natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Subsequently, by defining the product types in accordance with the TARIC codes under which the product is classified (i.e. by standard grade or other than standard grade, including granular) and by the packing or form in which it is shipped (i.e. in bulk, in bags or in containers), an analysis was made as to whether the domestic sales of each product type were sufficiently representative for the purposes of Article 2(2) of the basic Regulation.
Z opredelitvijo vrst izdelkov v skladu z oznakami TARIC, pod katere je uvrščen zadevni izdelek (tj. po standardni kakovosti ali ostalih standardnih kakovostih, vključno z zrnato), ter embalažo ali obliko, v kateri je odpremljen, (tj. v razsutem stanju, vrečah ali zabojnikih), je bila narejena analiza, da se ugotovi, ali je bila domača prodaja posamezne vrste izdelka dovolj reprezentativna za namene iz člena 2(2) osnovne uredbe.
Domestic sales of a particular product type were considered sufficiently representative when the total domestic sales volume of that type during the IP represented 5 % or more of the total sales volume of the comparable product type exported to the Community.
Domača prodaja določene vrste izdelka se je štela za dovolj reprezentativno, če je celotni obseg domače prodaje navedene vrste med OP predstavljal 5 % ali več celotnega obsega prodaje primerljive vrste izdelka, izvoženega v Skupnost.
This was the case for three out of four product types exported to the Community by Uralkali and for two out of three product types exported to the Community by Silvinit.
To je bilo ugotovljeno za 3 od 4 vrst izdelkov, ki jih v Skupnost izvaža Uralkali, in 2 od 3 vrst izdelkov, ki jih v Skupnost izvaža Silvinit.
In cases where the sales volume of a product type, sold at a net sales price equal to or above the adjusted unit cost, represented more than 80 % of the total sales volume of that type, and where the weighted average price of that type was equal to or above the adjusted unit cost, normal value was based on the actual domestic price, calculated as a weighted average of the prices of all domestic sales of that type made during the IP, irrespective of whether these sales were profitable or not.
Kjer je obseg prodaje posamezne vrste izdelkal po neto ceni enaki ali višji od prilagojenih stroškov na enoto, predstavljal več kot 80 % skupnega obsega prodaje te vrste in kjer je bila tehtana povprečna cena te vrste enaka prilagojenim stroškom na enoto, je normalna vrednost temeljila na dejanski domači ceni, izračunani kot tehtano povprečje cen celotne domače prodaje te vrste med OP, ne glede na to, ali je bila prodaja dobičkonosna ali ne.
This was found to be the case for all those product types of Silvinit and Uralkali which were both sold domestically and exported to the Community.
To je bilo ugotovljeno za vse vrste izdelkov družb Silvinit in Uralkali, ki so se prodajali na domačem trgu in izvažali v Skupnost.
Wherever domestic prices of a particular product type sold by an exporting producer could not be used in order to establish normal value because they had not been sold on the domestic market in representative quantities, another method had to be applied.
Če domačih cen posamezne vrste izdelka, ki ga je prodajal proizvajalec izvoznik, ni bilo mogoče uporabiti za določitev normalne vrednosti, ker se izdelki niso prodajali na domačem trgu v reprezentativnih količinah, je bilo treba uporabiti drugo metodo.
In the absence of any other reasonable method, constructed normal value was used.
Ker ni bilo na voljo nobene druge primerne metode, je bila uporabljena konstruirana normalna vrednost.
In all cases where constructed normal value was used and in accordance with Article 2(3) of the basic Regulation, normal value was constructed by adding to the manufacturing costs of the exported types, a reasonable percentage for selling, general and administrative expenses (SG&A) and a reasonable margin of profit.
V vseh primerih, kjer je bila uporabljena konstruirana normalna vrednost v skladu s členom 2(3) osnovne uredbe, je bila konstruirana tako, da je bil proizvodnim stroškom izvozne vrste izdelka prištet razumni znesek za prodajne, splošne in administrativne stroške (PSA-stroški) ter ustrezna stopnja dobička.
