natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Where the volume of profitable sales of a product type represented 80 % or less of the total sales volume of that type, or where the weighted average price of that type was below the unit cost of production, normal value was based on the actual domestic price, which was calculated as the weighted average price of only the profitable domestic sales of the type in question made during the IP.
Kadar je obseg dobičkonosne prodaje neke vrste izdelka predstavljal 80 % ali manj celotnega obsega prodaje navedene vrste ali kadar je bila tehtana povprečna cena navedene vrste nižja od stroškov proizvodnje na enoto, je normalna vrednost temeljila na dejanski domači ceni, izračunani kot tehtana povprečna cena le dobičkonosne domače prodaje zadevne vrste v OP.
Wherever domestic prices of a particular product type sold by DSRM could not be used in order to establish the normal value, another method had to be applied.
Kadar domačih cen določene vrste izdelka, ki jo je prodajal DSRM, ni bilo mogoče uporabiti za določitev normalne vrednosti, je bilo treba uporabiti drugo metodo.
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 amount for selling, general and administrative expenses (SG&A) and a reasonable margin of profit.
V skladu s členom 2(3) osnovne uredbe je bila normalna vrednost konstruirana tako, da se je proizvodnim stroškom izvoženih vrst izdelka prištel razumni znesek za prodajne, splošne in administrativne stroške (v nadaljnjem besedilu: PSA-stroški) ter razumna stopnja dobička.
Pursuant to Article 2(6) of the basic Regulation, the amounts for SG&A and profit margin were based on the average SG&A and profit margin of DSRM sales in the ordinary course of trade of the like product.
V skladu s členom 2(6) osnovne uredbe sta znesek PSA-stroškov in stopnja dobička temeljila na povprečnih PSA-stroških in stopnji dobička pri prodaji DSRM v običajnem poteku trgovine s podobnim izdelkom.
Since all export sales to the Community were made via DSRM’s related companies either in the Community or in Switzerland, the ex-works export price had to be constructed in accordance with Article 2(9) of the basic Regulation, on the basis of the price at which the imported products were first resold to the first independent buyer in the Community, adjusted for all costs incurred between importation and resale, as well as a reasonable margin for SG&A and for profits.
Celotni izvoz v Skupnost je potekal prek povezanih uvoznikov DSRM, bodisi v Skupnosti bodisi v Švici, zato je morala biti izvozna cena v skladu s členom 2(9) osnovne uredbe konstruirana na podlagi cene, po kateri so bili uvoženi izdelki prvič prodani naprej prvemu neodvisnemu kupcu v Skupnosti, pri čemer je bila cena ustrezno prilagojena za vse stroške, nastale med uvozom in nadaljnjo prodajo, kakor tudi za razumne zneske PSA-stroškov ter dobičkov.
As regards a reasonable importer’s profit to be used for this purpose, in the absence of data from unrelated importers, since the current interim review is limited to the examination of dumping in relation to one company, the profit margin was based on the profit achieved by a cooperating unrelated importer from the original investigation.
Kar zadeva razumen dobiček uvoznika, ki ga je treba zato uporabiti, je ob odsotnosti podatkov nepovezanih uvoznikov in dejstvu, da je sedanji vmesni pregled omejen na preiskavo dampinga v zvezi z eno družbo, stopnja dobička temeljila na dobičku sodelujočega uvoznika iz prvotne preiskave.
Further, to the final disclosure DSRM claimed that the SG&A ratio used when constructing the export price for one of its related importers did not reflect the reality, since it was calculated as a ratio of the total turnover without taking into account the fact that the majority of the sales made by this company were on a commission basis and that only the amount of the commission had been reported in the turnover.
Po dokončnem razkritju je DSRM trdil, da razmerje PSA-stroškov, uporabljeno pri konstruiranju izvozne cene za enega od njegovih povezanih uvoznikov, ni odražalo realnega stanja, ker je bilo izračunano kot razmerje celotnega prihodka od prodaje brez upoštevanja dejstva, da navedena družba večinoma prodaja na podlagi provizije in da je v prihodku od prodaje zabeležen samo znesek provizije.
