natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In the absence of any other comments concerning the general methodology of the dumping margin calculation, recitals 64 to 68 (except for the change described in recital 46 above) of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Ker v zvezi s splošno metodologijo izračuna stopnje dampinga ni bilo nobenih drugih pripomb, se potrdijo uvodne izjave 64 do 68 (razen sprememba, opisana v uvodni izjavi 3.5.2) začasne uredbe.
For the companies granted MET or IT, the weighted average normal value of each type of the product concerned exported to the Community was compared with the weighted average export price of the corresponding type of the product concerned, as provided for in Article 2(11) and (12) of the basic Regulation.
Za družbe, ki jim je bila odobrena TGO ali IO, se je tehtana povprečna normalna vrednost vsake vrste zadevnega izdelka, izvoženega v Skupnost, primerjala s tehtano povprečno izvozno ceno ustrezne vrste zadevnega izdelka, kakor je določeno v členu 2(11) in (12) osnovne uredbe.
On this basis, the definitive dumping margins expressed as a percentage of the cif Community frontier price, duty unpaid, are:
Na tej podlagi so dokončne stopnje dampinga, izražene kot odstotek na meji Skupnosti, brez plačane dajatve, naslednje:
The basis for establishing the countrywide dumping margin was set out in recital 71 of the provisional Regulation.
Podlaga za določitev stopnje dampinga na ravni države je bila določena v uvodni izjavi 71 začasne uredbe.
In light of the changes to Chinese normal values and export prices as set out above, the countrywide margin has also been adjusted and should be now set at 55,6 % of the cif Community frontier price, duty unpaid.
Glede na spremembe kitajskih normalnih vrednosti in izvoznih cen, kakor je navedeno zgoraj, je bila prilagojena tudi stopnja na ravni države, ki jo je zdaj treba določiti pri 55,6 % cene CIF meja Skupnosti brez plačane dajatve.
Following the imposition of provisional measures, one of the Egyptian companies complained about the method of calculation of the anti-dumping duty without elaborating any further.
Po uvedbi začasnih ukrepov se je ena od egiptovskih družb pritožila nad metodo izračuna protidampinške dajatve brez nadaljnjega pojasnjevanja.
In reply to this, it should be noted that the company did not substantiate its comments.
V odgovor na to je treba omeniti, da družba ni utemeljila svojih pripomb.
Consequently, the claim had to be rejected.
Posledično je bilo treba zahtevek zavrniti.
The definitive dumping margins, expressed as a percentage of the cif import price at the Community border, duty unpaid, are the following:
Dokončne stopnje dampinga, izražene kot odstotek uvozne cene CIF na meji Skupnosti, brez plačane dajatve, so:
The Egyptian Ferroalloys Company, Cairo 15,4 %,
The Egyptian Ferroalloys Company, Kairo 15,4 %
Egyptian Chemical Industries KIMA, Cairo 24,8 %,
Egyptian Chemical Industries KIMA, Kairo 24,8 %
All others 24,8 %.
vsi ostali 24,8 %
In the absence of cooperation, only a countrywide dumping margin was established.
Zaradi nesodelovanja je bila določena le stopnja dampinga na ravni države.
The definitive dumping margin, expressed as a percentage of the cif import price at the Community border, duty unpaid, is set at 37,1 %.
Dokončna stopnja dampinga, izražena kot odstotek uvozne cene CIF na meji Skupnosti, brez plačane dajatve, je določena pri 37,1 %.
The cooperating exporting producer is the only known FeSi producer in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.
Sodelujoči proizvajalec izvoznik je edini znan proizvajalec FeSi v Nekdanji jugoslovanski republiki Makedoniji.
The definitive dumping margins, expressed as a percentage of the cif import price at the Community border duty unpaid, are the following:
Dokončni stopnji dampinga, izraženi kot odstotek uvozne cene CIF na meji Skupnosti, brez plačane dajatve, sta naslednji:
All others 5,4 %.
vsi ostali 5,4 %
The two cooperating Russian exporting producers are the only known FeSi producers in Russia.
