natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
As stated in recital (60) above, it was found that all biodiesel is subsidised through the tax credit scheme.
Kakor je navedeno v uvodni izjavi (59), je bilo ugotovljeno, da so v okviru sheme davčnih olajšav bile do subvencij upravičene vse vrste biodizla.
In these circumstances, it is considered that a countervailing duty can be levied on imports of pure biodiesel and biodiesel in a blend.
Zato se šteje, da se izravnalna dajatev lahko uporablja za uvoz čistega biodizla in biodizla v mešanicah.
It should furthermore be noted that sales of B100 to the Community are also eligible for benefits under the Small Agribiodiesel Producer Income tax credit.
Poleg tega je treba opozoriti, da je prodaja B100 v Skupnost tudi upravičena do ugodnosti v okviru sheme za davčne olajšave na dobiček malih proizvajalcev agro-biodizla.
During the IP, some of the companies in the sample had exported small quantities of B100 to the Community.
V OP so nekatere družbe iz vzorca izvažale majhne količine B100 v Skupnost.
However, there appeared to be no economic justification to export B100 in lieu of B99 to the Community, as only the latter directly or indirectly would have benefitted from the biodiesel mixture credit unless the exporter or the purchaser qualified for the above-mentioned income tax credit.
Vendar se je zdelo, da izvoz B100 namesto B99 v Skupnost ni gospodarsko utemeljen, saj bi do neposrednih ali posrednih subvencij v obliki davčne olajšave za mešanice biodizla bil upravičen le B100, razen če bi bila izvoznik ali kupec upravičena do zgoraj navedene davčne olajšave na dobiček.
If that is the case, there would be a benefit for the US producer in the same way as for sales of B100 on the domestic market.
Če je tako, bi proizvajalec v ZDA pri izvozu imel enake ugodnosti kot pri prodaji B100 na notranjem trgu.
Following final disclosure, the USG stated that no evidence had been cited to substantiate the statement that there is no economic justification to export B100 in lieu of B99 to the Community.
Po dokončnem razkritju je ameriška vlada trdila, da ugotovitev o neobstoju gospodarske utemeljenosti izvoza B100 namesto B199 v Skupnost ni bila podprta z dokazi.
In this regard, it must be pointed out that the finding above states that there ‘appears’ to be no economic justification to export B100 in lieu of B99 to the Community.
V zvezi s tem je treba poudariti, da je v ugotovitvi navedeno, da „se zdi“, da izvoz B100 namesto B99 v Skupnost ni gospodarsko utemeljen.
The reasons for this conclusion are as set out above.
Razlogi za tak sklep so navedeni zgoraj.
Therefore, in view of the fact that it is perfectly possible that export of B100 could be subsidised and that there appears to be no economic justification to export to the Community without a subsidy, the above claims are rejected.
Glede na to, da je povsem možno, da je bil izvoz B100 subvencioniran, in ker se zdi, da ni gospodarske utemeljitve za izvoz brez subvencij, se zgoraj navedene trditve zavrnejo.
In the light of the above, the findings in relation to this scheme as set out in recitals (41) to (63) of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Na podlagi zgoraj navedenega se ugotovitve v zvezi s to shemo, kakor so navedene v uvodnih izjavah od (41) do (63) začasne uredbe, potrdijo.
In the absence of any comments concerning this scheme, recitals (64) to (72) of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Ker v zvezi s tem ni bilo drugih pripomb, se uvodne izjave od (64) do (72) začasne uredbe potrdijo.
In the absence of any comments concerning this scheme, recitals (73) to (86) of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Ker v zvezi s tem ni bilo drugih pripomb, se uvodne izjave od (73) do (86) začasne uredbe potrdijo.
In the absence of any comments concerning the schemes mentioned below, recitals (87) to (157) of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Ker v zvezi z zgoraj navedenimi shemami ni bilo pripomb, se uvodne izjave od (87) do (157) začasne uredbe potrdijo.
