natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
On this basis, it was concluded that the dumping margin found during the current RIP reflected more accurately the situation of the applicant during the RIP than the measures currently in force.
Na podlagi tega je bilo sklenjeno, da je stopnja dampinga, ugotovljena med sedanjim OPP, bolj natančno odražala stanje vložnika med OPP kot trenutno veljavni ukrepi.
In this context, it was also considered that the objective of an anti-dumping duty is not to close the Community market from third country imports but to restore a fair level playing field.
V tem okviru se je tudi upoštevalo, da cilj protidampinške dajatve ni zapreti trg Skupnosti za uvoz iz tretjih držav, temveč vzpostaviti pravične enake konkurenčne pogoje.
Given the above specific circumstances, it was therefore concluded that the calculation of the dumping margin during the RIP on the basis of export sales prices of the applicant to the USA was appropriate.
Glede na zgornje posebne okoliščine je bilo torej sklenjeno, da je bil izračun stopnje dampinga med OPP na podlagi izvoznih cen vložnika za ZDA ustrezen.
In order to establish the normal value, it was first verified that the total domestic sales of the applicant were representative in accordance with Article 2(2) of the basic Regulation.
Za določitev normalne vrednosti je bilo najprej potrjeno, da je bila vsa domača prodaja vložnika reprezentativna v skladu s členom 2(2) osnovne uredbe.
Since the applicant did not have export sales of UAN to the European Community during the RIP, overall domestic sales quantities of the applicant were compared to all exports of UAN by the applicant to the United States.
Ker vložnik v času OPP v Evropsko skupnost ni izvažal SAN, so bile vse količine domače prodaje vložnika primerjane z vsem njegovim izvozom SAN v Združene države.
In accordance with Article 2(2) of the basic Regulation, domestic sales should be considered representative in case the total volume of such sales is equal to or greater than 5 % of the total volume of the corresponding export sales, in this case to the United States.
V skladu s členom 2(2) osnovne uredbe se mora domača prodaja šteti za reprezentativno v primeru, da je skupna količina te prodaje enaka ali večja od 5 % skupne količine ustreznega izvoza, v tem primeru v Združene države.
The investigation showed that the applicant did not sell representative quantities of UAN on the domestic market.
Preiskava je pokazala, da vložnik na domačem trgu ni prodal reprezentativnih količin SAN.
Since on this basis the domestic prices of the applicant could not be used to establish normal value, normal value was constructed on the basis of the manufacturing costs incurred by the applicant plus a reasonable amount for selling, general and administrative costs (SG&A costs) and for profits, in accordance with Article 2(3) and (6) of the basic Regulation.
Ker na podlagi tega domačih cen vložnika ni bilo mogoče uporabiti pri določitvi normalne vrednosti, je bila ta konstruirana na podlagi proizvodnih stroškov, ki so nastali na strani vložnika, ter razumnih zneskov za prodajne, splošne in administrativne stroške („PSA-stroški“) ter za dobiček, v skladu s členom 2(3) in (6) osnovne uredbe.
Regarding the cost of manufacturing, it should be noted that gas costs represent a major proportion of the manufacturing cost and a significant proportion of the total cost of production.
V zvezi s stroškom proizvodnje je treba navesti, da stroški plina predstavljajo velik del proizvodnih stroškov in znaten del vseh stroškov proizvodnje.
In accordance with Article 2(5) of the basic Regulation, it was examined whether the costs associated with the production and sales of the product concerned were reasonably reflected in the records of the applicant.
V skladu s členom 2(5) osnovne uredbe je bilo proučeno, ali so bili stroški, povezani s proizvodnjo in prodajo zadevnega izdelka, v računovodskih evidencah vložnika razumno prikazani.
It was established on the basis of data published by internationally recognised sources specialised in energy markets, that the prices paid by the applicant were abnormally low.
Na podlagi podatkov, ki so jih objavili mednarodno priznani viri, specializirani za energetski trg, je bilo ugotovljeno, da so bile cene, ki jih je plačal vložnik, neobičajno nizke.
By way of illustration, they amounted to one forth and one fifth of the export price of natural gas from Russia.
Za ponazoritev, znašale so eno četrtino in eno petino izvozne cene zemeljskega plina iz Rusije.
Waidhaus, being the main hub for Russian gas sales to the EU, which is both the largest market for Russian gas and has prices reasonably reflecting costs, can be considered a representative market within the meaning of Article 2(5) of the basic Regulation.
Waidhaus, glavno vozlišče za prodajo ruskega plina v EU, ki je hkrati največji trg za ruski plin in na katerem cene razumno odražajo stroške, se lahko šteje za reprezentativen trg v smislu člena 2(5) osnovne uredbe.