In this respect, the Commission re-examined the evidence collected during the inspection at the premises of this related importer.
Komisija je v zvezi s tem ponovno pregledala dokaze, zbrane med pregledom v prostorih tega povezanega uvoznika.
On this basis, the claim of DSRM was found to be warranted and the SG&A ratio used for the calculation of the constructed export price via this related importer was subsequently revised.
Na podlagi tega je bilo ugotovljeno, da je bil zahtevek DSRM upravičen, in razmerje PSA-stroškov za izračun konstruirane izvozne cene preko tega povezanega uvoznika je bil nato popravljen.
This revised SG&A ratio was also found to be in line with the findings in respect of the other related importers.
Obenem je bilo popravljeno razmerje PSA-stroškov v skladu z ugotovitvami glede drugih povezanih uvoznikov.
In order to ensure a fair comparison between normal value and export price, account was taken, in accordance with Article 2(10) of the basic Regulation, of differences in factors which were claimed and demonstrated to affect prices and price comparability.
Zaradi poštene primerjave med normalno vrednostjo in izvozno ceno so se v skladu s členom 2(10) osnovne uredbe upoštevale razlike v dejavnikih, za katere se je izkazalo, da so vplivale na cene in na primerljivost cen.
For this purpose, adjustments for transport costs, insurance, handling and loading charges, credit costs, and actual anti-dumping duties paid were made where applicable and justified.
Zato so bile po potrebi in kadar je bilo upravičeno, odobrene prilagoditve za stroške prevoza, zavarovanje, manipuliranje in nakladanje, stroške kredita ter dejansko plačane protidampinške dajatve.
The investigation has established that the VAT paid on export sales was not refunded (not even partially, which was the case in the original investigation).
S preiskavo je bilo ugotovljeno, da DDV, plačan pri izvozu, ni bil povrnjen (niti delno, kot v prvotni preiskavi).
The applicant argues that this approach would be unlawful.
Vložnik je trdil, da tak pristop ni zakonit.
Regarding his arguments, the following can be noted.
V zvezi s tem je mogoče ugotoviti naslednje.
Firstly, regarding the argument that in the original investigation another methodology was used (i.e. the deduction of VAT both from the normal value and the export price), it must be emphasised that the circumstances which were applicable during the review investigation period (RIP) were not the same as those applicable during the original investigation period.
Glede trditve, da je bila v prvotni preiskavi uporabljena druga metodologija (da je bil DDV odštet tako od normalne vrednosti kot od izvozne cene), je treba poudariti, da so bile okoliščine v obdobju preiskave v zvezi s pregledom (OPP) drugačne kot v obdobju prvotne preiskave.
Whereas during the original investigation period, as stated above, VAT was partially refunded, which necessitated an adjustment pursuant to Article 2(10), during the RIP, no VAT on export sales was refunded.
Medtem ko je bil v obdobju prvotne preiskave, kot je navedeno zgoraj, DDV delno povrnjen, zaradi česar je bila potrebna prilagoditev skladu s členom 2(10), pa med obdobjem preiskave v zvezi s pregledom DDV na izvoz ni bil povrnjen.
Even if this could be qualified as a change in methodology, it is justified under Article 11(9) of the basic Regulation since the circumstances have changed.
Tudi če bi se to lahko štelo za spremembo metodologije, je ta upravičena v skladu s členom 11(9) osnovne uredbe, ker so se okoliščine spremenile.
The second argument which the applicant makes is that the method used in this review would artificially inflate the dumping margin.
Drugi argument vložnika pa je, da v tem pregledu uporabljena metoda umetno zvišuje damping.
It has the same effect, also if, for instance for certain products or transactions, the company sells to the Community at an export price which does not result in dumping.
