členom 14 Sporazuma SIU, ko je izhajala iz tega, da je treba višino ugodnosti, ustvarjeno z vsakim finančnim prispevkom v obliki posojila, jamstva ali lastniškega kapitala, izračunati tako, kot da bi bili ti finančni prispevki subvencije in se njihovi pogoji ne bi upoštevali.
The Panel reasoned that the calculation of the amount of the benefit should be based on the benefit to the recipient, not the cost to the provider.
Preiskovalni odbor je pojasnil, da bi moral izračun višine ugodnosti temeljiti na ugodnosti, ki je bila odobrena prejemniku, in ne na strošku, ki ga je imel financer.
It further reasoned that the provision in this case of funds to Hynix in the form of loans, guarantees and equity may have been of less benefit to Hynix than if the funds had been provided in the form of grants.
Menil je tudi, da je zagotovitev sredstev Hynixu v obliki posojil, jamstev in lastniškega kapitala lahko pomenilo manjšo ugodnost za Hynix, kot če bi bila sredstva zagotovljena v obliki subvencij.
In particular, the Panel reasoned that the funds would appear as debt in Hynix's balance sheet or would have given rise to the dilution of the ownership claims of existing shareholders in Hynix [29].
Natančneje, preiskovalni odbor je menil, da bi bila sredstva prikazana kot dolg v bilanci Hynixa ali pa bi bila povod za razvodenitev lastniških pravic obstoječih delničarjev Hynixa [29].
The Panel considered that, as a matter of WTO law, the correct starting point for the EC in this case must be the search for an alternative benchmark as a base for the calculation of the amount of benefit.
Preiskovalni odbor je menil, da bi bilo z vidika zakonodaje STO pravilno izhodišče ES v tem primeru, da najde alternativno primerjavo kot osnovo za izračun višine ugodnosti.
The Panel particularly referred, at para. 7.213 of its report, to ‘a comparable commercial loan which the firm could actually obtain on the market’ (Article 14(b) SCM Agreement) and ‘a comparable commercial loan absent the government guarantee’ (Article 14(a) SCM Agreement).
Preiskovalni odbor se je v odstavku 7.213 tega poročila skliceval zlasti na „primerljivo komercialno posojilo, ki ga dejansko lahko dobi na trgu kapitala“ (člen 14(b) Sporazuma SIU) in „primerljivo komercialno posojilo brez vladnega jamstva“ (člen 14(a) Sporazuma SIU).
The Panel also referred, by way of example, to so-called ‘junk bonds’ or ‘vulture funds’ [30].
Preiskovalni odbor se je skliceval tudi na t. i. „junk bonds“ (tvegane obveznice z visoko obrestno mero) ali „vulture funds“ [30].
The Panel observed that there may be circumstances in which there is an absence of any comparable benchmark, and that the investigating authority was and is entitled to considerable leeway in adopting a reasonable approach to calculating the amount of the benefit to Hynix [31].
Preiskovalni odbor je opozoril, da lahko pride do okoliščin, v katerih ne obstaja nobena primerjava, in da je preiskovalni organ bil in je upravičen do več možnosti pri sprejetju ustreznega pristopa k izračunu višine ugodnosti, ki je bila dodeljena Hynixu [31].
In the light of the Panel's findings, for each of the relevant financial contributions in the measure at issue, the Commission has re-examined all of the relevant facts and evidence on the record, taking into account all of the submissions of interested parties, specifically with respect to possible alternative benchmarks, including ‘junk bonds’ and ‘vulture funds’, and, for each relevant financial contribution, redetermined the amount of the benefit to Hynix.
V smislu ugotovitev preiskovalnega odbora v zvezi z vsakim zadevnim finančnim prispevkom v okviru obravnavanega ukrepa je Komisija ponovno preučila vsa zadevna dejstva in zabeležene dokaze in pri tem upoštevala vse predložene listine zainteresiranih strank, zlasti v zvezi z možnimi alternativnimi primerjavami, vključno z „junk bonds“ in „vulture funds“, ter za vsak zadevni finančni prispevek ponovno izračunala višino ugodnosti, dodeljeno Hynixu.
The Commission has not re-examined or made any redeterminations with respect to any substantive or procedural matters confirmed by the Panel report or not found by the Panel to be inconsistent with the SCM Agreement, including, but not limited to: Hynix's financial situation or worth, conditions in the DRAM market, conditions in the financial markets and the use of facts available.