Following disclosure, the applicant claimed that any adjustment of its gas price paid on the domestic market would be unwarranted alleging that its accounting records fully reflected the costs associated with the activity of production and sales of the like product in the country of origin.
Po razkritju je vložnik navedel, da bi bila vsaka prilagoditev njegove cene plina na domačem trgu neupravičena, saj naj bi računovodske evidence v celoti prikazovale stroške, povezane z dejavnostjo proizvodnje in prodaje podobnega izdelka v državi porekla.
To substantiate this claim, the applicant provided a study from an independent consultancy firm that the gas price paid by the applicant reflected full cost of production and sale of gas, as incurred by the gas provider.
Da bi to trditev potrdil, je vložnik predložil študijo neodvisnega svetovalnega podjetja o tem, da je cena plina, ki jo je plačal vložnik, odražala celoten strošek proizvodnje in prodaje plina za ponudnika plina.
It should first be noted that, as the study itself sets out, the costs of gas as well as the cost of the delivery of the gas to the applicant used for the comparison were estimated costs and thus not actual costs incurred during the RIP.
Najprej je treba navesti, da so bili, kot to navaja že študija, stroški plina in tudi stroški dostave plina vložniku, uporabljeni za primerjavo, ocenjeni stroški in zato niso bili dejanski stroški, nastali med OPP.
It is also unclear whether the costs thus established were full costs as established in accordance with the basic Regulation, i.e. including full costs of manufacturing and full SG&A costs linked to the production and sale of gas.
Prav tako ni jasno, ali so bili tako ugotovljeni stroški vsi stroški, kot so določeni v skladu z osnovno uredbo, torej vključno z vsemi stroški proizvodnje in vsemi PSA-stroški, povezanimi s proizvodnjo in prodajo plina.
Finally, it is also noted that the information available on the gas provider’s costs could not be verified within the framework of this proceeding.
Nenazadnje se ugotovi tudi, da informacij o stroških ponudnika plina ni bilo mogoče preveriti v okviru tega postopka.
In any case, it is considered that under Article 2(5) of the basic Regulation, the sole fact that the price of gas charged by the supplier to its client is cost covering is as such not a criterion to establish whether the costs of production of the like product as booked in the company’s accounts are reasonably reflecting the costs associated with the production and sale of the product under investigation.
V vsakem primeru se šteje, da v skladu s členom 2(5) osnovne uredbe samo dejstvo, da cena plina, ki jo dobavitelj zaračuna stranki, pokriva stroške, ni merilo za določitev, ali stroški proizvodnje podobnega izdelka, kot so knjiženi v računovodskih evidencah podjetja, razumno odražajo stroške, povezane s proizvodnjo in prodajo izdelka v preiskavi.
For the reasons set out above in recital 21, this was found not to be the case.
Iz razlogov, navedenih v uvodni izjavi (21), je bilo ugotovljeno, da to ne drži.
The applicant did not address the apparent significant difference between the price for gas paid on the Russian domestic market and the export price of natural gas from Russia on the one hand and the one paid by the Community producers on the other hand.
Vložnik ni obravnaval očitne razlike med ceno za plin na ruskem domačem trgu in izvozno ceno zemeljskega plina iz Rusije na eni strani ter ceno, ki jo plačajo proizvajalci Skupnosti, na drugi strani.
Therefore, even if the gas price paid by the applicant covered the unit cost of production and sales of the gas incurred by its provider, this argument is irrelevant since the market price of gas is not necessarily directly linked to costs of its production and sales.
Torej, tudi če je cena plina, ki jo je plačal vložnik, krila strošek za enoto proizvodnje in prodaje plina, ki je nastal na strani ponudnika, ta argument ni pomemben, saj tržna cena plina ni nujno neposredno povezana s stroški njegove proizvodnje in prodaje.
The price at which the applicant was purchasing the gas during the RIP continues to be State regulated and significantly below the price level in non-regulated markets as explained in recital 21.
Ceno, po kateri je vložnik med OPP kupoval plin, še naprej nadzoruje država in je znatno pod ravnjo cene na nenadzorovanih trgih, kot je pojasnjeno v zgornji uvodni izjavi (21).
The applicant further claimed that by making a gas adjustment, de facto a methodology to determine normal value was used which is not foreseen by the basic Regulation.
Vložnik je tudi zatrjeval, da je bila s prilagoditvijo plina dejansko uporabljena metodologija za določitev normalne vrednosti, ki v osnovni uredbi ni predvidena.