Isti učinek bi bil dosežen tudi, če bi bili na primer nekateri izdelki ali transakcije družbe prodani v Skupnost po izvozni ceni, ki ne bi privedla do dampinga.
In other words, even assuming that the inclusion of VAT on both sides of the equation would increase the difference between the two elements, that would also be the case for those models for which there was no dumping.
Z drugimi besedami, tudi če bi predpostavili, da bi vključitev DDV na obeh straneh enačbe povečala razliko med tema dvema elementoma, bi to veljalo tudi za tiste primere, pri katerih dampinga ni bilo.
This comparison showed the existence of dumping.
Ta primerjava je pokazala damping.
DSRM’s dumping margin expressed as a percentage of the net, free-at-Community-frontier price, duty unpaid, was found to be 14,4 %.
Ugotovljena stopnja dampinga za DSRM, izražena kot odstotek neto cene franko meja Skupnosti, dajatev neplačana, je bila 14,4 %.
In accordance with Article 11(3) of the basic Regulation, it was also examined whether the changed circumstances which were found to exist could reasonably be considered to be of a lasting nature.
V skladu s členom 11(3) osnovne uredbe se je proučilo tudi, ali se ugotovljene spremenjene okoliščine lahko upravičeno štejejo za trajne.
In this respect it is recalled that in the original investigation DSRM did not obtain MET because its accounting was not in line with internationally accepted accounting principles and IAS.
S tem z zvezi je treba spomniti, da v prvotni preiskavi TGO družbi DSRM ni bila odobrena, ker njeno računovodstvo ni bilo v skladu z mednarodno sprejetimi računovodskimi načeli in MRS.
It was, however, granted individual treatment.
Vendar pa ji je bila odobrena individualna obravnava.
On 8 December 2006, i.e. after the original investigation, DSRM became a Sino-foreign joint-venture with the Duferco group as foreign shareholder, with a 25 % ownership.
8. decembra 2006, po prvotni preiskavi, se je DSMR združil z nekitajsko družbo Duferco group, ki ima kot tuji delničar 25-odstotni delež.
The current investigation showed that this shareholding led to fundamental changes in DSRM’s management and accounting practices.
Sedanja preiskava je pokazala, da je ta delež povzročil temeljne spremembe v upravi in računovodskih praksah družbe DSRM.
Indeed, DSRM acquired Duferco’s know-how and support regarding management accounting and financial control and became part of Duferco’s international sales network.
DSRM je od družbe Duferco dejansko pridobil znanje in podporo za vodenje računovodstva in finančno kontrolo ter postal del njegove mednarodne prodajne mreže.
Evidence obtained and verified during the investigation also shows that these changes in the applicant’s corporate structure are of a lasting nature.
Iz dokazov, poslanih in preverjenih med preiskavo, je razvidno tudi, da so navedene spremembe v podjetniški strukturi vložnika trajne.
In contrast to the original investigation, where the normal value was based on data obtained from the analogue country, the data collected and verified during the present review showed that DSRM could be granted MET and consequently the dumping calculation could be based on its own data.
Za razliko od prvotne preiskave, pri kateri je normalna vrednost temeljila na podatkih iz primerljive države, so med sedanjo preiskavo zbrani in preverjeni podatki pokazali, da se družbi DSRM lahko odobri TGO, zato se lahko damping izračuna na podlagi njenih lastnih podatkov.
In the light of the above, it is therefore considered that the circumstances that led to the initiation of this review are unlikely to change in the foreseeable future in a manner that would affect the findings of the current review.
Glede na zgoraj navedeno se šteje, da se okoliščine, ki so privedle do začetka tega pregleda, v bližnji prihodnosti verjetno ne bodo toliko spremenile, da bi vplivale na ugotovitve iz sedanjega pregleda.
Therefore, it is concluded that the changes are considered to be of a lasting nature.
Zato se sklene, da so spremembe trajne.
