natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
While it is certainly true that global demand for FeSi, in particular from the steel industry, influenced the price setting in certain parts of the period considered, the information available has shown that there were periods in which FeSi contractual prices decreased despite the growing demand.
Čeprav je nedvomno res, da je svetovno povpraševanje po FeSi, zlasti s strani jeklarske industrije, vplivalo na oblikovanje cen v določenih delih obravnavanega obdobja, so razpoložljive informacije pokazale, da so bila tudi obdobja, v katerih so se pogodbene cene FeSi znižale kljub rastočemu povpraševanju.
The same interested parties provided information showing the development of EU crude and stainless steel production and EU FeSi spot prices from 2002 onwards.
Iste zainteresirane stranke so posredovale podatke, ki prikazujejo razvoj proizvodnje nerjavnega in surovega jekla v EU ter spreminjanje promptnih cen FeSi v EU od leta 2002 naprej.
From this data the interested parties drew the conclusion that FeSi prices could only have been driven by demand (primarily from steel producers).
Iz teh podatkov so zainteresirane stranke sklepale, da so cene FeSi lahko odvisne samo od povpraševanja (zlasti s strani proizvajalcev jekla).
However, the analysis of this information confirmed the conclusion reached in recital 88, namely that even on the Community level, FeSi prices were in certain periods decreasing despite an increasing demand from the steel industry.
Vendar je analiza teh podatkov potrdila sklepno ugotovitev iz uvodne izjave 88, namreč da so tudi na ravni Skupnosti cene FeSi v določenih obdobjih padale kljub rastočemu povpraševanju jeklarske industrije.
Therefore, the claim that the low level of FeSi prices was determined by demand and not by the dumped imports has to be rejected.
Zato je treba trditev, da je nizko raven cen FeSi narekovalo povpraševanje in ne dampinški uvoz, zavrniti.
One interested party claimed that the injury suffered by the Community industry had to be attributed solely to the alleged lack of competitiveness of the Community producers and not to the dumped imports.
Ena zainteresirana stranka je zatrjevala, da je treba škodo, povzročeno industriji Skupnosti, pripisati izključno domnevni nekonkurenčnosti proizvajalcev Skupnosti in ne dampinškemu uvozu.
In particular, this interested party cited a working document [3] where raw materials and energy were cited as the most important competitiveness factors for the EU metals industry.
Konkretno se je ta zainteresirana stranka sklicevala na delovni dokument [3], v katerem se surovine in energija omenjajo kot najpomembnejši dejavniki konkurenčnosti za kovinsko industrijo EU.
The analysis of the aforementioned working document showed, however, that no conclusion is drawn in the text which refers to any lack of competitiveness of the European ferro-alloys industry.
Toda analiza omenjenega delovnega dokumenta je pokazala, da v besedilu ni nobene ugotovitve, ki bi se nanašala na morebitno nekonkurenčnost evropske industrije fero zlitin.
On the contrary, this working document indicates that the ferro-alloy producers ‘are facing growing imports from third countries e.g. the PRC, Russia, Ukraine, Brazil and Kazakhstan.
Nasprotno, ta delovni dokument navaja, da se proizvajalci fero zlitin „soočajo z rastočim uvozom iz tretjih držav, kot so LRK, Rusija, Ukrajina, Brazilija in Kazahstan.
The same interested party further argued that most of the Community producers were already unprofitable before any injurious dumping took place in the Community market.
Ista zainteresirana stranka je nadalje trdila, da je bila večina proizvajalcev Skupnosti nedobičkonosnih, še preden je na trgu Skupnosti prišlo do kakršnega koli škodljivega dampinga.
Therefore, it would not be the dumped imports but vulnerable costs structures that have caused the weak economic situation of the Community industry.
Šibkega ekonomskega stanja industrije Skupnosti torej ni povzročil dampinški uvoz, temveč ranljive strukture stroškov.
