natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The selected companies accounted for respectively around 25 and 22 % of the export quantities to the Community of the Chinese and Vietnamese cooperating exporting producers and respectively around 42 and 50 % of domestic sales in the PRC and Vietnam reported by the cooperating exporters.
Izbrane družbe so predstavljale približno 25 % in 22 % izvoznih količin v Skupnost kitajskih in vietnamskih sodelujočih proizvajalcev izvoznikov oziroma približno 42 % in 50 % domače prodaje v LRK in Vietnamu, o kateri so poročali sodelujoči izvozniki.
The exclusion of the STAF products did not significantly influence the representative sample.
Izključitev izdelkov STAF ni znatno vplivala na reprezentativnost vzorcev.
The cooperating exporting producers, which were not finally retained in the sample, were informed through the Chinese or Vietnamese authorities that any anti-dumping duty on their exports would be calculated in accordance with the provisions of Article 9(6) of the basic Regulation.
Sodelujoče proizvajalce izvoznike, ki na koncu niso bili obdržani v vzorcu, so kitajski in vietnamski organi obvestili, da bi bila vsakršna protidampinška dajatev na njihov izvoz izračunana v skladu z določbami člena 9(6) osnovne uredbe.
Questionnaires were sent for completion to all sampled companies and replies from all of them, except one in the PRC, were received within the given deadlines.
Komisija je poslala vzorce vsem vzorčenim družbam, izpolnjene vprašalnike so v določenem roku vrnili vsi, razen družba iz LRK.
Four exporting producers in the PRC and four exporting producers in Vietnam, which were not included in the sample, claimed an individual dumping margin and have provided the relevant information within the given deadline, with a view to the application of Articles 9(6) and 17(3) of the basic Regulation.
Štirje proizvajalci izvozniki v LRK in štirje proizvajalci izvozniki v Vietnamu, ki niso bili vključeni v vzorec, so zahtevali individualno stopnjo dampinga in so v določenem roku predložili ustrezne informacije, potrebne za uporabo členov 9(6) in 17(3) osnovne uredbe.
However, in view of the unprecedented size of the samples which concerned 20 companies and many other related parties, the Commission concluded, in accordance with Article 17(3) of the basic Regulation, that no individual examination of exporting producers in the PRC nor Vietnam could be granted because this would have been unduly burdensome and would have prevented completion of the investigation in good time.
Glede na neprimerljivo velikost vzorcev, v katere je bilo vključenih 20 družb in veliko drugih povezanih strank, je Komisija v skladu s členom 17(3) osnovne uredbe sklenila, da ni mogoče odobriti individualne preiskave niti proizvajalcev izvoznikov v LRK niti v Vietnamu, ker bi bilo to preveč obremenjujoče in bi preprečilo pravočasni zaključek preiskave.
As far as Community producers are concerned, the Commission selected a sample based primarily on the size of the relevant Community producers in terms of production volume.
Kar zadeva proizvajalce Skupnost, je Komisija izbrala vzorec, ki je prvotno temeljil na številu zadevnih proizvajalcev Skupnosti v smislu obsega proizvodnje.
This was based on the information provided by the producers themselves and by their national associations.
To je temeljilo na informacijah, ki so jih predložili proizvajalci sami ter njihova nacionalna združenja.
In order to receive a balanced picture of the footwear industry, the geographical location of the producers was also considered.
Da bi lahko dobili uravnoteženo sliko obutvene industrije, se je upošteval tudi geografski položaj proizvajalcev.
Thus, the sample, which primarily reflects the size and importance of the various producing companies, also reflects the geographical spread of the industry in the Community.
Vzorec, ki prvotno odraža število in pomembnost različnih proizvodnih družb, torej odraža tudi geografsko razširjenost industrije v Skupnosti.
The 10 producers in the sample represent around 10 % of the production of the complainant Community producers.
Deset proizvajalcev v vzorcu predstavlja približno 10 % proizvodnje proizvajalcev pritožnikov Skupnosti.
Market economy treatment (MET)
Tržnogospodarska obravnava (TGO)
Pursuant to Article 2(7)(b) of the basic Regulation, in anti-dumping investigations concerning imports originating in the PRC and Vietnam, normal value shall be determined in accordance with paragraphs 1 to 6 of the said Article for those exporting producers which were found to meet the criteria laid down in Article 2(7)(c) of the basic Regulation, i.e. where it is demonstrated by such exporting producers that market economy conditions prevail in respect of the manufacture and sale of the like product.