In the light of the results of the investigation, it is considered appropriate to amend the anti-dumping duty applicable to imports of the product concerned from DSRM to 14,4 %.
Glede na rezultate preiskave se zdi primerno spremeniti protidampinško dajatev, ki se uporablja za uvoz zadevnega izdelka družbe DSRM, na 14,4 %.
The comments were taken into account, where appropriate,
Pripombe so bile upoštevane, kjer je bilo to primerno –
The entry concerning the Dashiqiao Sanqiang Refractory Materials Co. Ltd. in the table in Article 1(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1659/2005 shall be replaced by the following:
V preglednici iz člena 1(2) Uredbe (ES) št. 1659/2005 se vnos v zvezi z družbo Dashiqiao Sanqiang Refractory Materials Co. Ltd nadomesti z naslednjim:
‘Dashiqiao Sanqiang Refractory Materials Co. Ltd., Biangan Village, Nanlou Economic Development Zone, Dashiqiao City, Liaoning Province, 115100, PRC
„Dashiqiao Sanqiang Refractory Materials Co. Ltd, Biangan Village, Nanlou Economic Development Zone, Dashiqiao City, Liaoning Province, 115100, LRK
OJ C 146, 12.6.2008, p. 30.
UL C 146, 12.6.2008, str. 30.
The method used is neutral.
Uporabljena metoda je nevtralna.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 827/2009
Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 827/2009
This Regulation shall enter into force on 11 September 2009.
Ta uredba začne veljati 11. septembra 2009.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 828/2009
Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 828/2009
laying down detailed rules of application for the marketing years 2009/2010 to 2014/2015 for the import and refining of sugar products of tariff heading 1701 under preferential agreements
o podrobnih pravilih za izvajanje uvoza in prečiščevanja proizvodov iz tarifne številke 1701 v sektorju sladkorja v okviru preferencialnih sporazumov za tržna leta od 2009/2010 do 2014/2015
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1528/2007 of 20 December 2007 applying the arrangements for products originating in certain states which are part of the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) Group of States provided for in agreements establishing, or leading to the establishment of, Economic Partnership Agreements [2], and in particular Article 9(5) thereof,
ob upoštevanju Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 1528/2007 z dne 20. decembra 2007 o uporabi ureditev za proizvode s poreklom iz nekaterih držav iz skupine afriških, karibskih in pacifiških držav (AKP), določenih v sporazumih, ki vzpostavljajo ali vodijo k vzpostavitvi sporazumov o gospodarskem partnerstvu [2], in zlasti člena 9(5) Uredbe,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 732/2008 of 22 July 2008 applying a scheme of generalised tariff preferences for the period from 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2011 and amending Regulations (EC) No 552/97, (EC) No 1933/2006 and Commission Regulations (EC) No 1100/2006 and (EC) No 964/2007 [3], and in particular Article 11(7) thereof,
ob upoštevanju Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 732/2008 z dne 22. julija 2008 o uporabi sheme splošnih tarifnih preferencialov v obdobju od 1. januarja 2009 do 31. decembra 2011 in spremembah uredb (ES) št. 552/97, (ES) št. 1933/2006 in uredb Komisije (ES) št. 1100/2006 in (ES) št. 964/2007 [3] ter zlasti člena 11(7) Uredbe,
Article 7(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1528/2007 eliminates, as from 1 October 2009, the import duties of tariff heading 1701 for the regions and states listed in its Annex I to that Regulation.
Člen 7(1) Uredbe (ES) št. 1528/2007 s 1. oktobrom 2009 odpravlja uvozne dajatve iz tarifne številke 1701 za regije in države iz Priloge I k tej uredbi.
However, if imports reach the double threshold specified in Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1528/2007, this preference may be suspended for the regions or states listed in Annex I thereto and which are not least-developed countries listed in Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 732/2008.