As it is clearly demonstrated in recital 97 of the provisional Regulation, the Community industry was profitable in 2003 with a pre-tax profit margin of 2,3 %, which increased to 2,7 % in 2004.
Kot je nedvoumno dokazano v uvodni izjavi 97 začasne uredbe, je bila industrija Skupnosti leta 2003 dobičkonosna, s stopnjo dobička pred obdavčitvijo 2,3 %, ki se je leta 2004 povečala na 2,7 %.
In 2005, however, a significant downwards trend in profitability took place and losses reached – 9,2 % of turnover.
Leta 2005 pa je prišlo do tendence bistvenega zmanjševanja dobičkonosnosti in izgube so dosegle –9,2 % prihodkov od prodaje.
The highest losses of – 12,9 % were incurred during the IP.
Največje izgube v višini –12,9 % so nastale v obdobju preiskave.
In this context, it is recalled that part of 2005 is covered by the IP.
V tej zvezi je treba spomniti, da se del leta 2005 prekriva z obdobjem preiskave.
Consequently, the argument that the Community industry was already unprofitable before any injurious dumping took place has to be rejected.
Zato je treba argument, da je bila industrija Skupnosti nedobičkonosna, še preden je prišlo do kakršnega koli škodljivega dampinga, zavrniti.
With regard to imports form other third countries, in the absence of any new comments, the conclusion reached in recital 121 of the provisional Regulation that these imports have not materially contributed to the injury suffered by the Community industry is confirmed.
Kar zadeva uvoz iz drugih tretjih držav, se, ker ni bilo nobenih novih pripomb, potrdi sklepna ugotovitev iz uvodne izjave 121 začasne uredbe, da ta uvoz ni bistveno prispeval k škodi, povzročeni industriji Skupnosti.
Effects of further factors
Učinki drugih dejavnikov
Various interested parties reiterated the claims put forward before the imposition of the provisional measures, that the material injury suffered by the Community industry was allegedly caused by factors other than the dumped imports.
Različne zainteresirane stranke so ponovile trditve, ki so jih izrekle že pred uvedbo začasnih ukrepov, češ da so znatno škodo, ki jo je utrpela industrija Skupnosti, domnevno povzročili drugi dejavniki, kot je dampinški uvoz.
These claims were already duly addressed in the provisional Regulation.
Te trditve so bile ustrezno obravnavane že v začasni uredbi.
More specifically, the claims referring to alleged self-inflicted material injury were addressed in recitals 134 to 136 of the provisional Regulation and the claims concerning the downturn in steel demand were addressed in recital 124 of the provisional Regulation.
Konkretneje, trditve, ki se nanašajo na domnevno samopovzročeno znatno škodo, so bile obravnavane v uvodnih izjavah 134 do 136 začasne uredbe, trditve v zvezi z upadom povpraševanja po jeklu pa v uvodni izjavi 124 začasne uredbe.
Even though no new elements were provided to support these claims, the main findings and conclusions set out in the provisional Regulation are further clarified below.
Čeprav ni bilo predloženih nobenih novih elementov v podporo teh trditev, so spodaj dodatno pojasnjene glavne ugotovitve in sklepi iz začasne uredbe.
Several interested parties claimed that the sharp increase in costs, in particular raw materials and electricity, suffered by the Community industry and the reduction in production capacity of one Community producer have caused the material injury found during the IP.
Več zainteresiranih strank je trdilo, da sta močno povečanje stroškov, zlasti surovin in električne energije, ki ga je utrpela industrija Skupnosti, in zmanjšanje proizvodne zmogljivosti enega proizvajalca Skupnosti povzročila znatno škodo, ugotovljeno v obdobju preiskave.
With regard to the alleged reduction in production capacity of one Community producer, it is recalled that an adjustment to capacity was made as mentioned in recital 93 of the provisional Regulation to take full account of this particular situation.