Oba sodelujoča ruska proizvajalca izvoznika sta edina znana proizvajalca FeSi v Rusiji.
Chemk Group (Chelyabinsk Electrometallurgical Integrated Plant and Kutznetsk Ferroalloy Works), Chelyabinsk and Novokuznetsk 22,7 %,
Chemk Group (Chelyabinsk Electrometallurgical Integrated Plant and Kutznetsk Ferroalloy Works), Chelyabinsk and Novokuznetsk 22,7 %
ICT Group of Companies (Bratsk Ferroalloy Plant, TD North West Ferro Alloy Company and Bakersfield Marketing Ltd), Bratsk and Saint Petersburg 17,8 %,
ICT Group of Companies (Bratsk Ferroalloy Plant, TD North West Ferro Alloy Company and Bakersfield Marketing Ltd), Bratsk in Sankt Peterburg 17,8 %
All others 22,7 %,
vsi ostali 22,7 %
Certain interested parties claimed that the injury assessment should not be made on an aggregate basis but on a company-by-company basis, in view of alleged divergent injury trends between the different Community producers.
Nekatere zainteresirane stranke so zahtevale, naj se ocena škode ne opravi na skupni osnovi, temveč od družbe do družbe, ob upoštevanju domnevnih različnih trendov škode med različnimi proizvajalci Skupnosti.
Pursuant to Article 3(5) of the basic Regulation the examination of injury shall include an evaluation of the relevant factors having a bearing on the Community industry.
V skladu s členom 3(5) osnovne uredbe mora preiskava škode vključevati oceno pomembnih dejavnikov, ki zadevajo industrijo Skupnosti.
The term ‘Community industry’ is defined in Article 4 of the basic Regulation as Community producers as a whole of the like products or those whose collective output represents a major proportion of the total Community production.
Izraz „industrija Skupnosti“ je opredeljen v členu 4 osnovne uredbe kot proizvajalci Skupnosti podobnih izdelkov kot celota oziroma tisti proizvajalci, katerih skupna proizvodnja predstavlja večji delež celotne proizvodnje Skupnosti.
From the above it is clear that the determination of injury shall be conducted at the level of the Community industry examined as a whole, rather than on the individual situation of each Community producer in isolation.
Iz zgoraj navedenega je jasno, da je treba ugotovitev škode izvesti na ravni industrije Skupnosti, ki se proučuje kot celota, in ne v posamezni situaciji vsakega proizvajalca Skupnosti ločeno.
On the basis of the above, the claims were rejected and recitals 78 to 80 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Na podlagi navedenega se zahtevki zavrnejo in uvodne izjave 78 do 80 začasne uredbe potrdijo.
One interested party claimed that the Commission did not provide in its provisional Regulation essential information for its injury analysis, such as a monthly breakdown of demand of FeSi, price development on the EU market, including Community industry price and cost developments.
Ena zainteresirana stranka je trdila, da Komisija v svoji začasni uredbi ni podala bistvenih informacij za svojo analizo škode, kot so mesečna razčlenitev povpraševanja po FeSi, spreminjanje cen na trgu EU, vključno s spreminjanjem cen in stroškov v industriji Skupnosti.
The basic Regulation does not require Community producers or other interested parties to provide data for the period considered on a monthly basis.
Osnovna uredba ne zahteva, da proizvajalci Skupnosti ali druge zainteresirane stranke mesečno posredujejo podatke za obravnavano obdobje.
It is considered that this would be unduly burdensome for all interested parties and it is common practice to request data on a yearly basis for the investigation of dumping and injury.
Prevladuje mnenje, da bi to neupravičeno obremenilo vse zainteresirane stranke, obstaja pa tudi običajna praksa, da se podatke za preiskavo dampinga in škode zahteva letno.
In addition, the party did not provide any evidence demonstrating that a monthly analysis was necessary in the current case to assess injury.
Poleg tega stranka ni predložila nobenih dokazov, ki bi potrjevali, da je v trenutnem primeru mesečna analiza nujna za oceno škode.