As concerns energy costs, such as electricity and gas used in the mining and production processes of the product concerned, the investigation established that these costs form a significant proportion of the total cost of manufacturing of potash producers, not only in Russia but in other producing countries as well.
V zvezi s stroški energije, kot sta elektrika in plin, ki se uporabljata pri rudarskih in proizvodnih postopkih zadevnega izdelka, je bilo s preiskavo ugotovljeno, da pomenijo ti stroški znaten del celotnih proizvodnih stroškov proizvajalcev pepelike, ne le v Rusiji, ampak tudi v drugih državah proizvajalkah.
It was considered appropriate in the present case to also compare the Russian producers’ energy purchase costs per unit to those of other major potash producers with similar production methods, output levels and similar natural advantages in order to determine whether the prices paid were not abnormally low and reasonably reflecting the normal costs.
V tem primeru se je štelo za primerno, da se tudi primerja nabavne stroške energije na enoto ruskih proizvajalcev s stroški drugih velikih proizvajalcev pepelike s podobnimi proizvodnimi metodami, ravnijo proizvodnje in podobnimi naravnimi pogoji, da se ugotovi, ali plačane cene niso bile izjemno nizke in ali so realno odražale normalne stroške.
As there are no other producers of potash in Russia, this information was sought and obtained from two Canadian producers.
Ker v Rusiji ni drugih proizvajalcev pepelike, je Komisija to informacijo iskala in dobila pri dveh kanadskih proizvajalcih.
The data provided showed that the energy requirements of the two Canadian producers were similar to those of the Russian producers and that electricity and gas purchased by these companies was derived from domestic hydroelectric power and major gas fields, as is the electricity and gas used by the Russian companies.
Posredovani podatki so pokazali, da so potrebe obeh kanadskih proizvajalcev po energiji podobne tistim, ki jih imata ruska proizvajalca, in da sta nabavljena elektrika in plin izvirala iz domačih hidroelektrarn ter glavnih plinskih polj, tako kot elektrika in plin, ki ju uporabljata ruski družbi.
The comparison showed that the cost per unit for electricity paid by the Canadian producers was similar to that paid by the Russian producers.
Ta primerjava je pokazala, da so stroški elektrike na enoto, ki jih plačujeta kanadska proizvajalca, podobna tistim, ki jih plačujeta ruska proizvajalca.
As concerns gas supplies, it was established on the basis of data found in the published annual report for 2004 of the Russian gas provider OAO Gazprom (whose regional distributor was the supplier to the exporting producers in question) that the domestic price of gas paid by the two Russian producers was around one fifth of the export price of natural gas from Russia. The same report says that ‘OAO Gazprom together with the Government of the Russian Federation carry out a lot of work to optimise the regulated gas wholesale prices.’
V zvezi z dobavo plina je bilo na podlagi podatkov iz objavljenega letnega poročila ruskega dobavitelja plina OAO Gazprom (katerega regionalni distributer je bil dobavitelj za zadevna proizvajalca izvoznika) za leto 2004 ugotovljeno, da je domača cena plina, ki sta jo plačevala oba ruska proizvajalca, predstavljala približno petino izvozne cene zemeljskega plina iz Rusije.
According to the analysis presented in the said report, there is ‘a risk of low prices for the natural gas sold in the domestic market’ and ‘Gazprom Group is required to supply natural gas to Russian consumers at prices regulated by the Federal Tariff Service. As of now, these prices are considerably lower than the international prices for natural gas.’
Isto poročilo pravi, da se „OAO Gazprom skupaj z vlado Ruske federacije trudi optimizirati nadzorovane veleprodajne cene plina.“ V skladu z analizo, predstavljeno v navedenem poročilu, obstaja „tveganje nizkih cen za zemeljski plin, ki se prodaja na domačem trgu“, in od „Gazprom Group se zahteva, da zemeljski plin ruskim uporabnikom prodaja po cenah, ki jih nadzoruje Zvezna tarifna služba.