Illinois biodiesel tax exemption
Oprostitev davka na biodizel zvezne države Illinois
Texas fuel ethanol and biodiesel production incentive program
Program za financiranje proizvodnje etanola za gorivo in biodizla v zvezni državi Teksas
The amount of countervailable subsidies in accordance with the provisions of the basic Regulation, expressed ad valorem, for the investigated companies ranges between 29,1 % and 41,1 %.
Znesek subvencij, proti katerim se lahko uvedejo izravnalni ukrepi, določen v skladu z določbami osnovne uredbe, izražen ad valorem, je za preiskane družbe med 29,1 % in 41,1 %.
As these are at the same level as set out in recital (158) of the provisional Regulation, that recital is therefore confirmed.
Ker so te subvencije na isti ravni, kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi (158) začasne uredbe, se potrdi sklep iz te uvodne izjave.
SCHEME→
SHEMA→
COMPANY↓
DRUŽBA↓
Biodiesel Mixture Credit
Davčna olajšava za mešanice biodizla
Small Agri-biodiesel Producer Income tax credit
Davčna olajšava na dobiček malih proizvajalcev biodizla
The methodology for establishing the subsidy margin for the cooperating companies not included in the sample was set out in recital (159) of the provisional Regulation.
Metodologija za določitev stopnje subvencije za sodelujoče družbe, ki niso vključene v vzorec, je bila opisana v uvodni izjavi (159) začasne uredbe.
Hence, recital (159) of the provisional Regulation is confirmed.
Zato se uvodna izjava (159) začasne uredbe potrdi.
The basis for establishing the country-wide subsidy margin was set out in recital (160) of the provisional Regulation.
Podlaga za določitev stopnje subvencije na ravni države je bila določena v uvodni izjavi (160) začasne uredbe.
In the absence of any comments in this regard, recital (160) of the provisional Regulation is confirmed.
Ker ni bilo nobene pripombe v zvezi s tem, se uvodna izjava (160) začasne uredbe potrdi.
One interested party contested the exclusion from the assessment of total Community production of the group of producers related to an exporting producer in the USA mentioned in recital (162) of the provisional Regulation on the basis of Article 9(1) of the basic Regulation.
Ena od zainteresiranih strank je nasprotovala izključitvi skupine proizvajalcev, povezanih s proizvajalcem izvoznikom v ZDA, kot je navedena v uvodni izjavi (162) začasne uredbe, iz ocene celotne proizvodnje Skupnosti na podlagi člena 9(1) osnovne uredbe.
It argued that the correct denominator to establish support to the complaint should be kept at around 5400 thousand tonnes and not decreased to between 4200 to 4600 thousand tonnes as was done at provisional stage.
Trdila je, da je treba pravilni imenovalec za ugotovitev podpore pritožbi ohraniti pri približno 5400000 tonah, pri čemer se ne sme zmanjšati na 4200000–4600000 ton kot v začasni fazi.
The relevant provisions of the basic Regulation to assess standing or the support for the investigation are Article 9(1) and Article 10(8) of the basic Regulation.
Ustrezne določbe osnovne uredbe za oceno položaja ali podpore za preiskavo so navedene v členu 9(1) in členu 10(8) osnovne uredbe.
For information, the relevant provisions of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures concerning the definition of the domestic industry are contained in the EU’s legislation in Article 9(1) of the basic Regulation.
Zgolj v vednost, ustrezne določbe Sporazuma o subvencijah in izravnalnih ukrepih v zvezi z opredelitvijo domače industrije so v zakonodajo EU vključene s členom 9(1) osnovne uredbe.
From these provisions, it is clear that the definition of the domestic production to establish standing should be made in conjunction and is subject to the same requirements as those for the definition of the domestic industry.