Kar zadeva domnevno zmanjšanje proizvodne zmogljivosti enega proizvajalca Skupnosti, je treba spomniti, da je bila izvedena prilagoditev zmogljivosti, kot je omenjena v uvodni izjavi 93 začasne uredbe, z namenom polnega upoštevanja tega stanja.
With regard to cost increases, the Community industry alleged that cost increases observed in the alloy industry usually occur on a worldwide scale thereby affecting equally the worldwide industry.
Kar zadeva zvišanja stroškov, je industrija Skupnosti zatrdila, da do zvišanj stroškov, ki jih je opaziti v industriji zlitin, običajno pride na globalni ravni, s čimer v enaki meri prizadenejo vso svetovno industrijo.
An analysis of the price development of major cost items over the period considered shows that costs have increased (electricity, quartzite and electrode paste).
Analiza spreminjanja cen pomembnejših stroškovnih postavk v obravnavanem obdobju kaže, da so se stroški zvišali (električna energija, kvarcit in pasta za elektrode).
However, the investigation has shown that even if these increases were partly compensated by sale price increases the presence of low-priced dumped imports did not allow the Community industry to pass on the full effect of its increases in costs in its sales price.
Vendar je preiskava pokazala, da četudi bi ta zvišanja delno nadomestili z zvišanji prodajnih cen, industrija Skupnosti zaradi poceni dampinškega uvoza ne more na svojo prodajno ceno prenesti celotnega učinka zvišanj stroškov.
Recitals 131 to 140 of the provisional Regulation are therefore confirmed.
Uvodne izjave 131 do 140 začasne uredbe se zato potrdijo.
Several interested parties argued that one specific Community producer had problems with its electricity supplier leading to reduced production quantities in 2005 and 2006.
Več zainteresiranih strank je trdilo, da ima neki določeni proizvajalec Skupnosti težave z dobaviteljem električne energije, kar je pripeljalo do manjših proizvodnih količin v letih 2005 in 2006.
They argued that this fully explained the decrease in production and sales volume by the Community industry and the loss in profitability.
Trdile so, da to docela pojasnjuje zmanjšanje obsega proizvodnje in prodaje industrije Skupnosti ter izgubo dobičkonosnosti.
As already mentioned in recital 84 above, the cause of the injury suffered shall be analysed at the level of the Community industry as a whole.
Kot je že omenjeno v uvodni izjavi 84, je treba vzrok za povzročeno škodo analizirati na ravni industrije Skupnosti kot celote.
However, for the sake of argument, even if the data pertaining to this producer could be excluded from the injury assessment, the trends observed for the remainder of the Community industry would remain highly negative and continue to show material injury.
Vendar pa, zavoljo argumenta, četudi bi podatke, ki se nanašajo na tega proizvajalca, lahko izločili iz ocene škode, bi trendi, ki jih je opaziti za preostanek industrije Skupnosti, ostali skrajno negativni in bi še naprej odražali znatno škodo.
Therefore this claim had to be rejected.
Zato je bilo treba to trditev zavrniti.
Given the above analysis which has properly distinguished and separated the effects of all other known factors on the situation of the Community industry from the injurious effects of the dumped imports, it is hereby confirmed that these other factors as such do not reverse the fact that the material injury assessed must be attributed to the dumped imports.
Glede na zgornjo analizo, ki je ustrezno razlikovala in ločila vplive vseh drugih znanih dejavnikov na stanje industrije Skupnosti od škodljivih učinkov dampinškega uvoza, se potrdi, da ti drugi dejavniki kot taki ne spremenijo dejstva, da je treba ocenjeno znatno škodo pripisati dampinškemu uvozu.
Given the above, it is concluded that the dumped imports of FeSi originating in the PRC, Kazakhstan, Egypt, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Russia have caused material injury to the Community industry within the meaning of Article 3(6) of the basic Regulation.
