natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
All parties were informed of the essential facts and considerations on the basis of which it was intended to recommend the imposition of definitive anti-dumping measures on imports of certain aluminium foil originating in Armenia, Brazil and the PRC and the definitive collection of the amounts secured by way of the provisional duty.
Vse stranke so bile obveščene o bistvenih dejstvih in premislekih, na podlagi katerih se je nameravala priporočiti uvedba dokončnih protidampinških dajatev na uvoz nekaterih aluminijastih folij s poreklom iz Armenije, Brazilije in LRK ter dokončno pobiranje zneskov, zavarovanih z začasno dajatvijo.
Scope of the investigation
Obseg preiskave
The Brazilian exporting producer argued that Russia should have been included in the scope of the investigation since, during the entire period considered import volumes and market shares from Russia were significant and even higher than the ones from Armenia.
Brazilski proizvajalec izvoznik je trdil, da bi morala biti Rusija vključena v obseg preiskave, saj so bili v celotnem obravnavanem obdobju količine uvoza in tržni delež iz Rusije znatni ter celo višji od tistih iz Armenije.
Furthermore, the Brazilian exporting producer alleged that import prices from Russia were at the same level as the prices of imports of the countries concerned and that there was prima facie evidence of dumping at the time of the initiation.
Poleg tega je brazilski proizvajalec izvoznik navajal, da naj bi bile uvozne cene iz Rusije na isti ravni kot cene uvoza iz zadevnih držav in da obstajajo prime facie dokazi o dampingu v času začetka postopka.
When analysing the complaint, the Commission came to the conclusion that there was no sufficient prima facie evidence of dumping with regard to Russia.
Pri analizi pritožbe je Komisija ugotovila, da v zvezi z Rusijo ni nikakršnih prima facie dokazov o dampingu.
Consequently, the non-inclusion of Russia in the complaint was considered warranted.
Zato se je štelo za upravičeno, da Rusija ni bila vključena v pritožbo.
In the absence of evidence of dumping, it is irrelevant whether import volumes and/or market shares of imports originating in Russia were indeed higher than the ones of one or more countries included in the scope of the investigation.
Glede na to, da ni dokazov o dampingu, je nepomembno, ali so bile količine in/ali tržni delež uvoza s poreklom iz Rusije dejansko višji od tistih iz ene ali več držav, ki jih zajema obseg preiskave.
The claim of the Brazilian exporting producer was therefore rejected.
Trditev brazilskega proizvajalca izvoznika se zato zavrne.
The downstream industry in the Community, i.e. the ‘rewinders’, reiterated that the product concerned should also include consumer rolls, i.e. aluminium foil weighing less than 10 kg, because if definitive measures were imposed solely on imports of aluminium foil weighing over 10 kg (jumbo reels), this could give rise to an increase of exports of consumer rolls from the countries concerned at low prices.
Panoge na koncu proizvodne verige v Skupnosti, t. i. „previjalci“, so ponovili trditev, da bi moral zadevni izdelek vključevati tudi zvitke za široko potrošnjo, tj. aluminijaste folije z maso manj kot 10 kg, ker bi dokončna uvedba ukrepov le na uvoz aluminijaste folije z maso več kot 10 kg („zvitki jumbo“) lahko povzročila porast izvoza zvitkov za široko potrošnjo iz zadevnih držav po nizkih cenah.
It was also argued that both products have basically the same characteristics, the only difference being the packaging.
Trdili so tudi, da imata oba izdelka v osnovi enake lastnosti in da se razlikujeta samo po embalaži.
In recitals 15 to 19 of the provisional Regulation it was concluded that consumer rolls and jumbo reels are different products in terms of physical characteristics and basic end-uses.
V uvodnih izjavah od 15 do 19 začasne uredbe je bilo ugotovljeno, da se zvitki za široko potrošnjo in zvitki jumbo razlikujejo glede na fizikalne lastnosti in osnovno končno uporabo.
The subsequent investigation confirmed these findings.