Na podlagi teh določb je jasno, da je treba opredelitev domače proizvodnje za ugotovitev položaja oblikovati skupaj z opredelitvijo domače industrije in na podlagi istih zahtev kot za opredelitev domače industrije.
In any case this claim is not such as to alter the conclusion that the investigation was supported by a major proportion of Community production.
Vsekakor ta trditev ne spremeni ugotovitve, da preiskavo podpira velik delež proizvodnje Skupnosti.
Even if the denominator was kept at 5400 thousand tonnes, the support for the investigation would be above 50 %, namely largely above the requirements of the basic Regulation.
Tudi če bi se imenovalec ohranil pri 5400000 tonah, bi bil delež podpore za preiskavo več kot 50-odstoten, kar znatno presega zahteve iz osnovne uredbe.
The same interested party argued that in the light of the definition of the product concerned and the like product which is biodiesel whether in pure form or in blends containing more than 20 % biodiesel (B20), the Community industry and Community production must be composed of all Community companies producing biodiesel and blends above B20.
Ista zainteresirana stranka je trdila, da morata industrija in proizvodnja Skupnosti ob upoštevanju opredelitve zadevnega izdelka in podobnega izdelka, ki je biodizel v čisti obliki ali mešanicah z več kot 20 % biodizla (B20), vključevati vse družbe Skupnosti, ki proizvajajo biodizel in mešanice nad B20.
It claimed that there is no evidence that the complainant or the Commission has sought to include these companies into the total production or determined that these producers supported the complaint.
Trdila je, da ni nobenih dokazov, da sta si pritožnik ali Komisija prizadevala za vključitev teh družb v skupno proizvodnjo ali ugotovila, da so ti proizvajalci podprli pritožbo.
In this regard it is noted that the total Community production figure indicated in recital (162) of the provisional Regulation does indeed take into account the production volume of biodiesel in blends above B20.
V zvezi s tem se ugotavlja, da je pri vrednosti celotne proizvodnje Skupnosti, navedeni v uvodni izjavi (162) začasne uredbe, dejansko upoštevan obseg proizvodnje biodizla v mešanicah nad B20.
It can further be clarified that according to available information, the production in the Community of blends containing between 21 % (B21) and 99 % (B99) of biodiesel has been very limited during the IP.
Poleg tega je mogoče pojasniti, da je bila glede na razpoložljive informacije proizvodnja mešanic, ki vsebujejo med 21 % (B21) in 99 % (B99) biodizla, v Skupnosti v OP zelo majhna.
The only production of blends in this range was concentrated on blends of B30 and did not exceed 60000 tonnes in terms of biodiesel content.
Edina proizvodnja mešanic te vrste je bila proizvodnja mešanic B30, ki pa ni presegla 60000 ton v smislu vsebnosti biodizla.
Moreover, the Commission has contacted known producers of B30 after the imposition of provisional measures and the responses received from two of the producer indicate that they support the complaint.
Poleg tega je Komisija po uvedbi začasnih ukrepov stopila v stik z znanimi proizvajalci B30, prejeta odgovora dveh zadevnih proizvajalcev pa kažeta, da podpirajo pritožbo.
In the absence of any other comments recitals (161) to (163) of the provisional Regulation concerning the definition of Community production, Community industry and standing are hereby confirmed.
Ker ni bilo drugih pripomb, se uvodne izjave od (161) do (163) začasne uredbe v zvezi z opredelitvijo proizvodnje, industrije in položaja Skupnosti potrdijo.
One party argued that the performance of one sampled Community producer that failed to cooperate in the investigation was very good and it should have been taken into account in the assessment of injury to the Community industry.
Ena od strank je trdila, da so bili rezultati enega od vzorčenih proizvajalcev Skupnosti, ki ni sodeloval v preiskavi, zelo dobri in da bi jih bilo treba upoštevati pri oceni škode za industrijo Skupnosti.
It was claimed that this producer was not injured during the IP and that best facts available should be used in accordance with Article 28 of the basic Regulation.