Glede na navedeno se ugotovi, da je dampinški uvoz FeSi s poreklom iz LRK, Kazahstana, Egipta, Nekdanje jugoslovanske republike Makedonije in Rusije industriji Skupnosti povzročil znatno škodo v smislu člena 3(6) osnovne uredbe.
In the absence of other comments in this respect, the conclusions in recitals 137 to 140 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Ker v zvezi s tem ni bilo drugih pripomb, se sklepne ugotovitve iz uvodnih izjav 137 do 140 začasne uredbe potrdijo.
Interest of the Community industry and of the other Community producer
Interes industrije Skupnosti in drugega proizvajalca Skupnosti
Certain interested parties argued that the market of FeSi has recovered since the end of the IP and that prices have allegedly reached record levels.
Nekatere zainteresirane stranke so zatrjevale, da je od konca obdobja preiskave trg FeSi okreval in da so cene domnevno dosegle rekordne ravni.
The Community industry could thus resume production and increase its profitability without the need to impose any anti-dumping measures.
Industrija Skupnosti naj bi tako lahko nadaljevala s proizvodnjo in povečala dobičkonosnost, ne da bi bilo treba uvesti kakršne koli protidampinške ukrepe.
In addition, it was also alleged that only exporting producers located in third countries not concerned by anti-dumping measures would be the beneficiary from the imposition of measures rather than the Community industry.
Poleg tega so trdile, da bi imeli le proizvajalci izvozniki s sedežem v tretjih državah, ki jih ne zadevajo protidampinški ukrepi, korist od uvedbe ukrepov, in ne industrija Skupnosti.
According to Article 6(1) of the basic Regulation, information relating to a period subsequent to the IP shall normally not be taken into account to reach a finding.
V skladu s členom 6(1) osnovne uredbe se za namen ugotovitve običajno ne upoštevajo informacije, ki se nanašajo na čas po obdobju preiskave.
In any event, while the information available shows that FeSi prices have indeed followed an upward trend in the months following the IP, the prices for major cost inputs of FeSi have also increased in the same period.
Kakor koli že, čeprav razpoložljive informacije kažejo, da so cene FeSi v mesecih po obdobju preiskave resnično sledile naraščajočemu trendu, so se v istem obdobju zvišale tudi cene za večje stroškovne vložke FeSi.
On this basis, it cannot be concluded that the Community industry has recovered to the extent that the imposition of measures would not be warranted.
Na tej podlagi ni mogoče zaključiti, da je industrija Skupnosti okrevala v obsegu, ko uvedba ukrepov ne bi bila upravičena.
With regard to the argument that only exporting producers located in third countries not concerned by anti-dumping measures would in fact be the beneficiary from the imposition of measures rather than the Community industry, it is recalled that the aim of anti-dumping measures is to correct the trade distorting effects of dumping and restore effective competition on the Community market.
Kar zadeva argument, da bi imeli dejansko le proizvajalci izvozniki s sedežem v tretjih državah, ki jih ne zadevajo protidampinški ukrepi, korist od uvedbe ukrepov, in ne industrija Skupnosti, je treba spomniti, da je cilj protidampinških ukrepov popraviti učinke dampinga, ki izkrivljajo trgovino, in obnoviti učinkovito konkurenco na trgu Skupnosti.
On the one hand, the imports from the countries concerned will therefore not be prevented from entering the Community market where effective competition will prevail for the benefit of all operators.
Na eni strani torej uvozu iz zadevnih držav ne bo preprečen vstop na trg Skupnosti, na katerem bo prevladala učinkovita konkurenca v korist vseh subjektov.
Likewise, the Community industry will reap the benefits of the restoration of effective competition on the Community market.
Podobno bo industrija Skupnosti žela sadove obnove učinkovite konkurence na trgu Skupnosti.
On that basis, it is considered that the argument is unfounded and must therefore be rejected.
Na tej podlagi prevladuje mnenje, da je argument neutemeljen in ga je zato treba zavrniti.