Nadaljnja preiskava je te ugotovitve potrdila.
Indeed, the physical differences between consumer rolls and jumbo reels go beyond the mere difference in packaging, as the product concerned has to be rewound before being repacked and resold to the final customer.
Fizikalne razlike med zvitki za široko potrošnjo in zvitki jumbo dejansko presegajo zgolj razliko v embalaži, saj je treba zadevni izdelek pred prepakiranjem in nadaljnjo prodajo končnemu kupcu na novo naviti.
It was also established that customers, sales channels and basic applications are different.
Ugotovljeno je bilo, da se razlikujejo tudi stranke, prodajne poti in osnovna uporaba.
It was therefore not considered appropriate to include consumer rolls in the product scope of the present investigation.
Zato ne bi bilo primerno, da se zvitki za široko potrošnjo vključijo v obseg trenutne preiskave.
The allegation that imports of jumbo reels may be substituted by imports of consumer rolls is addressed in recitals 97 to 99.
Trditve, da bi se uvoz zvitkov jumbo lahko nadomestil z uvozom zvitkov za široko potrošnjo, so obravnavane v uvodnih izjavah od 97 do 99.
In the absence of any other comments concerning the product concerned and the like product, the findings as set out in recitals 14 to 21 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
V zvezi z zadevnim izdelkom in podobnim izdelkom ni bilo drugih pripomb, zato se ugotovitve iz uvodnih izjav od 14 do 21 začasne uredbe potrdijo.
The sole exporting producer in Armenia contested the provisional findings as set out in recitals 24 to 31 of the provisional Regulation.
Edini proizvajalec izvoznik v Armeniji je nasprotoval začasnim ugotovitvam iz uvodnih izjav od 24 do 31 začasne uredbe.
The company first stated that the Commission erred in considering that a company in Armenia would need to apply for MET, as in its opinion, Armenia was a market economy country under the terms of the WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement and that the inclusion of Armenia in the footnote to Article 2(7)(a) of the basic anti-dumping Regulation should be removed.
Družba je najprej izjavila, da se Komisija moti, da bi morala Armenija vložiti zahtevek za TGO, saj naj bi bila po njenem mnenju Armenija država s tržnim gospodarstvom v skladu s Protidampinškim sporazumom STO, in da bi bilo treba vključitev Armenije v opombo k členu 2(7)(a) osnovne protidampinške uredbe umakniti.
However as set out in recital 25 of the provisional Regulation, Armenia is specifically mentioned in the footnote to Article 2(7)(a) of the basic Regulation as being included among non-market economy countries.
Vendar je Armenija, kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 25 začasne uredbe, v opombi k členu 2(7)(a) osnovne uredbe izrecno omenjena kot ena od držav z netržnim gospodarstvom.
The treatment of exporting producers in non-market economy countries which are WTO members is set out in Article 2(7)(b).
Obravnava proizvajalcev izvoznikov v državah z netržnim gospodarstvom, ki so članice STO, je navedena v členu 2(7)(b).
These provisions have been fully complied with in the current investigation.
Sedanja preiskava je v celoti skladna z navedenimi določbami.
This argument was therefore again dismissed.
Argument je bil zato ponovno zavrnjen.
The company then stated that it met the second MET criterion, which was provisionally found not to have been met in recitals 27 to 29 of the provisional Regulation.
Družba je nato izjavila, da izpolnjuje drugo merilo TGO, za katerega je bilo v uvodnih izjavah od 27 do 29 začasne uredbe začasno ugotovljeno nasprotno.
The company based its argument on the submission of the accounts for 2007 which had not been provided during the verification visit of the company prior to provisional measures being imposed.
Družba je to utemeljevala s predložitvijo računovodskih evidenc za 2007, ki med preveritvenim obiskom družbe pred uvedbo začasnih ukrepov niso bile zagotovljene.