Komisija ni izvedla ponovnega pregleda ali prišla do novih ugotovitev v zvezi z vsebinskimi in postopkovnimi zadevami, ki jih je potrdil preiskovalni odbor v svojem poročilu ali za katere preiskovalni odbor ni ugotovil, da ne bi bile v skladu s Sporazumom SIU, vključno s, vendar ne omejeno samo na to, finančnim stanjem ali vrednostjo Hynixa, pogoji na trgu DRAM, pogoji na finančnih trgih in uporabo razpoložljivih dejstev.
The Commission has limited itself to the specific issue that is the subject of the Panel's findings: the availability of alternative benchmarks.
Komisija se je omejila na posebno vprašanje, ki je predmet ugotovitev preiskovalnega odbora: na razpoložljivost alternativnih primerjav.
In making this redetermination, the Commission has based its calculation of subsidy on a ‘benefit to the recipient’ and not on a ‘cost to the government’ standard, as is required by Article 6 of the basic Regulation, consistent with the Panel's reasoning, with the determinations in the definitive Regulation and with the Commission's established practice [32].
Pri tem ponovnem pregledu je Komisija vzela za osnovo izračuna subvencije „ugodnost, ki je bila dodeljena prejemniku“ in ne načelo „stroška, ki ga je imel financer“, kakor je določeno v členu 6 osnovne uredbe, skladno z mnenjem preiskovalnega odbora, z ugotovitvami dokončne uredbe in z ustaljeno prakso Komisije [32].
In this regard, the Commission notes that one of the key features of the SCM Agreement (Article 14) following the Uruguay Round was the confirmation that the ‘benefit to the recipient’ standard would normally prevail over the ‘cost to the government’ standard.
V tem smislu je Komisija opozorila, da je bil eden ključnih dejavnikov Sporazuma SIU (člen 14) v urugvajskem krogu potrditev, da načelo „ugodnosti, ki je bila dodeljena prejemniku“ običajno prevlada nad načelom „stroška, ki ga je imel financer“.
The Commission further notes that the former will generally lead to a higher amount of subsidy than the latter, because it requires a comparison with commercial, rather than governmental, funding.
Komisija tudi opozarja, da ima prvo načelo običajno za posledico višji znesek subvencije kot drugo, ker zahteva primerjavo s tržnim in ne z vladnim financiranjem.
Consequently, the Commission notes that the ‘cost to the government’ approach would not generally be expected to lead to a higher amount of subsidy than the ‘benefit to the recipient’ approach.
Komisija zato opozarja, da se od načela „stroška, ki ga ima vlada“ običajno ne pričakuje, da bo imel za posledico višji znesek subvencije kot bi ga imelo načelo „ugodnosti, ki je bila dodeljena prejemniku“.
Thus, consistent with the Panel's reasoning, the Commission has examined the financial contributions ‘from the perspective of the recipient’.
Zato je Komisija v skladu z mnenjem preiskovalnega odbora preučila finančne prispevke „z vidika prejemnika“.
The Commission has done this by means of an objective examination of the information on the record of the case.
Komisija je zabeležene podatke o tem primeru preučila nepristransko.
The Commission has not enquired into what might have been the subjective state of mind of one or more Hynix executives at the time.
Komisija se ni poglabljala v to, kakšno bi lahko bilo stanje duha enega ali več vodilnih delavcev Hynixa v tistem času.
Rather, it has enquired into what, objectively, the amount of the benefit would have been for a company in exactly Hynix's situation at the time.
Raje se je osredotočila na to, kakšna bi po nepristranskih izračunih lahko bila višina ugodnosti, dodeljena družbi, ki bi bila v tistem času v ravno takšni situaciji kot Hynix.
Calculating the amount of the benefit from the perspective of the recipient does not entail switching from an objective to a subjective basis of enquiry.
Izračun višine ugodnosti z vidika prejemnika ne vključuje prehajanja od objektivne do subjektivne osnove preučitve.
KEIC guarantee for export credits (D/A extension) in the amount of USD 600 million
Jamstvo KEIC za posojila za izvoz (povišanje dokumentarnega akreditiva) v višini 600 milijonov USD
The Panel summarised the facts concerning the KEIC guarantee in the following terms:
Preiskovalni odbor je takole povzel dejstva glede jamstva KEIC:
The second action which was found to be a subsidy was the extension of a guarantee by the Korea Export Insurance Corporation (KEIC) which is the official export credit agency of Korea.
Drugi ukrep, pri katerem je bilo ugotovljeno, da je šlo za subvencijo, je bil povečanje jamstva s strani Korea Export Insurance Corporation („KEIC“), ki je korejska uradna agencija za izvozna posojila.
The KEIC provides export insurance and guarantees to manage the risk associated with overseas transactions.