In the absence of any other comments in this particular regard, the findings set out in recitals 143 to 149 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Ker glede tega ni bilo nobenih drugih pripomb, se ugotovitve iz uvodnih izjav 143 do 149 začasne uredbe potrdijo.
In the absence of comments from suppliers, following the disclosure of provisional findings, recitals 150 to 152 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Ker dobavitelji po razkritju začasnih ugotovitev niso dali nobenih pripomb, se potrdijo uvodne izjave 150 do 152 začasne uredbe.
Interest of the importers
Interesi uvoznikov
One interested party importing FeSi from the PRC and delivering it mainly to foundries alleged that the imposition of any anti-dumping measures will have serious negative effects on the iron casting industry resulting in the closing down of undertakings in such industry and consequently in job losses in the Community market.
Ena zainteresirana stranka, ki uvaža FeSi iz LRK in ga dobavlja zlasti livarnam, je izjavila, da bo imela uvedba morebitnih protidampinških ukrepov hude negativne učinke na industrijo železnih odlitkov, kar bo privedlo do zaprtja podjetij v tej industriji in posledično do izgube delovnih mest na trgu Skupnosti.
However, as outlined in recital 115 below, despite a very limited cooperation from foundries, the further investigation carried out after the imposition of provisional measures showed that the imposition of measures is not likely to have a significantly negative effect on foundries.
Toda, kot je na kratko opisano v uvodni izjavi 115, je kljub zelo omejenemu sodelovanju livarn nadaljnja preiskava, opravljena po uvedbi začasnih ukrepov, pokazala, da ni verjetno, da bi uvedba ukrepov imela bistveno negativen učinek na livarne.
In the absence of any other comments in this particular regard, the findings set out in recitals 153 to 158 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Ker glede tega ni bilo nobenih drugih pripomb, se ugotovitve iz uvodnih izjav 153 do 158 začasne uredbe potrdijo.
As outlined in recitals 3 to 5 above, the possible effect of provisional measures on the situation of the user industries, in particular foundries and steel producers, was further examined.
Kot je na kratko opisano v uvodnih izjavah 3 do 5, je bil možni vpliv začasnih ukrepov na stanje predelovalnih industrij, zlasti livarn in proizvajalcev jekla, dodatno proučen.
Although more than 500 questionnaires were sent to interested parties, their cooperation, as explained in recital 5 above, was very poor.
Čeprav je bilo zainteresiranim strankam poslanih več kot 500 vprašalnikov, je bilo njihovo sodelovanje, kot je pojasnjeno v uvodni izjavi 5, zelo slabo.
The additional analysis concentrated on the two main groups of users, namely steel producers and foundries.
Dodatna analiza se je osredotočila na obe glavni skupini uporabnikov, in sicer na proizvajalce jekla in livarne.
Based on additional information received, it was confirmed that on average FeSi accounts for approximately 0,7 % of the cost of production of steel producers.
Na podlagi prejetih dodatnih podatkov je bilo potrjeno, da FeSi v povprečju predstavlja približno 0,7 % proizvodnih stroškov proizvajalcev jekla.
For foundries, this share was found to be higher (1,4 % of the cost of production).
Pri livarnah je, kot je bilo ugotovljeno, ta delež višji (1,4 % proizvodnih stroškov).
On that basis, and taking into account that the average definitive duty rate is 23,4 %, the impact of measures on the steel and the foundry industry is not expected to be significant as it will effect at maximum their financial results by 0,16 % and 0,33 %, respectively.
Na tej podlagi in ob upoštevanju, da je povprečna stopnja dokončne dajatve 23,4 %, ni pričakovati, da bi bil vpliv ukrepov na jeklarsko in livarsko industrijo velik, saj bo na njune finančne rezultate vplival za največ 0,16 % oziroma 0,33 %.
This worst case scenario situation should be seen in the light of the beneficial effects the correction of the trade distortion will have on the Community market overall.