Vendar če uvoz preseže dvojni prag, ki je določen v členu 9 Uredbe (ES) št. 1528/2007, se zadevna ugodnost lahko odpravi za regije ali države iz Priloge I k omenjeni uredbi, ki ne spadajo med najmanj razvite države iz Priloge I k Uredbi (ES) št. 732/2008.
In accordance with Article 9(2), a regional safeguard threshold should be fixed.
V skladu s členom 9(2) se določi regionalni zaščitni prag.
Article 11(3) of Regulation (EC) No 732/2008 suspends entirely, as from 1 October 2009, the Common Customs Tariff duties on the products under tariff heading 1701 for the countries which according to its Annex I to that Regulation benefits from the special arrangements for the least-developed countries.
Člen 11(3) Uredbe (ES) št. 732/2008 s 1. oktobrom 2009 v celoti odpravlja skupne carinske tarife za izdelke iz tarifne številke 1701 za države, ki so v skladu s Prilogo I k tej uredbi upravičene do posebnega režima za najmanj razvite države.
In accordance with Article 11(6) of Regulation (EC) No 732/2008, for the period from 1 October 2009 to 30 September 2015, imports of products under tariff heading 1701 require an import licence.
V skladu s členom 11(6) Uredbe (ES) št. 732/2008 se za uvoz izdelkov iz tarifne postavke 1701 za obdobje med 1. oktobrom 2009 in 30. septembrom 2015 zahteva uvozno dovoljenje.
To simplify the licensing procedure, each reference number should be linked to a country listed under Annex I of this Regulation.
Za poenostavitev postopkov izdajanja dovoljenj mora biti vsaka referenčna številka vezana na državo iz seznama v Prilogi I k tej uredbi.
To avoid fraudulent applications, this list shall be limited to those countries identified as current or potential sugar exporters to the European Union.
Za preprečitev goljufivih vlog se ta ukrep omeji na države, ki so opredeljene kot trenutni ali potencialni izvozniki sladkorja v Evropsko unijo.
Any country not currently listed in Annex I to this Regulation but listed either in Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 1528/2007 or in Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 732/2008 is eligible to be included in Annex I of this Regulation.
Vsaka država, ki trenutno ni uvrščena na seznam v Prilogi I k tej uredbi, vendar je uvrščena na seznam v Prilogi I k Uredbi (ES) št. 1528/2007 ali v Prilogi I k Uredbi (ES) št. 732/2008, je upravičena do uvrstitve na seznam v Prilogi I k tej uredbi.
To this effect, such a country shall request the Commission to be listed in Annex I of this Regulation.
V ta namen zadevna država zaprosi Komisijo za uvrstitev na seznam v Prilogi I k tej uredbi.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 376/2008 of 23 April 2008 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of import and export licences and advance fixing certificates for agricultural products [4] should apply to import licences issued under this Regulation, except as otherwise provided by this Regulation.
Za uvozna dovoljenja, izdana v skladu s to uredbo, se uporablja Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 376/2008 z dne 23. aprila 2008 o določitvi skupnih podrobnih pravil za uporabo sistema uvoznih in izvoznih dovoljenj in potrdil o vnaprejšnji določitvi za kmetijske proizvode [4], razen če v tej uredbi ni drugače določeno.
To ensure uniform and equitable treatment for all operators, the period in which licence applications may be submitted and licences issued should be determined.
Da se zagotovi enotna in pravična obravnava vseh podjetij, je treba določiti obdobje, v katerem se predložijo zahtevki za dovoljenja in v katerem se izdajo dovoljenja.
In accordance with Article 5 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1301/2006 of 31 August 2006 laying down common rules for the administration of import tariff quotas for agricultural products managed by a system of import licences [5], operators should submit, to the Member States in which they are registered for VAT purposes, proof that they have been trading sugar during a certain period.