In fact, the tables provided in recitals 81, 85, 96 and 97 of the provisional Regulation reflect adequately the Community consumption, prices on the Community market, profit and thus the cost development of the Community industry during the period considered.
Dejansko tabele v uvodnih izjavah 81, 85, 96 in 97 začasne uredbe primerno odražajo potrošnjo Skupnosti, cene na trgu Skupnosti, dobiček in s tem spreminjanje stroškov v industriji Skupnosti v obravnavanem obdobju.
One interested party claimed that imports from Russia should not be cumulated with those from the PRC for the purpose of the injury assessment since these imports allegedly did not operate under similar conditions of competition on the Community market.
Ena zainteresirana stranka je zahtevala, da se uvoz iz Rusije ne sešteva z uvozom iz LRK za namen ocene škode, saj ta uvoz domnevno ne deluje v podobnih pogojih konkurence na trgu Skupnosti.
In particular, it claimed that (i) the majority of Chinese exporting producers operate under non-market economy conditions, (ii) the Russian companies sell through related companies whereas the Chinese exporting producers sell directly to independent customers, (iii) the dumping and undercutting margins for Chinese companies are significantly higher than those of the Russian companies and that (iv) Chinese exporting producers have been increasingly penetrating the EU market in the first six months of 2006 being 50 % higher than Russian exporting producers.
Konkretno je trdila, (i) da večina kitajskih proizvajalcev izvoznikov posluje v pogojih netržnega gospodarstva, (ii) da ruske družbe prodajajo preko povezanih družb, medtem ko kitajski proizvajalci izvozniki prodajajo neposredno neodvisnim strankam, (iii) da so stopnje dampinga in nelojalnega nižanja za kitajske družbe bistveno višje kot stopnje ruskih družb in (iv) da kitajski proizvajalci izvozniki vse bolj prodirajo na trg EU, pri čemer je bil tržni delež v prvih 6 mesecih leta 2006 za 50 % višji kot delež ruskih proizvajalcev izvoznikov.
Regarding the first claim, the fact that the majority of Chinese exporting producers operate under non-market economy conditions is not one of the reasons for decumulation foreseen in Article 3(4) of the basic Regulation.
Kar zadeva prvo trditev, dejstvo, da večina kitajskih proizvajalcev izvoznikov posluje v pogojih netržnega gospodarstva, ni eden od razlogov za dekumulacijo, predvideno v členu 3(4) osnovne uredbe.
The fact whether or not the product concerned is produced under market economy conditions in the domestic market is therefore not relevant for deciding on the cumulation of imports.
Dejstvo, ali je zadevni izdelek proizveden v pogojih tržnega gospodarstva na notranjem trgu ali ne, zato ni pomembno za odločanje o kumulaciji uvoza.
As to the second claim concerning the alleged difference in sales channels, it is noted that, even though the Russian exporting producers were using related traders, the like products imported both from the PRC and Russia are sold to the same type of end-customers in the Community, namely to users and distributors.
Glede druge trditve o domnevni razliki v prodajnih poteh se ugotovi, da četudi so ruski proizvajalci izvozniki uporabljali povezane trgovce, se podobni izdelki, uvoženi tako iz LRK kot Rusije, prodajajo isti vrsti končnih uporabnikov v Skupnosti, namreč uporabnikom in distributerjem.
As to third claim regarding the dumping and undercutting margins, it is noted that for both countries dumping margins have been established above de minimis levels as required by Article 3(4)(a) of the basic Regulation and that for both countries undercutting was found to exist.
V zvezi s tretjo trditvijo glede stopenj dampinga in nelojalnega nižanja se ugotovi, da so bile za obe državi stopnje dampinga določene nad pragom de minimis, kot to zahteva člen 3(4)(a) osnovne uredbe, in da je bilo v obeh državah ugotovljeno nelojalno nižanje.
Regarding the last claim on import volumes, it is noted that the volumes imported from Russia (and the PRC) were not negligible as required by Article 3(4)(a) of the basic Regulation as they reached a market share of 18 % and 21 %, respectively, during the IP.