The company again stated that it did not believe that the second MET criterion demanded that the accounts of the company be prepared in line with international accounting standards and that Armenian national accounting standards were sufficient, as Armenia is a member of the WTO.
Družba je ponovno izjavila, da ne verjame, da se morajo v skladu z drugim merilom TGO računovodske evidence družbe pripravljati v skladu z mednarodnimi računovodskimi standardi in da so armenski nacionalni računovodski standardi zadostni, saj je Armenija članica STO.
This argument was rejected.
Ta argument je bil zavrnjen.
The company is obliged to have one clear set of accounts in line with international accounting standards.
Družba mora imeti jasen seznam računovodskih evidenc v skladu z mednarodnimi računovodskimi standardi.
The failures noted by the auditors for both the 2006 and 2007 financial years were such as to clearly show that their accounts were not prepared in line with IAS and therefore the company could not prove that the second MET criterion was met.
Napake, ki so jih revizorji zabeležili za finančni leti 2006 in 2007, so jasno pokazale, da računovodske evidence družbe niso bile pripravljene v skladu z MRS, zato družba ni mogla dokazati, da izpolnjuje drugo merilo TGO.
The MET criteria actually point to international standards and WTO membership does not change this.
Merila TGO se nedvomno ravnajo po mednarodnih standardih in članstvo STO tega ne spremeni.
Furthermore, WTO membership in itself is not a guarantee of the prevalence of market conditions in the economic activity of one company.
Poleg tega članstvo STO samo po sebi ne zagotavlja, da v gospodarskih dejavnostih neke družbe prevladujejo tržni pogoji.
The company further stated that it met the third MET criterion, which was provisionally found not to have been met in recital 30 of the provisional Regulation on grounds relating to the sale of shares by the Armenian State and also the State’s granting of land to the company for free.
Nadalje je družba izjavila, da izpolnjuje tretje merilo TGO, za katerega je bilo v uvodni izjavi 30 začasne uredbe začasno ugotovljeno nasprotno na podlagi nepravilnosti v zvezi s delnicami, ki jih je prodala armenska država, in zemljiščem, ki ga je družba od države prejela brezplačno.
The company stated that the issue of the land being given to the company for free was not significant and should not be cumulated with the other issue regarding shares, which the company also considers not significant.
Družba je izjavila, da je vprašanje glede zemljišča, ki ga je prejela brezplačno, nepomembno in se ne bi smelo obravnavati skupaj z vprašanjem glede delnic, ki se družbi prav tako ne zdi pomembno.
This argument was also rejected.
Tudi ta argument je bil zavrnjen.
The fact that the land was obtained for zero cost, and can be sold with the payment of its cadastral value to the State (which is significantly lower than its market value) makes that land an important and valuable asset for the company which does not appear in the company’s accounts and therefore has a significant effect on the company’s costs.
Samo dejstvo, da je družba pridobila zemljišče brezplačno in da ga lahko proda s plačilom katastrske vrednosti državi (ki je znatno nižja od tržne vrednosti), pomeni, da je to zemljišče pomembno in vredno premoženje, ki ga računovodske evidence ne vsebujejo, zato znatno vpliva na stroške družbe.
In addition, the company failed to prove that the distortion caused by the sale of shares at a lower price than their nominal one was insignificant.
Družba tudi ni dokazala, da je bilo izkrivljanje zaradi prodaje delnic po ceni, nižji od nominalne, nepomembno.
It can therefore be concluded that the two issues concerning compliance with the third MET criterion point to a distortion carried over from a non-market economy situation.
Zato se lahko sklene, da navedeni vprašanji, ki zadevata skladnost s tretjim merilom TGO, kažeta na izkrivljanje, preneseno iz razmer netržnega gospodarstva.
The finding that this company should be denied MET is confirmed.
Ugotovitev, da je treba družbi zavrniti TGO, je potrjena.
One exporting producer in the PRC contested the provisional findings as set out in recital 32 of the provisional Regulation.
En proizvajalec izvoznik v LRK je nasprotoval začasnim ugotovitvam iz uvodne izjave 32 začasne uredbe.