KEIC zagotavlja izvozna zavarovanja in jamstva za obvladovanje tveganj, povezanih s čezmorskimi transakcijami.
In January 2001, 14 Hynix creditor banks increased the ceiling of the export credit facility for D/A's (documents against acceptance) provided to Hynix from USD 800 million to USD 1,4 billion, an increase of USD 600 million, The KEIC granted the short-term export credit insurance for the extended D/A limit as regards the transaction between Hynix and its overseas subsidiaries.
Januarja 2001 je štirinajst kreditnih bank Hynixa zvišalo zgornjo mejo izvoznega posojila za dokumentarni akreditiv, ki je bil zagotovljen Hynixu, in sicer z 800 milijonov USD na 1,4 milijarde USD, torej za 600 milijonov USD. KEIC je odobrila kratkoročno zavarovanje za izvozno posojilo pri povišani meji dokumentarnega akreditiva v zvezi s transakcijo med Hynixom in njegovimi čezmorskimi podružnicami.
In other words, Hynix collects the foreseen payment for the export transaction from the banks concerned, which hold the D/A documents.
Drugače povedano, Hynix zbira prejema plačila, predvidena za izvozne transakcije s strani zadevnih bank, ki imajo dokumentacijo za dokumentarni akreditiv.
The affiliated importer in the country of destination then makes the payments for the goods concerned directly to the banks against the D/A.
Povezani uvoznik v namembni državi nato nakaže plačila za zadevno blago neposredno bankam za dokumentarni akreditiv.
Hynix pays KEIC a premium for the guarantee and pays interest to the banks concerned for the D/A amounts withdrawn until the importer makes the final payment.
Hynix plača KEIC premijo za jamstvo in tudi obresti zadevnim bankam za vsote dokumentarnega akreditiva, ki se umaknejo, dokler uvoznik ne plača končnega zneska.
The KEIC insurance covers the amounts due to the banks which cannot be collected due to the bankruptcy of either the exporter or the importer.’.
Zavarovanje KEIC krije zneske, ki se dolgujejo banki in ki ne morejo biti izplačani zaradi stečaja izvoznika ali uvoznika.“
The Panel found that the EC reached a reasonable and reasoned conclusion on the basis of the record before it that the KEIC Guarantee conferred a benefit to Hynix [34].
Preiskovalni odbor je ugotovil, da je ES na podlagi dokumentacije, ki ji je bila na voljo, razumno in premišljeno sklepala, da je jamstvo KEIC dodelilo ugodnost za Hynix [34].
In doing so, it recalled that the KEIC itself was hesitant to provide the guarantee on Hynix's debt and needed its own guarantee from the GOK [35].
S tem je opomnil, da je sam KEIC okleval pri zagotavljanju jamstva za dolg Hynixa in je potreboval lastno jamstvo s strani KV [35].
However, as regards the amount of the benefit, the Panel report indicates that the EC should, as a matter of WTO law, re-examine the question of the availability of alternative benchmarks for calculating the benefit to Hynix [36].
Vendar pa, kar zadeva višino ugodnosti, poročilo preiskovalnega odbora navaja, da bi ES morala v skladu z zakonodajo STO ponovno preučiti vprašanje razpoložljivosti alternativne primerjave za izračun ugodnosti, ki je bila dodeljena Hynixu [36].
As the Panel observed, the question of benefit in the case of a government guarantee can be examined from more than one angle [37].
Po mnenju preiskovalnega odbora se lahko vprašanje ugodnosti v primeru jamstva vlade preuči z več plati [37].
One reasonable method of enquiring into the amount of benefit from such a measure might be to compare the guarantee provided by the government with a comparable guarantee provided by the market [38].
Ena primerna metoda za ugotavljanje višine ugodnosti takega ukrepa bi lahko bila primerjava med jamstvom vlade s primerljivim jamstvom, ki ga ponuja trg [38].
A second reasonable method is indicated by Article 6(b) of the basic Regulation (which generally corresponds to Article 14(b) of the SCM Agreement), which refers to government loans; and Article 6(c) of the basic Regulation (which generally corresponds to Article 14(c) of the SCM Agreement), which refers to a loan guarantee by a government [39].
Druga primerna metoda je navedena v členu 6(b) osnovne uredbe (ki na splošno ustreza členu 14(b) Sporazuma SIU), ki se nanaša na vladna posojila; navedena je tudi v členu 6(c) osnovne uredbe (ki na splošno ustreza členu 14(c) Sporazuma SIU), ki se nanaša na vladna posojila [39].
In this case, the ‘loan guaranteed by the government’ is the revolving amount of debt outstanding at any time owed by the Hynix group, via its affiliated importers in various countries of export, to the banks, in respect of export transactions where payment has yet to be made, but funds have already been advanced by the banks to Hynix.