Kar zadeva zadnjo trditev o obsegu uvoza, se ugotovi, da količine, uvožene iz Rusije (in LRK), niso bile zanemarljive, kot to zahteva člen 3(4)(a) osnovne uredbe, saj so v obdobju preiskave dosegle tržni delež 18 % oziroma 21 %.
For all these reasons, a decumulation of imports from Russia is not warranted and the claim is rejected.
Iz vseh teh razlogov dekumulacija uvoza iz Rusije ni upravičena in zahtevek se zavrne.
Another interested party claimed that the Commission did not analyse the conditions of competition between the products imported from the countries concerned and submitted that the effects of the dumped Egyptian imports on the situation of the Community industry should, therefore, be assessed separately.
Neka druga zainteresirana stranka je zatrjevala, da Komisija ni analizirala pogojev konkurence med izdelki, uvoženimi iz zadevnih držav, in trdila, da bi bilo zato treba ločeno oceniti vplive dampinškega egiptovskega uvoza na stanje industrije Skupnosti.
As suggested in recitals 83 and 89 of the provisional Regulation, the conditions of competition between the imported products regarding the likeness of the product and the similarity of the exporters’ behaviour (i.e. the significance of the import volume level, the development and level of the price of imports and their undercutting of prices of the Community industry and the similarity of sales channels) were analysed.
Kot se predlaga v uvodnih izjavah 83 in 89 začasne uredbe, so bili pogoji konkurence med uvoženimi izdelki glede podobnosti izdelka in podobnosti obnašanja izvoznikov (tj. pomena ravni obsega uvoza, spreminjanja in ravni cene uvoza, njihovega nelojalnega nižanja cen v industriji Skupnosti ter podobnosti prodajnih poti) analizirani.
It was thereby found that the conditions justifying the cumulative assessment of imports from the countries concerned were met.
Ugotovljeno je bilo, da so pogoji, ki upravičujejo kumulativno oceno uvoza iz zadevnih držav, izpolnjeni.
On this basis, this claim had to be rejected and recital 84 of the provisional Regulation is confirmed.
Zato je bilo treba ta zahtevek zavrniti, uvodno izjavo 84 osnovne uredbe pa potrditi.
One Egyptian exporting producer also claimed that its limited export volume during the IP had not caused injury to the Community industry and that thus its situation should be assessed separately.
En egiptovski proizvajalec izvoznik je prav tako trdil, da njegov omejen obseg izvoza v obdobju preiskave ni povzročil škode industriji Skupnosti in da bi zato njegov položaj bilo treba oceniti ločeno.
In this regard, it is noted that pursuant to Article 3(4) of the basic Regulation the effect of dumped imports on the situation of the Community industry shall be cumulatively assessed if, amongst others, the volume of imports from each country subject to the investigation is not negligible.
V tej zvezi se ugotovi, da je treba, v skladu s členom 3(4) osnovne uredbe, vpliv dampinškega uvoza na stanje industrije Skupnosti kumulativno oceniti, če, med drugim, obseg uvoza iz vsake države, ki je predmet preiskave, ni zanemarljiv.
Since imports from Egypt were found to have reached a market share of 3,7 % during the IP, they were not negligible within the meaning of Article 5(7) of the basic Regulation.
Ker je bilo ugotovljeno, da je uvoz iz Egipta v obdobju preiskave dosegel tržni delež 3,7 %, ta torej ni bil zanemarljiv v smislu člena 5(7) osnovne uredbe.
In the absence of any other comments in this regard, recitals 82 to 89 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Ker v zvezi s tem ni bilo nobenih drugih pripomb, se potrdijo uvodne izjave 82 do 89 začasne uredbe.
One interested party claimed that the undercutting margins found in the provisional Regulation should be reduced by 3 % to 5 % in order to reflect ‘locally sourced’ FeSi, since the steel producer in the Community would allegedly pay a premium for locally (EU)-sourced material reflecting reliability, quality and timing of supply.