Moreover, as it was found in the previous review investigation concluded in November 2005 by Regulation (EC) No 1891/2005, the annual report of 2003 stated that ‘OAO Gazprom did not make any profit in the domestic market’.
Sedaj so te cene bistveno nižje od mednarodnih cen za zemeljski plin.“ Poleg tega je bilo ugotovljeno, kot že v prejšnji preiskavi pregledov, ki se je končala novembra 2005 z Uredbo (ES) št. 1891/2005, da je v letnem poročilu za leto 2003 navedeno, da „OAO Gazprom na domačem trgu ni ustvaril nikakršnega dobička“.
In this regard, as the gas prices paid by the companies did not increase, there is no indication that this situation would have changed in the IP.
Ker se cene plina, ki so jih plačevale družbe, niso povišale, s tem v zvezi ne kaže, da bi se lahko takšno stanje v OP spremenilo.
Therefore, all available data strongly suggest that the gas prices charged to domestic customers were made at regulated prices far from cost recovery levels.
Vsi dostopni podatki jasno kažejo, da so bile cene plina, zaračunane domačim strankam, določene po administrativno določenih cenah, ki so močno odstopale od stopenj pokrivanja stroškov.
Moreover, the investigation showed that the price of gas paid by the two Russian producers was significantly lower than the gas price paid by the two Canadian producers.
Preiskava je tudi pokazala, da je bila cena plina, ki sta jo plačevala ruska proizvajalca, znatno nižja od cene plina, ki sta jo plačevala kanadska proizvajalca.
In view of the above, it was therefore considered that the prices charged by the regional Russian gas provider to the Russian potash producers in the investigation period could not reasonably reflect the costs associated with the production of gas when compared to the exported price of gas from Russia and the price of a Canadian gas provider to major industrial users in Canada.
Glede na zgoraj navedeno se zato šteje, da cene, po katerih je ruskima proizvajalcema pepelike v obdobju preiskave zaračunaval ruski regionalni dobavitelj plina, niso mogle realno odražati stroškov, povezanih s proizvodnjo plina, če jih primerjamo z izvozno ceno plina iz Rusije in ceno kanadskega dobavitelja plina glavnim industrijskim uporabnikom v Kanadi.
Therefore, in accordance with Article 2(5) of the basic Regulation, an adjustment to the cost of production for each of the Russian companies was made.
Zato so bili v skladu s členom 2(5) osnovne uredbe proizvodni stroški obeh ruskih družb prilagojeni.
In the absence of any other reasonable basis, such an adjustment was made using information concerning the price of gas for export, net of transport costs, value added tax and excise duty.
Ker ni bilo nobene druge razumne osnove, so bili za prilagoditev uporabljene informacije v zvezi s ceno plina za izvoz, neto stroški prevoza, davkom na dodano vrednost in trošarino.
This adjustment was made in accordance with the methodology used in the previous review investigation concluded in November 2005 by Regulation (EC) No 1891/2005.
Ta prilagoditev je bila narejena v skladu z metodologijo, uporabljeno pri prejšnji preiskavi pregleda, ki je bila zaključena novembra 2005 z Uredbo (ES) št. 1891/2005.
As regards the adjustment concerning the prices of natural gas, the Russian authorities put forward that natural comparative or competitive advantages must be properly taken into account in anti-dumping proceedings.
Kar zadeva prilagoditev cen zemeljskega plina, so ruski organi menili, da je treba naravne primerjalne ali konkurenčne prednosti ustrezno upoštevati v protidampinških postopkih.
Moreover, the Russian authorities alleged that the methodology used for determining profit while constructing the normal value was illegal and unacceptable.
Poleg tega so ruski organi trdili, da je metodologija, uporabljena za določitev dobička pri konstruiranju normalne vrednosti nelegalna in nesprejemljiva.