V skladu s členom 2(7)(b) osnovne uredbe se normalna vrednost v protidampinških preiskavah v zvezi z uvozom iz LRK in Vietnama določi v skladu z odstavki 1 do 6 navedenega člena za tiste proizvajalce izvoznike, za katere je bilo ugotovljeno, da izpolnjujejo merila iz člena 2(7)(c) osnovne uredbe, tj. kjer proizvajalci izvozniki dokažejo, da veljajo pogoji tržnega gospodarstva v zvezi z izdelavo in prodajo podobnega izdelka.
Briefly, and for ease of reference only, these criteria are set out in a summarised form below:
Ta merila so zaradi boljše preglednosti na kratko navedena spodaj v strnjeni obliki:
business decisions and costs are made in response to market conditions, and without significant State interference;
poslovne odločitve in stroški nastanejo kot odziv na tržne razmere in brez večjega vmešavanja države;
accounting records are independently audited, in line with international accounting standards (IAS) and applied for all purposes;
računovodska evidenca je neodvisno revidirana v skladu z mednarodnimi računovodskimi standardi in se uporabljajo za vse namene;
there are no significant distortions carried over from the former non-market economy system;
ni znatnih izkrivljanj, prenesenih iz prejšnjega sistema netržnega gospodarstva;
All the Chinese and the Vietnamese producers selected in the samples requested MET pursuant to Article 2(7)(b) of the basic Regulation and replied to the MET claim form for exporting producers within the given deadlines.
Vsi kitajski in vietnamski proizvajalci, izbrani v vzorce, so zahtevali TGO v skladu s členom 2(7)(b) osnovne uredbe in v določenih rokih izpolnili obrazec zahtevka za TGO za proizvajalce izvoznike.
However, one Chinese producer did not submit a questionnaire reply subsequent to having had its request for MET examined.
Vendar en kitajski proizvajalec ni predložil izpolnjenega vprašalnika, potem ko je bil proučen njegov zahtevek za TGO.
In these circumstances, it is necessary to establish a dumping margin for this producer on the basis of facts available.
V teh okoliščinah je treba določiti stopnjo dampinga za tega proizvajalca na podlagi razpoložljivih dejstev.
Consequently, its request for MET is null and void and only 12 MET claims of the remaining sampled Chinese exporting producers have been further analysed by the Commission.
Tako je njegov zahtevek za TGO ničen in neveljaven in Komisija je nadalje analizirala le 12 zahtevkov za TGO preostalih vzorčenih kitajskih proizvajalcev izvoznikov.
For those companies selected in the samples, the Commission sought all information deemed necessary and verified all information submitted in the MET claim at the premises of the companies in question.
Za navedene družbe, izbrane v vzorce, je Komisija iskala vse potrebne informacije in v prostorih zadevnih družb preverila vse informacije, navedene v zahtevku za TGO.
MET determination regarding exporting producers in the PRC
Določanje TGO v zvezi s proizvajalci izvozniki v LRK
The following table summarises situation of each company against each of the five criteria as set out in Article 2(7)(c) of the basic Regulation.
Spodnja tabela povzema ugotovitve za vsako družbo glede petih meril iz člena 2(7)(c) osnovne uredbe.
Source: Verified questionnaire replies of cooperating Chinese exporters.
Vir: Preverjeni odgovori na vprašalnike sodelujočih kitajskih izvoznikov.
Business decisions
Poslovne odločitve
Assets and ‘carry over’
Sredstva in „vnaprejšnja poraba“
Legal environment
Pravno okolje
Currency exchange
Menjalni tečaj
Company 1
Družba 1
no MET
brez TGO
Company 2
Družba 2
Company 3
Družba 3
Company 4
Družba 4
Company 5
Družba 5
Company 6
Družba 6
Company 7
Družba 7
Company 8
Družba 8
Company 9
Družba 9
Company 10
Družba 10
Company 11
Družba 11
Company 12
Družba 12
The companies concerned were given an opportunity to comment on the above findings.
Zadevne družbe so dobile možnost, da dajo pripombe na zgornje ugotovitve.
Firstly, it is noted that four sampled Chinese exporting producers did not meet any of the five criteria required to qualify for MET.
Prvič, treba je opomniti, da štirje vzorčeni kitajski proizvajalci izvozniki niso izpolnili nit enega izmed petih meril, potrebnih za upravičenost do TGO.
This was due to the fact that the information they had provided was substantially incomplete and therefore no conclusions could be drawn as to whether they fulfilled the relevant criteria.
Razlog za to je dejstvo, da so bile informacije, ki so jih predložili, v veliki meri nepopolne in zato ni bilo mogoče ugotoviti, ali izpolnjujejo ustrezna merila.
Consequently, these criteria are deemed not to be met.