Trdila je, da ta proizvajalec v OP ni bil oškodovan in da je treba v skladu s členom 28 osnovne uredbe uporabiti najboljša dostopna dejstva.
In this regard the party suggested using the publicly available financial data of this producer for 2007 and 2008 for the examination of injury to the Community industry.
V zvezi s tem je stranka predlagala, naj se uporabijo javno dostopni finančni podatki o tem proizvajalcu za leti 2007 in 2008, da se prouči škoda za industrijo Skupnosti.
It is common practice in anti-subsidy investigations that the Commission exclude producers that failed to cooperate for the purpose of the assessment of injury and not to use facts available in line with Article 28 of the basic Regulation.
V protisubvencijskih preiskavah je običajno, da Komisija iz ocene škode izključi proizvajalce, ki niso sodelovali, in ne uporabi dostopnih dejstev na podlagi člena 28 osnovne uredbe.
The data concerning injury cover an extended period of 4 years and it is not possible to obtain based on public sources all the necessary information to establish all injury indicators for the whole period.
Podatki v zvezi s škodo zajemajo obdobje štirih let, pri čemer iz javnih virov ni mogoče pridobiti vseh potrebnih informacij za določitev vseh kazalnikov škode za celotno obdobje.
In this particular case, the said Community producer was excluded from the investigation because it had failed to provide complete meaningful information for the years 2004 to 2006 and it only provided partial information for 2007 and the IP.
V tem posebnem primeru je bil navedeni proizvajalec Skupnosti izključen iz preiskave, ker ni zagotovil popolnih in smiselnih informacij za leta od 2004 do 2006, za leto 2007 in OP pa je predložil le delne informacije.
Using the public information for this producer’s biodiesel activity for 2007 and 2008, would not have allowed to obtain data for all injury factors and for all the years of the period considered.
Uporaba javno dostopnih informacij o proizvodnji biodizla tega proizvajalca za leto 2007 in OP ne bi omogočila pridobitve podatkov za vse dejavnike škode in vsa leta obravnavanega obdobja.
This would have distorted the trends which are relevant for the assessment of injury.
To bi izkrivilo gibanja, ki so pomembna pri oceni škode.
Moreover, maintaining the said producer in the sample would have not allowed the assessment of undercutting to be made for the totality of the sales of the sampled producers as the said company did not provide a listing with its detailed sales by product type for the IP.
Poleg tega ohranitev navedenega proizvajalca v vzorcu ne bi omogočila ocene nelojalnega nižanja cen, ki ga je bilo treba izračunati za celotno prodajo vzorčenih proizvajalcev, saj navedena družba ni predložila seznama podrobne prodaje v OP po vrsti izdelka.
Finally, it is noteworthy that contrary to the claim made by the interested party, the financial performance of the said producer, in terms of profitability as shown in its publicly available data, was well below the average profitability established for the co-operating sampled Community producers as shown in Table 7 of the provisional Regulation.
Končno, treba je omeniti, da je bil, v nasprotju s trditvijo zainteresirane stranke, finančni položaj navedenega proizvajalca v smislu dobičkonosnosti, kar potrjujejo javno dostopni podatki, dosti slabši od povprečne dobičkonosnosti, ugotovljene za sodelujoče vzorčene proizvajalce Skupnosti, kakor je razvidno iz preglednice 7 začasne uredbe.
On the basis of the above the request made by this party had to be rejected.
Na podlagi zgoraj navedenega je bilo treba zahtevo te stranke zavrniti.
The same party claimed that the sample of Community producers was not representative of the Community industry as it was based only on producers of pure biodiesel (B100) and therefore failed to include producers of blends from B99 down to B20 as well as blenders of B100.
Ista stranka je trdila, da vzorec proizvajalcev Skupnosti ni bil reprezentativen za industrijo Skupnosti, saj je vključeval le proizvajalce čistega biodizla (B100), ni pa torej vključeval tudi proizvajalcev mešanic od B99 navzdol do B20 in pripravljavcev mešanic z biodizlom B100.