Thus, by replacing domestic gas costs by costs calculated as described in recital 22, and due to the fact that these costs constitute major part of the total costs of the like product and therefore also of the constructed normal value, the normal value would be de facto determined by data from a third ‘representative’ market.
Z nadomestitvijo domačih stroškov za plin s stroški, izračunanimi v uvodni izjavi (22), in zaradi dejstva, da ti stroški predstavljajo velik del vseh stroškov podobnega izdelka in s tem tudi konstruirane normalne vrednosti, bi bila torej normalna vrednost de facto določena s podatki s tretjega „reprezentativnega“ trga.
In this regard, the applicant argued that for market economy countries, the basic Regulation however foresees, only the following methodologies to determine the normal value: (i) on the basis of the domestic price of the like product in the ordinary cause of trade, or alternatively, in case sales are not made in the ordinary course of trade, (ii) on the basis of the cost of production in the country of origin (plus a reasonable amount for SG&A costs and for profits) or (iii) representative export prices of the like product to an appropriate third country.
V zvezi s tem je vložnik navedel, da osnovna uredba za države s tržnim gospodarstvom predvideva le naslednje metodologije za določitev normalne vrednosti: (i) na podlagi domače cene za podoben izdelek v običajnem poteku trgovine ali, kar je druga možnost, v primeru, da prodaja ne poteka v običajnem poteku trgovine, (ii) na podlagi proizvodnega stroška v državi porekla (prišteje se razumen znesek za PSA-stroške in dobiček) ali (iii) na podlagi reprezentativnih izvoznih cen podobnega izdelka za ustrezno tretjo državo.
In this regard and as also outlined in recitals 18 to 42, it should first be noted that normal value was established in accordance with the methodologies outlined in Article 2(1) to (6) of the basic Regulation.
V zvezi s tem in kot je tudi navedeno v uvodnih izjavah (18) do (42), je najprej treba opozoriti na to, da je bila normalna vrednost določena v skladu z metodologijami, navedenimi v členu 2(1) do (6) osnovne uredbe.
However, in order to establish whether domestic sales were made in the ordinary course of trade by reason of price, i.e. whether they were profitable, it must first be established whether the costs of the applicant were a reliable basis within the meaning of Article 2(5) of the basic Regulation.
Da bi ugotovili, ali je domača prodaja potekala v okviru običajnega poteka trgovine zaradi cene, tj. ali je bila dobičkonosna, pa je treba najprej ugotoviti, ali so bili stroški vložnika zanesljiva osnova v smislu člena 2(5) osnovne uredbe.
Only after costs have been reliably established, can it be determined which methodology to establish normal value should be used.
Šele ko so stroški zanesljivo ugotovljeni, je mogoče določiti, katera metodologija se bo uporabila za določitev normalne vrednosti.
It is therefore wrong to claim that by determining reliable costs in accordance with Article 2(5) of the basic Regulation a new methodology to determine normal value was introduced.
Zato je trditev, da je bila z določitvijo zanesljivih stroškov v skladu s členom 2(5) osnovne uredbe uvedena nova metodologija za določitev normalne vrednosti, napačna.
The applicants arguments in this respect therefore had to be rejected.
Trditev vložnika v zvezi s tem je bilo zato treba zavrniti.
The applicant further argued that even in case that an adjustment was to be made to its cost of natural gas on the domestic market, Waidhaus price for Russian natural gas was not a reliable basis for such an adjustment since that price is set according to long term gas contracts under which the price formula is linked to oil product prices and thus unrelated to the costs of producing and delivering gas to the applicant in Russia.
Vložnik je tudi navedel, da tudi v primeru prilagoditve njegovih stroškov za zemeljski plin na domačem trgu cena pri Waidhausu za ruski zemeljski plin ni zanesljiva osnova za takšno prilagoditev, saj je ta cena oblikovana v skladu z dolgoročnimi pogodbami za plin, po katerih je formula za ceno povezana s cenami naftnih derivatov in zato ni povezana s proizvodnjo in dostavo plina vložniku v Rusiji.
The applicant further argued that Waidhaus price for Russian gas is not reliable because it is affected by excessively high and possibly non-competitive domestic pricing on gas in Germany, which is being investigated by German Antitrust Authorities.
Poleg tega je vložnik navedel, da cena pri Waidhausu za ruski plin ni zanesljiva, saj nanjo vplivajo zelo visoke in verjetno nekonkurenčne domače cene plina v Nemčiji, kar preiskujejo nemški protimonopolni organi.
Firstly, it should be noted that one of the primary criteria for the choice of the basis on which to establish the gas prices was that it reasonably reflects a price normally payable in undistorted markets.