Zato se šteje, da ta merila niso izpolnjena.
Secondly, it is recalled that it is the Commission's consistent practice to examine whether a group of related companies, as a whole, fulfils the conditions for MET.
Drugič, treba je opozoriti, da je običajna praksa Komisije proučiti, ali skupina povezanih družb kot celota izpolnjuje pogoje za TGO.
Therefore, in cases where a subsidiary or any other company related to the applicant in the PRC is a producer and/or a seller of the product concerned, all such related companies have to provide a MET claim form.
Zato v primeru, ko je hčerinska družba ali katera koli druga družba, povezana z vložnikom v LRK, proizvajalec in/ali prodajalec zadevnega izdelka, morajo vse takšne povezane družbe predložiti obrazec zahtevka za TGO.
Consequently, failure in that respect by all of the four sampled exporting producers mentioned in recital 71 lead to the result that it could not be established that these groups, as a whole, fulfil all the conditions for MET.
Ker nihče od štirih vzorčenih proizvajalcev izvoznikov, navedenih v uvodni izjavi 71 zgoraj, tega ni storil, ni bilo mogoče ugotoviti, ali te skupine kot celota izpolnjujejo vse pogoje za TGO.
As far as the firs criterion is concerned (Business decisions made in response to market signals, without significant State interference, and costs reflect market values), it was concluded that all 12 Chinese sampled exporting producers did not demonstrate that they fulfil this criterion.
Glede merila 1 („Poslovne odločitve nastanejo kot odziv na tržne razmere in brez večjega vmešavanja države, stroški pa odražajo tržne vrednosti“) je bilo sklenjeno, da nihče od 12 vzorčenih kitajskih proizvajalcev izvoznikov ni dokazal, da izpolnjuje to merilo.
In particular, the reasons for not meeting the first criterion included the existence of sales restrictions set out in the Articles of Association and/or business licences or, in one case, de facto sales restrictions, of the sampled companies, which are due to State interference.
Razlogi za neizpolnitev merila 1 so vključevali zlasti obstoj omejitev prodaje, določene v statutu in/ali poslovnem dovoljenju, v enem primeru pa de facto omejitev prodaje vzorčenih družb, kar pa gre pripisati vmešavanju države.
The sampled companies argued upon disclosure that such restrictions are irrelevant, because these allegedly are outdated and are merely non-binding company internal rules.
Vzorčene družbe so ob razkritju trdile, da so takšne omejitve nepomembne, saj naj bi bile domnevno zastarele in so le nezavezujoča notranja pravila družb.
However, such documents set out the basis, inter alia, upon which a company trades its goods.
Vendar takšni dokumenti pomenijo podlago za, med drugim, trgovanje družb s svojim blagom.
In fact, and to the contrary, the Chinese administration only authorises a company to operate on the basis of its Articles of Association and its business licence, which constitute the specific legal framework for a given company.
Dejstvo je, da kitajski organi v nasprotju s tem dovolijo delovanje družbe le na podlagi njihovega statuta in poslovnega dovoljenja, ki sestavljajo poseben pravni okvir za določeno družbo.
As far as the second criterion is concerned (Firms have a clear set of accounting records, independently audited in line with international accounting standards and are applied for all purposes), seven companies failed to demonstrate that they fulfil the condition set in Article 2(7)(c) of the basic Regulation.
Kar zadeva merilo 2 („Podjetja imajo eno jasno računovodsko evidenco, ki je bila neodvisno pregledana v skladu z mednarodnimi računovodskimi standardi in uporabljena v vse namene“), sedem družb ni dokazalo, da izpolnjujejo pogoj iz člena 2(7)(c) osnovne uredbe.
As a matter of fact, accounts were characterised by significant flaws in those cases.
Dejansko se je v navedenih primerih izkazalo, da so računovodske evidence zelo pomanjkljive.
For instance, for one exporter, the audited balance sheets did not reflect the fair and true value of assets and liabilities at all times because they were not booked at the moment they incurred (at the time of purchase) but when payments were made.
Na primer, pregledana bilanca stanja pri enem izvozniku ni odražala pravične in dejanske vrednosti sredstev in obveznosti ob vsakem času, saj niso bila knjižena v času nakupa, ampak po opravljenih plačilih.
Such infringement of a fundamental international accounting standard (IAS), notably the accrual principle, was however not commented on by the auditors.
Glede na takšno kršitev bistvenega mednarodnega računovodskega standarda, zlasti obračunskega načela, pa revizorji niso imeli pripomb.
Consequently, the accounting records were not audited in line with international accounting standards.