V skladu s členom 5 Uredbe Komisije (ES) št. 1301/2006 z dne 31. avgusta 2006 o določitvi skupnih pravil za upravljanje uvoznih tarifnih kvot za kmetijske proizvode, ki se upravljajo s sistemom uvoznih dovoljenj [5], morajo podjetja državam članicam, v katerih so prijavljena kot zavezanci za DDV, predložiti dokaz, da so v določenem obdobju trgovala s sladkorjem.
Nevertheless, operators approved in accordance with Article 7 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 952/2006 of 29 June 2006 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 as regards the management of the Community market in sugar and the quota system [6] should be able to participate in the trading of preferential sugar.
Kljub temu morajo podjetja, ki so bila priznana v skladu s členom 7 Uredbe Komisije (ES) št. 952/2006 z dne 29. junija 2006 o podrobnih pravilih za izvajanje Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 318/2006 kar zadeva upravljanje trga Skupnosti za sladkor in sistem kvot [6], imeti možnost trgovati s preferenčnim sladkorjem.
Sugar imported for refining needs specific monitoring by the Member States.
Države članice morajo posebej spremljati uvoz sladkorja za namene prečiščevanja.
Therefore operators should specify as from the import licence application if the imported sugar is intended for refining or not.
Zato morajo podjetja na zahtevku za uvozno dovoljenje podrobneje navesti, ali je uvoženi sladkor namenjen za prečiščevanje ali ne.
To avoid speculation or merchandising of import licences and to ensure that the applicant has commercial contacts with the exporting third country, import licence applications should be accompanied by an export document issued by a competent authority of the exporting third country for a quantity equal to the quantity of the import licence application.
Da se preprečijo špekulativni posli ali trgovanje z uvoznimi dovoljenji ter zagotovi, da ima vlagatelj zahtevka poslovne stike s tretjo državo izvoznico, je treba k zahtevkom za uvozna dovoljenja priložiti izvozno listino, ki jo izda pristojni organ tretje države izvoznice in sicer za količino, ki je enaka količini v zahtevku za uvozno dovoljenje.
In accordance with Article 11(4) of Regulation (EC) No 732/2008 and Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 1528/2007, the importer has to undertake to purchase the products of CN code 1701 at a price not lower than 90 % of the reference price (on a c.i.f. basis) set in Article 8 paragraph 1 point (c) of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007.
V skladu s členom 11(4) Uredbe (ES) št. 732/2008 in členom 8 Uredbe (ES) št. 1528/2007 mora uvoznik izdelke z oznako KN 1701 kupiti po ceni, ki ni nižja od 90 % referenčne cene (na osnovi CIF), določene v členu 8(1)(c) Uredbe (ES) št. 1234/2007.
When the quantities resulting from import licence applications exceed the quantities specified in Article 9(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 1528/2007, the issuance of licenses by Member States should be subject to an allocation coefficient to be fixed by the Commission similarly to what provided by Regulation (EC) No 1301/2006.
Ko količine, ki izhajajo iz zahtevkov za uvozna dovoljenja, presežejo količine, določene v členu 9(1)(a) Uredbe (ES) št. 1528/2007, morajo države članice v skladu z Uredbo (ES) št. 1301/2006 izdajati dovoljenja na podlagi koeficienta dodeljevanja, ki ga določi Komisija.
In accordance with Article 9(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1528/2007, that coefficient should be calculated on a regional level.
V skladu s členom 9(2) Uredbe (ES) št. 1528/2007 se ta koeficient izračuna na ravni regij.
Article 9(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1528/2007 increases the possibility of exceeding the quantities specified in Article 9(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1528/2007.
Zaradi člena 9(2) Uredbe (ES) št. 1528/2007 se povečuje možnost presega količin, določenih v členu 9(1) Uredbe (ES) št. 1528/2007.
The Commission should therefore report on the application of the transitional safeguard mechanism for sugar and, if necessary, make appropriate proposals.
Komisija mora zato pripraviti poročilo o uporabi prehodnega zaščitnega mehanizma za sladkor in po potrebi podati ustrezne predloge.