To this end, it has to be recalled that no adjustment was effected concerning any referred comparative or competitive advantages.
V zvezi s tem je treba opozoriti, da ni bila opravljena nobena prilagoditev v zvezi s katero koli navedeno primerjalno ali konkurenčno prednostjo.
However, an adjustment was made concerning the costs of gas associated with the production of potassium chloride pursuant to Article 2(5) of the basic Regulation as explained in recitals 51 to 54 above as these costs were not reasonably reflected in the records of the parties concerned.
Kakor je pojasnjeno v uvodnih izjavah od 51 do 54, pa je v skladu s členom 2(5) osnovne uredbe prišlo do prilagoditve v zvezi s stroški za plin, povezanimi s proizvodnjo kalijevega klorida, saj ti stroški niso bili ustrezno odraženi v evidencah zadevnih strank.
As also concerns cost of production, it was claimed by the Community industry that depreciation based conventionally on the acquisition (historical) value of the capital assets would not, in accordance with Article 2(5) of the basic Regulation, reasonably reflect the costs associated with the production of the product concerned.
Ker je to povezano tudi s proizvodnimi stroški, je industrija Skupnosti menila, da amortizacija, ki po dogovoru temelji na nabavni (dejanski) vrednosti osnovnih sredstev, v skladu s členom 2(5) osnovne uredbe ne bo realno kazala stroškov, povezanih s proizvodnjo zadevnega izdelka.
It was submitted, therefore, that an upward adjustment to the Russian producers’ costs was required.
Zato je bilo predlagano, da je potrebno prilagajanje navzgor ruskih proizvodnih stroškov.
In this regard, the on-the-spot verification visits to the Russian producers showed that the original value of their assets had been determined on the basis of valuations carried out during the privatisation process which took place in 1993.
V zvezi s tem so preveritveni obiski na kraju samem pri ruskih proizvajalcih pokazali, da je bila prvotna vrednost njunih osnovnih sredstev določena na podlagi vrednotenj, izvedenih med postopkom privatizacije leta 1993.
These asset values were subsequently revised between 1993 and 1997 as a result of the application of ‘revaluation coefficients’ issued by the Russian Government to deal with hyperinflation.
Vrednosti osnovnih sredstev so bile potem popravljene med letoma 1993 in 1997 kot posledica uporabe „revalorizacijskih koeficientov“, ki jih je ruska vlada uvedla proti hiperinflaciji.
Three basic criteria were adopted in establishing these asset values, one of which was the replacement value of the asset.
Za določitev teh osnovnih sredstev so bila sprejeta tri osnovna merila, od katerih je bilo eno tudi nadomestitvena vrednost osnovnih sredstev.
The result of these independent assessments are reflected in the opening balance sheet of the companies in 1998.
Ugotovitev teh neodvisnih vrednotenj je prikazana tudi v bilancah stanja družb leta 1998.
Therefore, in the absence of any substantive evidence showing that depreciation had not been correctly reflected in the accounts of the exporting producers, it is not considered warranted at present time to make any adjustment to depreciation costs in the cost of production data used for establishing the normal value of the companies.
Ker ni bilo zadostnih dokazov, ki bi kazali, da amortizacija v računovodski dokumentaciji proizvajalcev izvoznikov ni bila pravilno prikazana, se zdaj ne zdi utemeljeno, da se naredi prilagoditev stroškov amortizacije pri podatkih o proizvodnih stroških, ki se uporabljajo za določitev normalne vrednosti družb.
With regard to Silvinit, it was found that the company’s sales of potash to the Community during the investigation period were made (1) directly to independent customers in the Community, (2) through related importers in the Community or (3) through an unrelated trader located in Switzerland.
V zvezi z družbo Silvinit je bilo ugotovljeno, da je prodaja pepelike v Skupnost med preiskavo potekala 1) neposredno neodvisnim strankam v Skupnosti, 2) prek povezanih uvoznikov v Skupnosti ali 3) prek nepovezanega trgovca v Švici.