As far as the blenders of B100 is concerned these companies could not be considered as producers of the like product as they are processing by a simple blending operation an existing like product.
Kar zadeva pripravljavce mešanic z biodizlom B100, se te družbe niso mogle šteti za proizvajalce podobnega izdelka, saj s preprostim postopkom mešanja predelujejo že obstoječi podobni izdelek.
The claim was therefore rejected.
Zahteva je bila zato zavrnjena.
In the absence of any other comments recitals (164) to (166) of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Ker v zvezi s tem ni bilo drugih pripomb, se uvodne izjave od (164) do (166) začasne uredbe potrdijo.
As mentioned in recital (17) above, the examination of the trends concerning the assessment of injury covered the period from January 2004 to the end of the IP.
Kakor je navedeno v uvodni izjavi (16), je proučitev trendov v zvezi z oceno škode zajela obdobje od januarja 2004 do konca OP.
However the investigation showed that the Community industry was practically starting up in 2004.
Vendar je bilo s preiskavo ugotovljeno, da je industrija Skupnosti dejansko začela delovati šele leta 2004.
It was, thus, considered more appropriate to make an analysis on the possible injury and the economic situation of the Community industry based on trends for the period 2005 to the IP (‘period analysed’).
Zato se je zdelo ustrezneje, da se analiza mogoče škode in gospodarskega položaja industrije Skupnosti opravi na podlagi trendov za obdobje od leta 2005 do OP („analizirano obdobje“).
As no party commented on this approach recital (167) of the provisional Regulation is confirmed.
Ker ni nobena stranka predložila pripomb k temu pristopu, se uvodna izjava (167) začasne uredbe potrdi.
Index 2005=100
Indeks 2005 = 100
In the absence of any comments that could justify a change concerning the Community consumption as shown in the above table, recitals (168) to (173) of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Ker ni bilo nobenih pripomb, ki bi lahko upravičile spremembo v zvezi s potrošnjo Skupnosti, kot je prikazana v zgornji preglednici, se uvodne izjave od (168) do (173) začasne uredbe potrdijo.
Volume of imports from the country concerned and market share
Obseg uvoza iz zadevne države in tržni delež
The table below shows the total imports into the Community market made by US exporting producers during the period considered.
Spodnja preglednica kaže celotni uvoz ameriških proizvajalcev izvoznikov na trg Skupnosti v obravnavanem obdobju.
Source: USA export statistics.
Vir: statistični podatki ZDA o izvozu
All imports from USA
Celoten uvoz iz ZDA
One interested party claimed that the injury and causation analysis of the anti-subsidy proceeding should be made on different data than that made in the parallel anti-dumping proceeding.
Ena od zainteresiranih strank je trdila, da je treba škodo in vzročno zvezo v protisubvencijskem postopku analizirati na podlagi drugačnih podatkov kot v vzporednem protidampinškem postopku.
It was argued that the subsidy findings are based on i) own produced, ii) produced and blended and iii) purchased and blended biodiesel exported to the Community whereas the dumping findings, in particular the export sales to the Community, are based only on the own produced biodiesel of the sampled producers.
Trdila je, da ugotovitve o subvencioniranju temeljijo na biodizlu, ki se izvaža v Skupnost in ga proizvajalci i) proizvajajo sami, ii) proizvajajo in mešajo ter iii) kupujejo in mešajo, medtem ko ugotovitve o dampingu, zlasti izvoz v Skupnost, temeljijo le na biodizlu, ki so ga vzorčeni proizvajalci proizvedli sami.
This claim would appear to suggest that the anti-dumping proceeding should always be based on a narrower data in relation to the anti-subsidy proceeding.
Zdi se, da stranka s to trditvijo predlaga, naj protidampinški postopek v primerjavi s protisubvencijskim postopkom vedno temelji na ožjem razponu podatkov.