V tem primeru je „jamstvo vlade za posojilo“ obnovljivi znesek dolga, ki je stalno na voljo Hynixu, preko povezanih uvoznikov v različnih izvoznih državah, pri bankah, v zvezi z izvoznimi transakcijami, kjer plačilo še ni bilo izvedeno, so pa bila sredstva preko bank že nakazana Hynixu.
The financial contribution under consideration related to the extension of the facility by USD 600 million.
Obravnavani finančni prispevek je zadeval povečanje dokumentarnega akreditiva za 600 milijonov USD.
However, the facility itself had an overall ceiling of USD 1,4 billion.
Vendar pa je bila zgornja meja celotnega mehanizma/dokumentarnega akreditiva 1,4 milijarde USD.
The Commission has re-examined the extensive record in this case and considered whether there is any relevant benchmark against which the amount of the benefit could be calculated.
Komisija je ponovno pregledala obsežno dokumentacijo v tem primeru in preučila, če obstaja kakšna ustrezna primerjava, na podlagi katere bi lahko izračunali višino ugodnosti.
First, the Commission considered whether Hynix had received new loans at the time that the USD 600 million increase had been granted.
Prvič, Komisija je preučila, ali je Hynix prejel nova posojila v času, ko je bilo odobreno povečanje za 600 milijonov USD.
The record demonstrates, however, that no new commercially comparable lending had been provided.
Vendar iz dokumentacije ni razvidno, da je prišlo do novega komercialno primerljivega posojila.
Second, the Commission looked for verified evidence regarding the cost and terms of a comparable commercial guarantee or a ‘comparable commercial loan absent the government guarantee’ that Hynix or another firm in a situation comparable to Hynix concluded at the relevant time.
Drugič, Komisija je iskala preverjene dokaze o stroških in pogojih primerljivega komercialnega jamstva ali „primerljivega komercialnega posojila brez vladnega jamstva“, ki ga je Hynix ali drugo podjetje v primerljivem položaju sklenilo v zadevnem obdobju.
A comparable commercial loan would ideally be one of approximately the same size, would related to the same or a similar sector of economic activity, would involve a comparable type of activity, such as export credit insurance, and would have been concluded at approximately the same time.
Primerljivo komercialno posojilo bi bilo v najboljšem primeru približno enakega obsega, nanašalo bi se na isti ali podoben sektor gospodarske dejavnosti, zadevalo bi primerljivo vrsto dejavnosti, kot je npr. zavarovanje izvoznega posojila, in bi bilo sklenjeno približno v istem obdobju.
It could not involve any government guarantee, express or implied, and would need to involve a firm in a comparable financial situation to that of Hynix.
Ne bi smelo vsebovati nikakršnega vladnega jamstva, eksplicitnega ali implicitnega, in moralo bi biti dodeljeno podjetju, ki je v primerljivi finančni situaciji kot Hynix.
Having conducted this re-examination, the Commission has determined that there is no reliable information on the record regarding these matters.
S to ponovno preučitvijo je Komisija ugotovila, da glede dokazov v zvezi s to zadevo ni zanesljivih podatkov.
The Commission has not found any such benchmark as regards Hynix itself.
Komisija ni našla primerjave pri sami družbi Hynix.
The loans provided to Hynix were generally either provided by the GOK or by banks that were entrusted and directed by the GOK, and the rate on the syndicated loan would also be an inappropriate benchmark for the reasons stated in recitals 17 to 20 above.
Posojila, ki so bila odobrena Hynixu, so bila odobrena s strani KV ali s strani bank, ki so dobile pooblastila ali navodila KV, obrestna mera za posojilo bančnega konzorcija pa tudi ne bi bila ustrezna primerjava zaradi razlogov, navedenih v uvodnih izjavah 17 do 20.
Lending from Citibank Seoul is also not an appropriate benchmark for the reasons stated in recital 21 above.
Posojilo Citibank Seoul tudi ni ustrezna primerjava zaradi razlogov, navedenih v uvodni izjavi 21.
Citibank's participation was insufficiently significant, was influenced by the participation of other lenders and the GOK and was distorted by both its interest, together with SSB, as Hynix's financial advisor and its long-term relationship with the GOK.
Sodelovanje Citibank ni bilo dovolj pomembno, nanj je vplivalo sodelovanje drugih posojilodajalcev in KV, bilo pa je tudi izkrivljeno zaradi interesov, ki jih je skupaj s SSB imela kot finančni svetovalec Hynixa, in zaradi dolgoročnega odnosa s KV.