In the case of Uralkali all sales of potash to the Community were made through unrelated traders located in Cyprus and in Switzerland.
V primeru družbe Uralkali je vsa prodaja pepelike v Skupnost potekala prek nepovezanih trgovcev na Cipru in v Švici.
In all cases where exports of potash were made to independent customers in the Community, the export price was established in accordance with Article 2(8) of the basic Regulation, i.e. on the basis of export prices actually paid or payable.
V vseh primerih izvoza pepelike neodvisnim strankam v Skupnosti je bila izvozna cena določena v skladu s členom 2(8) osnovne uredbe, tj. na podlagi izvoznih cen, dejansko plačanih ali plačljivih.
With regard to the sales to related importers in the Community by the related trader, the export price was constructed on the basis of the price at which the imported products were first resold to an independent buyer.
V zvezi s prodajo povezanim uvoznikom v Skupnosti s strani povezanega trgovca je bila izvozna cena konstruirana na podlagi cene, po kateri so bili uvoženi izdelki prvič nadalje prodani neodvisni stranki.
Adjustments were made for all costs incurred between importation and resale by those importers, including SG&A and duties and assuming a reasonable profit margin, in accordance with Article 2(9) of the basic Regulation.
Prilagoditve so bile narejene za vse stroške, ki so jih ti uvozniki imeli med uvozom in nadaljnjo prodajo, vključno s PSA-stroški in dajatvami ter ob domnevi razumne stopnje dobička, v skladu s členom 2(9) osnovne uredbe.
On this basis, adjustments were made, where appropriate, with regard to indirect taxes, transport (including handling costs), ocean freight and insurance costs, packing and credit costs.
Na tej podlagi so bile po potrebi narejene prilagoditve v zvezi s posrednimi davki, stroški prevoza (vključno s stroški pretovarjanja), stroški čezmorskega prevoza in zavarovanja, stroški pakiranja in stroški kredita.
Adjustments were also made where the export sales were made via a related company located in a country outside the Community, pursuant to Article 2(10)(i) of the basic Regulation.
Prilagoditve so bile narejene tudi pri prodaji za izvoz prek povezane družbe s sedežem v državi izven Skupnosti, v skladu s členom 2(10)(i) osnovne uredbe.
In accordance with Article 2(11) of the basic Regulation, the dumping margin was established on the basis of a comparison of the weighted average normal value with the weighted average export prices per product type.
V skladu s členom 2(11) osnovne uredbe je bila stopnja dampinga določena na podlagi primerjave tehtane povprečne normalne vrednosti s tehtanimi povprečnimi izvoznimi cenami za posamezno vrsto izdelka.
This comparison showed the existence of significant dumping of imports of the product concerned by the cooperating exporters at the level of more than 8 % for Uralkali and more than 14 % for Silvinit.
S to primerjavo je bil ugotovljen znaten damping pri uvozu zadevnega izdelka sodelujočega izvoznika na ravni, ki presega 8 %, za družbo Uralkali in ravni, ki presega 14 %, za družbo Silvinit.
The comparison of the data concerning exports to the Community provided by the exporting producers and the total volume of imports as derived from the Eurostat import statistics indicated that the level of cooperation was high, since, the cooperating exporting producers represented the totality of all Community imports from Russia during the IP.
Primerjava podatkov o izvozu v Skupnost, ki so jih predložili izvozniki, in skupnega obsega uvoza, ugotovljenega na podlagi statističnih podatkov Eurostata o uvozu, je pokazala, da je bila stopnja sodelovanja visoka, ker so sodelujoči proizvajalci izvozniki predstavljali celoto vsega uvoza Skupnosti iz Rusije med OP.
The three cooperating producers represent the totality of imports from the countries concerned.
Trije sodelujoči proizvajalci predstavljajo celoten uvoz iz zadevnih držav.