They reiterated that the Commission should not have compared the price as quoted by the Shanghai Futures Exchange (the ‘SHFE’) and the London Metal Exchange (the ‘LME’) by taking both on a VAT-exclusive basis, and that without this adjustment the prices would be similar during the investigation period.
Ponovil je trditev, da pri primerjavi cene, ki jo navajata Šanghajska terminska borza (Shanghai Futures Exchange – SHFE) in Londonska borza barvnih kovin (London Metal Exchange – LME), Komisija ne bi smela upoštevati le osnove brez DDV, in da bi bile cene med obdobjem preiskave brez te prilagoditve podobne.
This argument was rejected for the reasons as set out in recital 38 of the provisional Regulation as the price should be compared on a like-for-like basis.
Ta argument je bil zavrnjen iz razlogov, pojasnjenih v uvodni izjavi 38 začasne uredbe, saj je treba cene primerjati na enaki osnovi.
Chinese producers of the product concerned pay VAT on their purchases of primary aluminium.
Kitajski proizvajalci zadevnega izdelka plačujejo DDV na nabavo primarnega aluminija.
Most of this VAT is then reclaimed on the sale of the finished product, whether sold domestically (in which case all is reclaimable) or for export (in which case the Chinese government restricts the reclaim of VAT at certain rates for certain goods at certain times).
Za večino tega DDV se nato zahteva vračilo pri prodaji končnega izdelka, prodanega doma (ko se zahteva vračilo v celoti) ali za izvoz (ko kitajska vlada v nekaterih primerih za nekatero blago po določenih stopnjah zahtevek za vračilo DDV omeji).
The inclusion of a small amount of non-reclaimable VAT is not such as to have a substantial effect on the above conclusions.
Vključitev majhnega zneska nepovrnjenega DDV nima znatnega vpliva na zgoraj navedene ugotovitve.
It should also be noted that the significant difference in price between the LME and the SHFE during the IP shows the state interference in the price setting mechanism for primary aluminium, a finding of the provisional Regulation (recital 32) which was confirmed following the Commission services visit to the SHFE.
Opozoriti je treba, da znatna razlika v cenah med LME in SHFE v OP kaže na vmešavanje države v mehanizme določanja cen primarnega aluminija, ta ugotovitev začasne uredbe (uvodna izjava 32) je bila potrjena po obisku služb Komisije v SHFE.
This visit confirmed that the State has a primary role in the price setting on the SHFE and interferes with the price setting mechanisms, in particular given its position as both a seller of primary aluminium and a purchaser via the State Reserve Bureau and other State bodies.
Obisk je potrdil, da ima država glavno vlogo pri določanju cen SHFE in se vmešava v mehanizme določanja cen, zlasti glede na njen položaj, ki zajema tako prodajalca primarnega aluminija kot kupca prek Urada za državne rezerve ali drugih državnih teles.
In addition, the State sets daily price limits via the rules of the SHFE which have been approved by the state Regulator, the China Securities Regulatory Commission (the ‘CSRC’).
Poleg tega država dnevno določa omejitve cen prek pravil SHFE, ki jih odobri državni regulator, Kitajska nadzorna komisija za vrednostne papirje (China Securities Regulatory Commission – CSRC).
It is also clear that the SHFE is a closed exchange for Chinese-registered companies and Chinese citizens and that there is no effective arbitrage between the SHFE and international exchanges outside China.
Jasno je tudi, da je SHFE zaprta borza za kitajske registrirane družbe in kitajske državljane in da ni učinkovite borzne izmenjave med CSRC in mednarodnimi borzami zunaj Kitajske.
This is evidenced in the price significant differences between the SHFE and the international exchanges such as the LME.
To dokazujejo tudi znatne cenovne razlike med SHFE in mednarodnimi borzami, kot je LME.
Furthermore where a SHFE futures contract ends in physical delivery, this can only take place in an approved warehouse within the PRC, unlike international exchanges where delivery can take place worldwide.