Ena zainteresirana stranka je zahtevala, da se stopnje nelojalnega nižanja, ki jih najdemo v začasni uredbi, znižajo za 3 % do 5 %, da bi tako odražale „lokalno pridobljeni“ FeSi, saj bi proizvajalec jekla v Skupnosti domnevno plačal dodatek za lokalno (v EU) pridobljen material, ki bi odražal zanesljivost, kakovost in časovni okvir dobave.
Recitals 38 and 87 to 89 of the provisional Regulation explain the basis for the comparison of the prices charged by the Community industry with those charged by the exporters concerned.
V uvodnih izjavah 38 ter 87 do 89 začasne uredbe je obrazložena podlaga za primerjavo cen, ki jih obračunava industrija Skupnosti, s tistimi, ki jih obračunavajo zadevni izvozniki.
The comparison took account of the various qualities of the product concerned as defined in recital 13 of the provisional Regulation.
V primerjavi so bile upoštevane različne lastnosti zadevnega izdelka, kot je opredeljen v uvodni izjavi 13 začasne uredbe.
Moreover, as regards reliability and timing of supply, the investigation did not reveal that the payment of any such premium was taking place or that this potential competitive advantage was included in the price charged by the Community industry to steel producers.
Poleg tega, kar zadeva zanesljivost in časovni okvir dobave, preiskava ni razkrila, da prihaja do plačevanja kakršnega koli tovrstnega dodatka ali da je ta potencialna konkurenčna prednost vključena v ceno, ki jo industrija Skupnosti zaračunava proizvajalcem jekla.
Finally, the interested party did not provide any evidence to substantiate its claim which therefore had to be rejected.
In končno, zainteresirana stranka ni predložila nobenih dokazov, s katerimi bi podkrepila svoj zahtevek, ki ga je bilo zato treba zavrniti.
Certain interested parties questioned the methodology used in recital 93 of the provisional Regulation to calculate the production capacity of the Community industry.
Nekatere zainteresirane stranke so podvomile v metodologijo, ki se uporablja v uvodni izjavi 93 začasne uredbe za izračun proizvodne zmogljivosti industrije Skupnosti.
In particular, they suggested applying a capacity figure taking into account closures for maintenance and electricity cuts, instead of the ‘theoretical nominal capacity’ as used in the provisional Regulation.
Konkretno so predlagale uporabo podatka o zmogljivosti, ki bi upošteval zaprtja zaradi vzdrževanja in izpadov električne energije, namesto „teoretične nazivne zmogljivosti“, kot je uporabljena v začasni uredbi.
The investigation has shown that any closures of the Community industry machinery for maintenance or electricity cuts were of a temporary nature and that these did not occur on a regular basis within the period considered.
Preiskava je pokazala, da so bile vse ustavitve strojev industrije Skupnosti zaradi vzdrževanja ali izpadov električne energije v obravnavanem obdobju začasne narave in da do njih ni prihajalo redno.
It is worth noting that, even if adjustments were to be made to production capacity, as suggested by these interested parties, the trends concerning the production capacity and of the capacity utilisation would remain unchanged.
Velja omeniti, da četudi bi bilo treba izvesti prilagoditve proizvodne zmogljivosti, kot predlagajo te zainteresirane stranke, bi trendi v zvezi s proizvodno zmogljivostjo in izkoriščenostjo zmogljivosti ostali nespremenjeni.
The conclusions reached on the existence of material injury suffered by the Community industry would also remain the same.
Enake bi ostale tudi sklepne ugotovitve o obstoju znatne škode, povzročene industriji Skupnosti.
Consequently, the claim to apply a different definition of production capacity has to be rejected.
Zato je treba zahtevek za uporabo drugačne opredelitve proizvodne zmogljivosti zavrniti.
Based on the above facts and considerations, the conclusion that the Community industry suffered material injury, in recitals 107 to 110 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Na podlagi zgornjih dejstev in premislekov se potrdi sklepna ugotovitev iz uvodnih izjav 107 do 110 začasne uredbe, da je bila industriji Skupnosti povzročena znatna škoda.