The examination of whether it would be likely that dumping continues should measures be repealed was therefore based to a large extent on the information provided by these cooperating exporting producers.
Preučitev, ali obstaja verjetnost nadaljevanja dampinga, če bi bili ukrepi razveljavljeni, je zato temeljila zlasti na informacijah, ki so jih predložili ti sodelujoči proizvajalci izvozniki.
Current Dumping
Sedanji damping
In order to determine whether there was a likelihood of continuation of dumping, the Commission investigated the existence of current dumping on exports from the countries concerned to the Community on the grounds that if dumping was taking place, then it was reasonable, in the absence of any information to the contrary, to consider that it would be likely to continue in the future.
Za ugotovitev, ali obstaja verjetnost nadaljevanja dampinga, je Komisija preučila obstoj sedanjega dampinga pri izvozu iz zadevnih držav v Skupnost na podlagi dejstva, da če bi damping obstajal, bi bilo ob odsotnosti kakršnih koli informacij o nasprotnem smiselno pričakovati, da se bo damping v prihodnosti verjetno nadaljeval.
In this regard, it is recalled that the level of dumping for potash originating in both of the countries concerned continued to be significant (see recitals 26 to 62).
S tem v zvezi je treba ponovno opozoriti, da je bila stopnja dampinga za pepeliko s poreklom iz obeh zadevnih držav še naprej znatna (glej uvodne izjave 26 do 62).
Relationship between export prices to third countries and the sales price in the Community
Razmerje med izvoznimi cenami v tretje države in prodajno ceno v Skupnosti
It is also noted that export prices to third countries by all the producers concerned were found to be on average below the sales prices of the Community industry in the Community.
Treba je tudi opozoriti, da je bilo ugotovljeno, da so bile izvozne cene v tretje države vseh zadevnih proizvajalcev povprečno nižje od prodajnih cen industrije Skupnosti v Skupnosti.
This means that the prevailing price level for the product concerned in the Community market makes the Community market a very attractive one for the exporters in the countries concerned.
To pomeni, da je zaradi prevladujoče cenovne ravni zadevnega izdelka na trgu Skupnosti ta zelo privlačen za izvoznike iz zadevnih državah.
On this basis, it was considered that there is indeed an economic incentive to shift exports from non-EU countries to the more profitable Community market in case of repeal of the measures in force.
Na podlagi tega se je štelo, da v resnici obstaja gospodarska pobuda, da se izvoz iz držav nečlanic v primeru razveljavitve veljavnih ukrepov preusmeri na dobičkonosnejši trg Skupnosti.
Production, production capacity and investment in Belarus
Proizvodnja, proizvodna zmogljivost in naložbe v Belorusiji
Belaruskali has managed to increase its production by 25 % during the period considered.
Družbi Belaruskali je med obravnavanim obdobjem uspelo povečati proizvodnjo za 25 %.
As the table shows, the production volumes have mainly increased in 2003 and the IP.
Iz tabele je razvidno, da se je obseg proizvodnje povečal zlasti leta 2003 in med OP.
Actual production in Belarus
Dejanska proizvodnja Belorusije
During the period considered, Belaruskali has increased its production capacity by 3 %.
Med obravnavanim obdobjem je družba Belaruskali povečala svojo proizvodno zmogljivost za 3 %.
A further growth of 12 percentage points in production capacity was foreseen by 2006.
Do leta 2006 je bila predvidena nadaljnja rast proizvodne zmogljivosti za 12 odstotnih točk.
In addition, it is noted that whilst Belaruskali was producing potash close to full capacity levels during the IP, it declared a significant further increase in its capacity and total investment in 2005 and 2006.
Opozoriti je treba tudi, da je družba Belaruskali med OP, ob proizvodnji pepelike, ki je skoraj na ravni polne zmogljivosti, napovedala znatno dodatno povečanje svoje zmogljivosti in skupnih naložb v letih 2005 in 2006.