Prvič, treba je opozoriti, da je eno od najpomembnejših meril za izbiro osnove, na kateri se določijo cene plina, da ta ustrezno odraža ceno, ki se običajno plačuje na neizkrivljenih trgih.
Furthermore, by far the greatest volume of gas from Russia is imported via the Waidhaus hub which represents therefore an appropriate basis for an adjustment.
Poleg tega se daleč največ plina iz Rusije izvozi preko vozlišča v Waidhausu, ki je zato primerna osnova za prilagoditev.
On this basis, Waidhaus was considered as a representative market and a reasonable basis for the determination of gas costs within the meaning of Article 2(5) of the basic Regulation.
Na tej osnovi je bil Waidhaus označen kot reprezentativni trg in ustrezna osnova za določitev stroškov za plin v smislu člena 2(5) osnovne uredbe.
Secondly, as outlined in recital 24, it is on its own irrelevant whether the price is cost driven as long as it reasonably reflects a price normally payable in undistorted markets.
Drugič, kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi (24), je samo po sebi nepomembno, ali ceno oblikujejo stroški, če ta ustrezno odraža ceno, ki se običajno plačuje na neizkrivljenih trgih.
As regards the price of gas imported at Waidhaus, there are no indications of State interference in price forming and this condition is thus met.
V primeru cene plina, ki ga uvaža Waidhaus, je ta pogoj izpolnjen, saj ni znakov, da bi na oblikovanje cen vplivala država.
Finally, as regards the claim about non-competitive domestic pricing on gas in Germany it should be noted that the Bundeskartellamts investigation, to which the applicant referred to, is still ongoing and no conclusions were reached.
V zvezi s trditvijo glede nekonkurenčnega domačega oblikovanja cen za plin v Nemčiji se ugotovi, da preiskava Bundeskartellamta, na katero se je vložnik skliceval, še vedno poteka, sklepne ugotovitve pa še niso bile sprejete.
Besides, this investigation concerns prices at which German main gas distributors sell the gas on the German domestic market and not the price at which they purchase the gas imported from Russia.
Poleg tega ta preiskava zadeva cene, po katerih nemški glavni distributerji plin prodajajo na nemškem domačem trgu, ne pa cene, po kateri ti distributerji plin uvozijo iz Rusije.
In contrast to what was claimed by the applicant, these two prices are not necessarily related since the economic interest of gas distributors and their customers is exactly the opposite.
V nasprotju s trditvami vložnika ti dve ceni nista nujno povezani, saj sta gospodarska interesa distributerjev plina in njihovih strank popolnoma nasprotna.
Thus, it can be presumed that the distributors aim to keep the resale price at the highest possible level whereby at the same time it is in their economic interest to keep the purchase price at the lowest possible level in order to maximise profit levels.
Zato je mogoče predvidevati, da želijo distributerji ceno pri nadaljnji prodaji ohraniti na najvišji možni ravni, hkrati pa je v njihovem gospodarskem interesu, da nakupno ceno ohranijo na najnižji možni ravni in tako povečajo stopnje dobička.
The applicants argument that the German incumbents do not have an incentive to negotiate low prices for Russian imported gas at Waidhaus is a mere presumption without any factual background.
Argument vložnika, da nemški distributerji nimajo želje po pogajanjih za nižje cene ruskega plina, uvoženega pri Waidhausu, je zgolj domneva brez dejanske osnove.
The applicant further claimed that if an adjustment were to be made to its cost of natural gas on the domestic market, such adjustment should be based on non-regulated gas prices available in Russia.
Vložnik je tudi trdil, da mora prilagoditev njegovih stroškov za zemeljski plin na domačem trgu, če do nje pride, temeljiti na nenadzorovanih cenah plina v Rusiji.
The primary criterion for the choice of the basis on which to establish the gas price is that it reasonably reflects a price normally payable in undistorted markets.
Prvo merilo za izbiro osnove, na kateri se določi cena plina, je, da ta ustrezno odraža ceno, ki se običajno plačuje na neizkrivljenih trgih.
The applicant further argued that domestic prices for natural gas in Russia regulated by the State are increasing constantly and reaching levels covering the cost of production of gas.
Vložnik je tudi navedel, da domače cene zemeljskega plina v Rusiji, ki jih nadzoruje država, neprestano naraščajo in dosegajo ravni, ki krijejo stroške proizvodnje plina.
Therefore, the price on the domestic market cannot be considered as uncompetitive or unreasonably low.
Zato cene na domačnem trgu ni mogoče obravnavati kot nekonkurenčne ali nerazumljivo nizke.