Certain interested parties claimed that the assessment of the causal link between the injury suffered by the Community industry and the dumped imports should not be made on an aggregate basis but on a company-by-company basis, in view of alleged divergent causation factors between the different Community producers.
Nekatere zainteresirane stranke so zahtevale, naj se ocena vzročne zveze med škodo, povzročeno industriji Skupnosti, in dampinškim uvozom ne opravi na skupni osnovi, temveč od družbe do družbe, ob upoštevanju domnevnih različnih vzročnih dejavnikov med različnimi proizvajalci Skupnosti.
As already noted in recital 64 above concerning injury, there is no legal ground in Article 3(5), 3(6) and 3(7) of the basic Regulation suggesting that causation should be assessed on the basis of individual Community producers included in the definition of the Community industry.
Kot je omenjeno že v uvodni izjavi 64 v zvezi s škodo, v členu 3(5), 3(6) in 3(7) osnovne uredbe ni nobene pravne podlage, iz katere bi bilo mogoče sklepati, da naj bi se vzročna zveza ocenjevala na osnovi posameznih proizvajalcev Skupnosti, zajetih v opredelitev industrije Skupnosti.
The latter is defined in Article 4 of the basic Regulation as Community producers as a whole of the like products or those whose collective output represents a major proportion of the total Community production.
Slednja je opredeljena v členu 4 osnovne uredbe kot proizvajalci Skupnosti podobnih izdelkov kot celota oziroma tisti proizvajalci, katerih skupna proizvodnja predstavlja večji delež celotne proizvodnje Skupnosti.
It is recalled that the dumped imports volume from the countries concerned and market share increased significantly during the period considered.
Treba je spomniti, da sta se obseg dampinškega uvoza iz zadevnih držav in tržni delež v obravnavanem obdobju znatno povečala.
There was also a clear coincidence in time between the surge of dumped imports and the deterioration of the economic situation of the Community industry.
Poleg tega je prišlo do očitnega časovnega sovpada med povečanjem dampinškega uvoza in poslabšanjem ekonomskega stanja industrije Skupnosti.
That industry was not able to increase its sales prices to the necessary level to cover its full costs, as its prices were undercut during the IP by dumped imports.
Ta industrija ni mogla povišati prodajnih cen na raven, potrebno za pokritje njenih celotnih stroškov, saj je njene cene v obdobju preiskave nelojalno nižal dampinški uvoz.
On that basis, the findings and the conclusions reached in recitals 112 to 114 of the provisional Regulation are confirmed.
Na tej podlagi se potrdijo ugotovitve in sklepi iz uvodnih izjav 112 do 114 začasne uredbe.
Price setting of ferro-silicon
Oblikovanje cen fero-silicija
Certain interested parties claimed that FeSi is a commodity traded on the global market and that market prices for FeSi were set by fluctuating demand of the steel industry and were not cost-based.
Nekatere zainteresirane stranke so trdile, da je FeSi blago, ki se prodaja na svetovnem trgu, ter da se tržne cene za FeSi oblikujejo glede na nihanje povpraševanja jeklarske industrije in ne temeljijo na stroških.
In market economies and in normal market conditions, the prices are generally set by the levels of the demand and the offer for a certain product in the market.
V tržnih gospodarstvih in v normalnih tržnih pogojih se cene praviloma oblikujejo glede na ravni povpraševanja in ponudbo določenega izdelka na trgu.
However, there might be other factors such as the presence of low-priced dumped imports, which are playing a major role in the level of the prices.
Vendar pa lahko obstajajo tudi drugi dejavniki, kot je na primer poceni dampinški uvoz, ki pri ravni cen igra pomembno vlogo.
In the current case, the investigation showed that indeed the price setting mechanisms for FeSi were influenced by the presence of significant quantities of dumped imports.
V trenutnem primeru je preiskava pokazala, da na mehanizme oblikovanja cen FeSi resnično vpliva prisotnost velikih količin dampinškega uvoza.