natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
However, it is stated that factors relating to financial situation of the Community industry were indeed severely affected, namely the profitability and the return on investment and to a lesser extent productivity was affected.
Vendar je navedeno, da je bil vpliv na dejavnike, povezane s finančnim položajem industrije Skupnosti, dejansko resen, pri čemer sta škodo utrpeli dobičkonosnost in donosnost naložb, nekoliko manj pa produktivnost.
This stems from the fact that the Community industry had to adapt to the competition of price-setting subsidised US imports, and chose to maintain their presence on the market to the detriment of their profitability, rather than preserving their profitability but losing market shares.
To izhaja iz dejstva, da se je morala industrija Skupnosti prilagoditi konkurenci ameriškega subvencioniranega uvoza, ki je določal ceno, pri čemer se je odločila za nadaljnjo navzočnost na trgu v škodo dobičkonosnosti, namesto da bi ohranila dobičkonosnost, izgubila pa tržne deleže.
Certain interested parties and the USG claimed that the levels of profitability and return on investment for the sampled EU producers are still good in 2007 and during the IP, in absolute value, in spite of the strong decrease compared to the previous years.
Nekatere zainteresirane stranke in ameriška vlada so trdile, da so bile v letu 2007 in OP stopnje dobičkonosnosti in donosnosti naložb pri vzorčenih proizvajalcih EU kljub izrazitemu zmanjšanju v primerjavi s prejšnjimi leti v absolutnih vrednostih še vedno dobre.
They argue that the levels of profitability and return on investment achieved from 2004 to 2006 were not sustainable and that the EU biodiesel industry, as all nascent industries, experienced a normal ‘boom and bust’ phenomenon during the period considered.
Trdijo, da stopnje dobičkonosnosti in donosnosti naložb, dosežene od leta 2004 od leta 2006, niso bile vzdržne, pri čemer je industrija biodizla v EU kot vse razvijajoče se industrije v obravnavanem obdobju izkusila običajni pojav hitre rasti in upada (boom and bust).
In this regard, it is recalled that some US sampled companies achieved much higher profitability, exceeding 30 %, in the similar context of a developing market during the period considered.
V zvezi s tem je treba spomniti, da so nekatere vzorčene ameriške družbe v podobnih okoliščinah razvijajočega se trga v obravnavanem obdobju dosegle veliko večjo dobičkonosnost, ki je presegla 30 %.
It is also stated that the decrease of profitability and return on investment experienced by the Community industry was very brutal since it occurred from 2006 to 2007, and coincides exactly with the surge of U.S. imports of biodiesel.
Prav tako je navedeno, da je bilo zmanjšanje dobičkonosnosti in donosnosti naložb v industriji Skupnosti zelo izrazito, ker se je pojavilo od leta 2006 do leta 2007 in natančno sovpada z nenadno rastjo uvoza biodizla iz ZDA.
Several Community producers claimed that the situation of non-sampled Community companies should be fully taken into account in the injury assessment, in particular in the light of the numerous cases of downsizing, closures or postponement of new projects that were identified among these companies during the period considered.
Več proizvajalcev Skupnosti je trdilo, da je treba položaj nevzorčenih družb Skupnosti v celoti upoštevati pri oceni škode, zlasti ob upoštevanju več primerov zmanjšanja proizvodnje, zapiranja ali odložitev novih projektov, ki so bili pri teh družbah ugotovljeni v obravnavanem obdobju.
On the other hand, one interested party claimed that the reference made in the provisional Regulation to producers in the Community not included in the sample is irrelevant, as the unverified data from non-sampled producers cannot be used for the demonstration of injury.
Po drugi strani je ena od zainteresiranih strank trdila, da je sklicevanje na proizvajalce v Skupnosti, ki niso vključeni v vzorec, v začasni uredbi nepomembno, ker nepreverjenih podatkov o nevzorčenih proizvajalcih ni mogoče uporabiti kot dokaz za škodo.
This party further insists on public data showing that some of these non-sampled producers are profitable.
Poleg tega ta stranka vztraja, da javni podatki dokazujejo, da nekateri od teh nevzorčenih proizvajalcev poslujejo z dobičkom.
Regarding the two claims above, it is recalled that the provisional Regulation in its recitals (205) to (208) refers to the situation of the non-sampled producers in the Community as a supplementary indication of injury, without impacting the calculations of the injury indicators and injury margin for which verified information was actually used.