This argument has no grounds since the correct standard for choosing a representative market is not whether prices are profitable as such but whether prices reasonably reflect a price normally payable in undistorted markets, as explained in recital 29.
Ta argument je neutemeljen, saj pravilen standard za izbiro reprezentativnega trga ni, ali so cene kot take dobičkonosne, temveč ali cene ustrezno odražajo ceno, ki se običajno plačuje na neizkrivljenih trgih, kot je pojasnjeno v uvodni izjavi (29).
This is not the case for prices regulated by the State.
Temu pa ni tako v primeru cen, ki jih nadzoruje država.
Furthermore, this argument also contradicts public statements of the Russian gas supplier (as confirmed by its published audited accounts) that the Russian domestic gas prices do not cover production, transportation and sales cost.
Poleg tega ta trditev nasprotuje tudi javnim izjavam ruskega dobavitelja plina (to je potrdilo njegovo objavljeno revidirano letno poročilo), da ruske domače cene plina ne krijejo stroškov proizvodnje, prevoza in prodaje.
The applicant further proposed the use of Russian export price to the neighbouring markets as an alternative basis for the adjustment, however without providing any further information or evidence on such markets.
Poleg tega je vložnik predlagal uporabo ruskih izvoznih cen za sosednje trge kot alternativno osnovo za prilagoditev, vendar pa ni predložil nobenih nadaljnjih informacij ali dokazov o takšnih trgih.
It was considered that Russian export prices of gas to the Baltic States, where some price information was available, were not sufficiently representative, due to the relatively low export volumes to these countries.
Prav tako se je štelo, da ruske izvozne cene plina za baltske države, kjer je bilo na voljo nekaj podatkov o cenah, niso bile dovolj reprezentativne, in sicer zaradi relativno majhnih izvoznih količin v te države.
Furthermore, necessary data concerning transportation and distribution cost were not available and therefore, reliable prices to the Baltic States could in any case not be established.
Poleg tega potrebni podatki v zvezi s stroški prevoza in distribucije niso bili na voljo, zato zanesljivih cen za baltske države v nobenem primeru ni mogoče določiti.
Therefore, these prices could not be used as a basis for the adjustment.
Zato teh cen ni bilo mogoče uporabiti kot osnovo za prilagoditev.
Alternatively, the applicant argued that if the export price at Waidhaus was to be used, the Russian export duty payable for all exports should have been deducted from the Waidhaus price because it was not incurred domestically.
Vložnik pa je tudi navedel, da je treba od izvozne cene pri Waidhausu, če se bo ta uporabila, odšteti rusko izvozno dajatev, ki se plača za ves uvoz, saj ni nastala na domačem trgu.
Indeed the market price at Waidhaus, which was considered as representative market within the meaning of Article 2(5) of the basic Regulation, is the price after export taxes and not the prices before these taxes.
Dejansko je tržna cena pri Waidhausu, ki je bil označen kot reprezentativni trg v smislu člena 2(5) osnovne uredbe, cena po izvoznih dajatvah in ne cena pred temi dajatvami.
The latter, on the other hand will always try to maximise its price and therefore charge the highest price its customers are willing to pay.
Dobavitelj plina bo vedno poskušal zvišati ceno in zaračunati najvišji znesek, ki so ga stranke pripravljene plačati.
It was therefore concluded that the price including the export tax, and not the price before that tax, is the undistorted market driven price.
Zato je bilo sklenjeno, da je cena z izvozno dajatvijo neizkrivljena, torej na trgu oblikovana cena, ne pa cena pred dajatvijo.
Consequently, the arguments of the applicant in this regard were rejected.
Zato so bili argumenti vložnika v zvezi s tem zavrnjeni.
In this context, the applicant also claimed that the mark-up of the local distributor should not be added to the export price at Waidhaus claiming that profits of the distributors would already be included in the price at Waidhaus.
V zvezi s tem je vložnik tudi navedel, da se pribitek lokalnega distributerja ne sme prišteti k izvozni ceni pri Waidhausu, saj bi bili dobički distributerjev že všteti v ceno pri Waidhausu.
In this regard, the applicant claimed that the local distributors in Russia were fully owned subsidiaries of the gas supplier and therefore, addition of the profit of these distributors could constitute double counting.
V zvezi s tem je vložnik trdil, da so lokalni distributerji v Rusiji hčerinske družbe v popolni lasti dobavitelja plina in bi lahko dodatek dobička teh distributerjev povzročil dvojno štetje.
The applicant also claimed that natural comparative advantage of Russia should be taken into account.
Vložnik je tudi trdil, da je treba upoštevati naravno primerjalno prednost Rusije.