However, at provisional stage it was found in the parallel anti-dumping proceeding that all the exports of the own production of the companies included in the sample of US producers were made at dumped prices in the Community market.
Vendar je bilo v začasni fazi ugotovljeno, da je izvoz lastne proizvodnje vseh družb, vključenih v vzorec ameriških proizvajalcev, na trg Skupnosti potekal po dampinških cenah.
A similar finding was made in the present anti-subsidy investigation.
Podobna ugotovitev je bila sprejeta v sedanji protisubvencijski preiskavi.
Thus in both investigations all exports made from the USA were deemed to be dumped and subsidized and were thus all included in the injury and causation analysis.
Tako se je v obeh preiskavah celoten izvoz iz ZDA štel za dampinškega in subvencioniranega, zato je bil vključen v analizo škode in vzročne zveze.
It should, however, be pointed out that, at definitive stage, one sampled US company was found not to be dumping and this has led to a difference between the volume of dumped imports and the volume of subsidized imports to be considered in the injury and causation analysis of the proceedings.
Vendar je treba poudariti, da je bilo na koncu ugotovljeno, da ena od vzorčenih ameriških družb ni izvajala dampinga, zaradi česar je prišlo do razlike med obsegom dampinškega uvoza in obsegom subvencioniranega uvoza, ki jo je treba upoštevati pri analizi škode in vzročne zveze v postopku.
In the anti-dumping proceeding, the overall volume of dumped imports from the USA has been adjusted to take into account the fact that the imports of one sampled exporting producer were found not to be dumped.
V protidampinškem postopku je bil celoten obseg dampinškega uvoza iz ZDA prilagojen, da bi se upoštevalo dejstvo, da eden od vzorčenih proizvajalcev izvoznikov zadevnega izdelka ni izvažal po dampinških cenah.
This has no bearing, however, on the anti-subsidy proceeding.
Vendar pa to ne vpliva na protidampinški postopek.
In view of the above the claim had to be rejected.
Ob upoštevanju zgoraj navedenega je bilo treba to trditev zavrniti.
One interested party claimed that the HTS heading 3824 90 of the USA export statistics which was used in the provisional Regulation to establish the imports from the country concerned would also cover, in addition to biodiesel, other products such as ‘fatty substances of animal or vegetable origin and mixtures thereof’.
Ena od zainteresiranih strank je trdila, da oznaka HTS 3824 90 iz statističnih podatkov ZDA o izvozu, ki se je uporabila v začasni uredbi za ugotovitev uvoza iz zadevne države, poleg biodizla vključuje tudi druge izdelke, kot so „živalske ali rastlinske maščobe in njihove mešanice“.
In this regard, it is firstly noted that the US HTS code 3824 90 4000 was used in order to compute the import volumes originating in the USA and not the six-digit tariff heading claimed by this party.
V zvezi s tem se najprej opozarja, da je bila za izračun obsega uvoza s poreklom iz ZDA uporabljena ameriška oznaka HTS 3824 90 4000 in ne šestmestna tarifna številka, kot je trdila ta stranka.
Moreover, it is recalled that as mentioned in recital (170) of the provisional Regulation, Eurostat data could not be used for the purpose of assessing the imports of biodiesel from the USA because until the end of 2007 there was no distinct CN code available for the customs classification of that product.
Treba je spomniti, kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi (170) začasne uredbe, da se podatki Eurostata niso mogli uporabiti za oceno uvoza biodizla iz ZDA, ker do konca leta 2007 ni bilo ločene oznake KN, ki bi bila na voljo kot carinska oznaka za ta izdelek.
Biodiesel could indeed have been classified under various CN codes which also contained import data for other products.
Biodizel bi se dejansko lahko uvrstil pod različne oznake KN, ki so vključevale tudi podatke o uvozu drugih izdelkov.