Na ta primer z najbolj črnim scenarijem je treba gledati v luči ugodnih učinkov, ki jih bo popravljanje izkrivljanja trgovine imelo na trg Skupnosti v celoti.
Moreover, if the fact that imports from the countries concerned account for about 50 % of Community consumption is factored into this analysis, then the effect of the measures to the financial results of the user industries would indeed be significantly lower.
Poleg tega, če se v tej analizi upošteva tudi dejstvo, da uvoz iz zadevnih držav predstavlja okrog 50 % potrošnje Skupnosti, potem bi bil vpliv ukrepov na finančne rezultate predelovalnih industrij resnično bistveno manjši.
Given the above, recital 166 of the provisional Regulation is hereby confirmed.
Glede na navedeno se uvodna izjava 166 začasne uredbe potrdi.
Previous proceedings
Predhodni postopki
Several interested parties claimed that because the anti-dumping measures imposed in the past allegedly did not have the expected remedial effect on the Community industry, the institutions decided to let the anti-dumping measures lapse in 2001, see recital 129 of Commission Decision 2001/230/EC of 21 February 2001 terminating the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of ferro-silicon originating in Brazil, the People’s Republic of China, Kazakhstan, Russia, Ukraine and Venezuela [5].
Več zainteresiranih strank je trdilo, da so se, zato ker protidampinški ukrepi, uvedeni v preteklosti, domnevno niso imeli pričakovanega popravljalnega učinka na industrijo Skupnosti, institucije odločile pustiti, da se protidampinški ukrepi iztečejo v letu 2001, glej uvodno izjavo 129 Odločbe Komisije 2001/230/ES z dne 21. februarja 2001 o zaključku protidampinškega postopka glede uvoza fero-silicija iz Brazilije, Ljudske republike Kitajske, Kazahstana, Rusije, Ukrajine in Venezuele [5].
Without commenting on the correctness of the above claim, the basic Regulation requires that decisions are taken on the basis of the information gathered and analysed during the relevant investigation and not on the basis of previous investigations.
Osnovna uredba, brez komentiranja pravilnosti zgornje trditve, zahteva, da se odločitve sprejemajo na podlagi informacij, zbranih in analiziranih med zadevno preiskavo in ne na podlagi prejšnjih preiskav.
The above assumption made by these interested parties is therefore not relevant in the present case and must be rejected.
Zgornja predpostavka teh zainteresiranih strank zato v tem primeru ni relevantna in jo je treba zavrniti.
Given the results of the further investigation of the Community interest aspects of the case described above, the findings and conclusions contained in recitals 141 to 168 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Glede na rezultate nadaljnje preiskave vidikov interesa Skupnosti v zvezi z zgoraj opisanim primerom se potrdijo ugotovitve in sklepi iz uvodnih izjav 141 do 168 začasne uredbe.
Several interested parties contested the provisional finding that a profit margin of 5 % would be the profit margin that could reasonably be achieved by an industry of this type in the sector under normal conditions of competition.
Več zainteresiranih strank je izpodbijalo začasno ugotovitev, da bi bila stopnja dobička 5 % tista stopnja dobička, ki bi jo industrija te vrste v sektorju lahko razumno dosegla v normalnih pogojih konkurence.
One interested party claimed that the profit margin for the Community industry used for the determination of the injury elimination level should be set at the level of the profit realised by the Community industry in the year 2003, i.e. 2,3 %, and in no case more than that of the year 2004 which was an exceptionally prosperous year for the alloy sector.
Ena zainteresirana stranka je zahtevala, naj se stopnja dobička za industrijo Skupnosti, ki se uporablja za določitev stopnje odprave škode, določi na ravni dobička, ki ga je industrija Skupnosti realizirala v letu 2003, tj. 2,3 %, in v nobenem primeru višje od ravni iz leta 2004, ki je bilo izjemno uspešno leto za sektor zlitin.