Poleg tega kadar se terminska pogodba SHFE zaključi s fizično izročitvijo, se ta lahko izvede le v odobrenem skladišču na ozemlju LRK, medtem ko so na mednarodnih borzah izročitve možne po celem svetu.
These delivery rules ensure that the domestic Chinese market remains insulated from the worldwide market and that the price distortion benefits only Chinese companies.
S temi pravili izročanja ostaja kitajski domači trg izoliran od svetovnega trga in od izkrivljanja cen imajo koristi samo kitajske družbe.
The provisional findings as set out in recitals 22 to 40 are therefore confirmed.
Zato se začasne ugotovitve iz uvodnih izjav od 22 do 40 potrdijo.
The PRC and Armenia: Individual treatment (IT)
LRK in Armenija: Individualna obravnava (IO)
In the absence of comments, the provisional findings as regards the exporting producer in Armenia as set out in recital 42 of the provisional Regulation are confirmed.
Ker ni bilo pripomb se začasne ugotovitve glede proizvajalca izvoznika v Armeniji iz uvodne izjave 42 začasne uredbe potrdijo.
One exporting producer in China contested the provisional finding as set out in recital 42 of the provisional Regulation that they should be denied IT.
En proizvajalec izvoznik na Kitajskem je nasprotoval začasnim ugotovitvam iz uvodne izjave 42 začasne uredbe, da mu je treba zavrniti IO.
This denial was due to the company being majority State owned.
Razlog za zavrnitev je bil, da je večinski lastnik družbe država.
The company stated that this should be reversed as the State ownership was through a company quoted on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange and there were no State officials on the Board of Directors.
Družba je izjavila, da bi bilo to treba popraviti, saj je država lastnica prek družbe, ki kotira na hongkonški borzi in v upravi ni nobenega državnega uradnika.
These arguments were rejected.
Ti argumenti so bili zavrnjeni.
The company is majority State owned and therefore the Board of Directors, which runs the company, is answerable to the ultimate shareholder — the State.
Družba je v večinskem lastništvu države, zato je upravni odbor, ki vodi družbo, odgovoren največjemu lastniku – državi.
The company was also unable to prove, and provided no evidence to show, that the State could not interfere in the business decisions of the company through the decisions of their Board of Directors.
Družba tudi ni mogla dokazati, in ni predložila dokazov, da se država ne more vmešavati v poslovne odločitve družbe prek odločitev upravnega odbora.
The provisional findings as set out in recitals 41 and 42 of the provisional Regulation are therefore confirmed.
Zato se začasne ugotovitve iz uvodnih izjav 41 in 42 začasne uredbe potrdijo.
In the absence of comments, the provisional findings that Turkey is an appropriate and reasonable analogue country, as set out in recitals 43 to 52 of the provisional Regulation are confirmed.
Ker ni bilo nobenih pripomb, se potrdijo začasne ugotovitve iz uvodnih izjav od 43 do 52 začasne uredbe, da je Turčija ustrezna in primerna primerljiva država.
In the absence of comments, the provisional findings as set out in recitals 53 to 68 of the provisional Regulation are confirmed.
Ker ni bilo pripomb, se potrdijo začasne ugotovitve iz uvodnih izjav od 53 do 68 začasne uredbe.
The sole exporting producer from Armenia contested the provisional findings as set out in recitals 69 to 77 of the provisional Regulation.
Edini proizvajalec izvoznik iz Armenije je nasprotoval začasnim ugotovitvam iz uvodnih izjav od 69 do 77 začasne uredbe.
The company stated that deductions made under Article 2(9) of the basic Regulation for selling, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses and a reasonable amount of profit for sales through related companies were not justified.
Družba je trdila, da odbitki v skladu s členom 2(9) osnovne uredbe za prodajne, splošne in administrativne stroške („PSA-stroški“) ter razumni znesek dobička za prodajo prek povezanih družb, niso upravičeni.