Kar zadeva obe zgornji trditvi, je treba spomniti, da se začasna uredba v uvodnih izjavah od (205) do (208) sklicuje na položaj nevzorčenih proizvajalcev v Skupnosti kot na dodaten dokaz za škodo, ne da bi to vplivalo na izračune kazalnikov škode in stopnje škode, za katere so se preverjene informacije dejansko uporabile.
Therefore the claim of this party was rejected.
Zato je bila trditev te stranke zavrnjena.
On the other hand, in the absence of available verified statistics or individual information regarding the situation of all non-sampled EU producers, it is not possible to make any accurate determination for the Community producers as a whole as suggested by the Community producers.
Po drugi strani zaradi neobstoja razpoložljivih preverjenih statističnih ali individualnih podatkov v zvezi s položajem vseh nevzorčenih proizvajalcev EU ni mogoče sprejeti natančne ugotovitve glede proizvajalcev Skupnosti kot celote, kot so predlagali proizvajalci Skupnosti.
This claim was therefore also rejected.
Zato je bila tudi ta trditev zavrnjena.
In the absence of any other comments on the provisional findings concerning the economic situation of the Community industry, recitals (188) to (194) and (196) to (208) of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Ker ni bilo drugih pripomb k začasnim ugotovitvam o gospodarskem položaju industrije Skupnosti, se uvodne izjave od (188) do (194) in od (196) do (208) začasne uredbe potrdijo.
The conclusion that the Community industry suffered material injury, as set out in recitals (209) to (212) of the provisional Regulation, is also confirmed.
Potrdi se tudi sklepna ugotovitev, da je industrija Skupnosti utrpela znatno škodo, kot je navedeno v uvodnih izjavah od (209) do (212) začasne uredbe.
It is recalled that the subsidised import volumes from the USA increased significantly during the period analysed.
Treba je spomniti, da se je obseg subvencioniranega uvoza iz ZDA v analiziranem obdobju izrazito povečal.
There was also a clear coincidence in time between the surge of subsidised imports and the deterioration of the economic situation of the Community industry.
Poleg tega je prišlo do očitnega časovnega sovpada nenadne rasti subvencioniranega uvoza in poslabšanja gospodarskega položaja industrije Skupnosti.
That industry was not able to set its prices in line with market conditions and the cost increases, as its prices were undercut during the IP by the subsidised imports.
Industrija Skupnosti svojih cen ni mogla določati v skladu s tržnimi razmerami in povečanjem stroškov, ker je njene cene v OP nelojalno nižal subvencionirani uvoz.
It is therefore confirmed that the surge of low-priced subsidised imports from the USA had a considerable negative impact on the economic situation of the Community industry during the IP.
Zato se potrdi, da je nenadna rast poceni subvencioniranega uvoza iz ZDA močno negativno vplivala na gospodarski položaj industrije Skupnosti med OP.
In the absence of any comments that would justify a change in the provisional findings it is confirmed that imports from other third countries cannot have made more than negligible contribution to the injury suffered by the Community industry.
Ker ni bilo drugih pripomb, ki bi upravičile spremembo začasnih ugotovitev, se potrdi, da je uvoz iz drugih tretjih držav lahko le zanemarljivo prispeval k škodi, ki jo je utrpela industrija Skupnosti.
One interested party claimed that the contraction in demand between 2007 and the IP even being negligible (0,5 %) would nevertheless have caused injury to the Community industry by alleging that an hypothetical increase of 10 % in demand would have yielded an additional volume of sales of 205733 tonnes if the Community industry would have maintained the same market share of 29,8 % that was recorded during the IP.
Ena od zainteresiranih strank je trdila, da je zmanjšanje povpraševanja med letom 2007 in OP bilo sicer zanemarljivo (0,5 %), vendar je vseeno škodovalo industriji Skupnosti, pri čemer je navedla, da bi hipotetično povečanje povpraševanja za 10 % zagotovilo dodaten obseg prodaje v višini 205733 ton, če bi industrija Skupnosti ohranila isti tržni delež v višini 29,8 %, ki je bil evidentiran v OP.
In this respect it is noted that the claims made by this party were based on broad and unsubstantiated assumptions.