Tako računovodske evidence niso bile pregledane v skladu z mednarodnimi računovodskimi standardi.
In another case, accounting records were unclear because important vouchers were incomplete.
V drugem primeru pa računovodske evidence niso bile jasne, saj so bile pomembne knjigovodske listine nepopolne.
This, again, was not mentioned by the auditors.
Tudi tega dejstva revizorji niso omenjali.
Upon disclosure no convincing explanation for such failures has been provided.
Ob razkritju za navedene nepravilnosti ni bilo predložene prepričljive razlage.
In addition, two sampled exporting producers did not follow their auditors' recommendations concerning the accounting of accruals, land-rents, provisions for bad debts, the devaluation of fixed assets and stocks in the financial years following the audit so as to keep clear accounts.
Dva vzorčena proizvajalca izvoznika nista upoštevala priporočila njunih revizorjev glede računovodstva na podlagi poslovnih dogodkov, dajanja v najem zemljišč, določb glede slabih dolgov, razvrednotenja osnovnih sredstev in stanja v poslovnih letih po pregledu in dejstva, da je treba voditi jasno računovodsko evidenco.
Nine companies have not demonstrated that they fulfil the third criterion (Production costs and financial situation are not subject to distortions carried over from the non-market economy system).
Devet družb ni dokazalo, da so izpolnili merilo 3 („Proizvodni stroški in finančno stanje nista predmet izkrivljanj, prenesenih iz nekdanjega sistema netržnega gospodarstva“).
In the cases at stake, it was notably found that land-use rights or machinery had not been passed on at market conditions to the exporters concerned, a fact that indeed caused distortions of costs and financial situations carried over from the non market economy system.
Pri teh perečih zadevah je bilo zlasti ugotovljeno, da pravice do rabe zemljišč ali strojev zadevnim izvoznikom niso bile posredovane pod tržnimi pogoji, kar pa je v resnici povzročilo izkrivljanje stroškov in finančnega stanja, prenesenih iz sistema netržnega gospodarstva.
Upon disclosure some of the sampled Chinese exporting producers contested these findings.
Ob razkritju so nekateri vzorčeni kitajski proizvajalci izvozniki spodbijali te ugotovitve.
However, they did not properly substantiate their allegations that they obtained those assets at market conditions.
Vendar niso pravilno utemeljili svojih trditev, da so navedena sredstva pridobili pod tržnimi pogoji.
As regards the fourth criterion (The firms concerned are subject to bankruptcy and property laws which guarantee legal certainty and stability for the operation of firms), in regard to the four producers that failed to provide sufficient information, it was concluded, in the absence of such information, that they did not demonstrate that they meet this criterion.
Kar zadeva merilo 4 („Zadevna podjetja so predmet zakonov o stečaju in lastninskih razmerjih, ki zagotavljajo pravno varnost in stabilnost delovanja podjetij“) v zvezi s štirimi proizvajalci, ki niso predložili zadostnih informacij, je bilo sklenjeno, da niso dokazali izpolnitve tega merila, saj niso predložili navedenih informacij.
Finally, the same four companies, given their failure to provide sufficient information, also failed to demonstrate that they meet the fifth criterion (Exchange rate conversions are carried out at market rates).
Nazadnje, iste štiri družbe glede na to, da niso predložile zadostnih informacij, tudi niso dokazale, da izpolnjujejo merilo 5 („Pretvorbe deviznih tečajev se opravljajo po tržnih stopnjah“).
The following table summarises the determination for each company against each of the five criteria as set out in Article 2(7)(c) of the basic Regulation.
Spodnja tabela povzema ugotovitve za vsako družbo gleda petih meril iz člena 2(7)(c) osnovne uredbe.
Source: Verified questionnaire replies of cooperating Vietnamese exporters.
Vir: Preverjeni odgovori na vprašalnike sodelujočih vietnamskih izvoznikov.
All eight companies disagreed with the determinations made and claimed that they should be granted MET.
Nobena izmed osmih družb se ni strinjala z ugotovitvami in trdili so, da jim mora biti TGO odobren.
Regarding the first criterion, six companies failed to demonstrate that their business decisions were made in response to market signals and without significant State interference.
Glede merila 1 šest družb ni moglo dokazati, da se njihove poslovne odločitve sprejmejo kot odziv na tržne signale in brez vmešavanja države.
Four of them operate under the obligation to export either all or a significant part of their production.
Štirje izmed njih so obvezani izvažati bodisi vso ali znaten del svoje proizvodnje.
The companies concerned claimed that they were allowed to sell on their domestic market.
Zadevne družbe so trdile, da so smele prodajati na svojem domačem trgu.