On examination, it was found that certain sales were not made through related importers in the Community.
Po proučitvi je bilo ugotovljeno, da nekaj prodaje ni potekalo prek povezanih uvoznikov v Skupnosti.
In these circumstances, adjustments under Article 2(9) of the basic Regulation were not warranted and the calculations were revised accordingly.
V teh okoliščinah prilagoditve v skladu s členom 2(9) osnovne uredbe niso bile utemeljene in izračun je bil ustrezno popravljen.
In the absence of comments, the provisional findings as set out in recitals 78 to 82 of the provisional Regulation are confirmed.
Ker ni bilo pripomb, se potrdijo začasne ugotovitve iz uvodnih izjav od 78 do 82 začasne uredbe.
To calculate the residual dumping margin for China, the provisional methodology as set out in recital 83 of the provisional Regulation was modified, such that the margin was calculated based on a weighted average of (i) the overall dumping margin calculated for the company to whom no MET and IT was granted, and (ii) the highest dumped transaction of that company applied to the export prices found in Comext (being representative of the non-cooperating Chinese exporters).
Za izračun preostale stopnje dampinga za Kitajsko je bila začasna metodologija iz uvodne izjave 83 začasne uredbe spremenjena, tako da je bila stopnja izračunana na podlagi tehtanega povprečja (i) splošne stopnje dampinga, izračunane za družbo, ki ji nista bili odobreni ne TGO ne IO, ter (ii) transakcije te družbe, pri kateri je bila stopnja dampinga najvišja – ugotovljena pri izvoznih cenah Comexta (te cene so bile reprezentativne za nesodelujoče kitajske izvoznike).
On this basis, the countrywide level of dumping was established at 47,0 % of the cif Community frontier price, duty unpaid.
Na podlagi tega je bila stopnja dampinga na ravni države določena v višini 47,0 % cene CIF meja Skupnosti brez plačane dajatve.
Definitive dumping margins
Dokončne stopnje dampinga
As mentioned in recital 87 of the provisional Regulation, the complaint was lodged by Eurométaux on behalf of four Community producers which cooperated in the investigation.
Kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 87 začasne uredbe, je pritožbo vložil Eurométaux v imenu štirih proizvajalcev Skupnosti, ki so sodelovali v preiskavi.
One further producer supported the complaint and one producer opposed it.
Pritožbo je podprl še en proizvajalec, eden pa ji je nasprotoval.
The five producers that were complainants or supported the complaint are therefore deemed to constitute the Community Industry (the ‘CI’) within the meaning of Articles 4(1) and 5(4) of the basic Regulation.
Za pet proizvajalcev, ki so pritožbo vložili ali jo podpirali, se zato šteje, da predstavljajo industrijo Skupnosti v smislu členov 4(1) in 5(4) osnovne uredbe.
In the absence of any comments concerning the production and definition of the Community industry, recitals 86 to 87 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Ker ni bilo pripomb v zvezi s proizvodnjo in opredelitvijo industrije Skupnosti, se uvodni izjavi 86 in 87 začasne uredbe potrdita.
The Armenian exporting producer contested the determination of the Community consumption by claiming that sales of the CI on the captive market should have been taken into consideration.
Armenski proizvajalec izvoznik je spodbijal določitev potrošnje Skupnosti in trdil, da bi bilo treba upoštevati prodajo industrije Skupnosti na omejenem trgu.
The same company also claimed that the estimated data included in the complaint were not a reliable basis to establish consumption in the Community and made reference to an independent market study.
Ista družba je trdila tudi, da ocenjeni podatki iz pritožbe niso zanesljiva osnova za določitev potrošnje v Skupnosti in se je sklicevala na neodvisno tržno študijo.
As far as the alleged captive use is concerned, it was found that there was only a very limited volume destined for the captive market during the IP.
Kar zadeva domnevno omejeno porabo, je bilo ugotovljeno, da je bila med OP za omejeni trg namenjena le majhna količina.