However, their submissions failed to give any relevant counter arguments.
Vendar pa niso predložile ustreznih utemeljitev, ki bi temu nasprotovale.
The companies merely argued that they are free to ask for a modification of their investment licence if they want to sell on their domestic market and/or that quantitative sales restrictions have a tax purpose.
Družbe so le trdile, da smejo zaprositi za spremembe svojega naložbenega dovoljenja, če želijo prodajati na svojem domačem trgu in/ali da so vzrok za količinske omejitve prodaje davki.
In that respect, the Commission services cannot but note that the companies are apparently free to remove this restriction from their investment licence but did not request any modifications during the IP nor thereafter.
V zvezi s tem morajo službe Komisije opomniti, da lahko očitno družbe odpravijo to omejitev, določeno v naložbenem dovoljenju, vendar pa niso zahtevale nobenih sprememb niti v OP niti pozneje.
These companies were thus still subject to a sales ratio and were therefore not able to take their business decisions in reaction to market signals.
Za te družbe so še vedno veljali pogoji glede prodaje in zato niso mogle sprejemati poslovnih odločitev na podlagi tržnih razmer.
As regards the two remaining companies, they were found to be entirely state owned with direct management links to the State.
Kar zadeva dve preostali družbi, je bilo ugotovljeno, da sta v celoti v lasti države, s katero je njuna uprava neposredno povezana.
Both of these companies challenged the fact that there was significant State interference but did not provide additional new arguments to substantiate their claim.
Obe družbi sta spodbijali dejstvo, da se je država znatno vmešavala v poslovanje, vendar pa nista predložili dodatnih novih utemeljitev, ki bi ustrezno utemeljile njihove trditve.
Their claims were therefore rejected.
Zato so bili njihovi zahtevki zavrnjeni.
As far as the second criterion is concerned, seven companies failed to fulfil the condition set in Article 2(7)(c) of the basic Regulation.
Kar zadeva merilo 2, sedem družb ni dokazalo, da izpolnjujejo pogoj iz člena 2(7)(c) osnovne uredbe.
Three companies had no audited accounts nor published financial statements.
Tri družbe niso imele niti revidiranih računovodskih evidenc niti objavljenih računovodskih izkazov.
For three other companies, it could not be guaranteed that accounting records are in line with the IAS and applied for all purposes since the auditors specifically mentioned in the published financial statements that the accounting statements are not intended to present the financial position of the company in accordance with accounting principles and practices generally accepted in countries and jurisdictions other than Vietnam.
Pri treh ostalih družbah ni bilo mogoče zagotoviti, da so računovodske evidence v skladu z mednarodnimi računovodskimi standardi in se uporabljajo za vse namene, saj so revizorji v objavljeni reviziji računovodskih izkazov posebej navedli, da namen računovodskih izkazov ni predstavitev finančnega stanja družbe v skladu z računovodskimi načeli in praksami, ki so splošno sprejete v drugih državah in jurisdikcijah, razen v Vietnamu.
This was found to be in contradiction to the IAS norms which state in their ‘Framework for the preparation and presentation of financial statements’ that ‘the objective of financial statements is to provide information about the financial position, performance and changes in financial position of an entity that is useful to a wide range of users in making economic decisions’.
Ugotovljeno je bilo, da je to v nasprotju z normami mednarodnih računovodskih standardov (IAS); v „Okvirnih navodilih za pripravo in predstavitev računovodskih izkazov“ je namreč navedeno: „cilj poročanja je zagotoviti informacije o finančnem stanju, poslovanju in spremembah finančnega stanja katere koli družbe, ki so uporabne za široki krog uporabnikov pri sprejemanju gospodarskih odločitev“.
In addition, IAS1 states that any entity whose financial statements comply with IAS shall make an explicit and unreserved statement of such compliance in the notes which is obviously not the case for these companies.
Poleg tega je v IAS1 navedeno, da vsaka družba, katere finančni izkazi so v skladu z IAS, izrecno in brez pridržkov v opombah navede takšno skladnost, kar pa vsekakor ni veljalo za te družbe.
For two of these companies, significant problems have been raised by the auditors in their report and for one of them, the verification performed by the auditors was found to be highly insufficient to guarantee the reliability of the accounts.
Revizorji so v svojem poročilu izpostavili znaten problem glede dveh izmed teh družb, pri eni od njiju pa je bilo ugotovljeno, da je pregled, ki so ga opravili revizorji, nezadosten za zagotovitev zanesljivosti računovodskih evidenc.
The seven exporting producers concerned contested the conclusions.
Sedem zadevnih proizvajalcev izvoznikov je te sklepe spodbijalo.