V zvezi s tem se opozarja, da so trditve te stranke temeljile na splošnih in neutemeljenih predpostavkah.
One interested party reiterated its claim that the reintroduction of energy tax in Germany would have negatively influenced the economic situation of Community producers supplying that market as because of these measures the biodiesel demand for B100 representing at least 1,5 million tonnes would have collapsed.
Ena od zainteresiranih strank je ponovila svojo trditev, da je vnovična uvedba davka na energijo v Nemčiji negativno vplivala na gospodarski položaj proizvajalcev Skupnosti, ki oskrbujejo ta trg, ker je zaradi teh ukrepov povpraševanje po biodizlu B100, ki znaša vsaj 1,5 milijona ton, izginilo.
It further claimed, in response to the findings of the investigation set in recital (225) of the provisional Regulation, that even if the introduction of a blending requirement of 4,4 % for the diesel placed in the German market for transport purposes (B5) would have compensated the alleged sales losses of B100, the prices levels of B100 would be different from those of biodiesel intended for the B5 blends.
Poleg tega je kot odziv na ugotovitve preiskave, navedene v uvodni izjavi (225) začasne uredbe, trdila tudi, da bi bile ravni cen biodizla B100 tudi v primeru, ko bi uvedba zahteve v zvezi z mešanjem biodizla v višini 4,4 % za dizel, ki se daje na nemški trg za sektor prometa (B5), nadomestila domnevno zmanjšanje prodaje B100, drugačne od ravni cen biodizla, namenjenega za mešanice B5.
It alleged that B100 was produced only from the more expensive rapeseed feedstock, whereas biodiesel B5 from a variety of feedstock, thus having a negative influence on the average price of the Community producers.
Navedla je, da se je vrsta B100 proizvajala le iz dražjih surovin, tj. repičnega semena, medtem ko se je biodizel B5 proizvajal iz različnih surovin, kar je negativno vplivalo na povprečno ceno pri proizvajalcih Skupnosti.
In this respect it is recalled that, contrary to the allegations made by this party, the investigation has shown that the sales volumes of the sampled Community producers supplying the German market rose by 68 % between 2006 and the IP, which would indeed confirm the provisional finding that any losses on B100 sales were compensated by the mandatory blending requirement.
V zvezi s tem je treba spomniti, da je preiskava v nasprotju z navedbami te stranke pokazala, da se je obseg prodaje vzorčenih proizvajalcev Skupnosti, ki oskrbujejo nemški trg, med letom 2006 in OP povečal za 68 %, kar dejansko potrjuje začasno ugotovitev, da so se vse izgube pri prodaji B100 nadomestile z obvezno zahtevo za mešanje biodizla.
It is further noted that the introduction of the Euro 0,09 per litre of biodiesel as of 1 August 2006 did not lead to the collapse of the market as alleged by this party, but indeed B100 sales were reduced significantly in the last quarter of the IP when this tax was further increased to Euro 0,15 per litre as of 1 January 2008.
Poleg tega se opozarja, da uvedba davka v višini 0,09 EUR na liter biodizla od 1. avgusta 2006 ni povzročila razpada trga, kot je trdila ta stranka, vendar se je prodaja biodizla B100 v zadnjem četrtletju OP dejansko znatno zmanjšala, ko se je ta davek s 1. januarjem 2008 dodatno povišal na 0,15 EUR na liter.
Regarding the effect on prices, the allegations made by this party were unfounded as the biodiesel used for both types of products had to conform with the same standards which means that in both biodiesel fuels the same mix of feedstock could be used which means that there is no proven price differentiation between the two types of biodiesel.
Kar zadeva učinek na cene, so bile navedbe te stranke neutemeljene, saj je moral biodizel, uporabljen za obe vrsti izdelkov, ustrezati istim standardom, kar pomeni, da je bila lahko pri obeh biodizelskih gorivih uporabljena enaka mešanica surovin, zato ni nobenega dokazanega razlikovanja v cenah med obema vrstama biodizla.
On the basis of the above the claim was rejected.
Na podlagi zgoraj navedenega je bila trditev zavrnjena.
In the absence of any other comments concerning the public policy decisions recital (226) of the provisional Regulation is confirmed.
Ker ni bilo drugih pripomb k odločitvam javne politike, se uvodna izjava (226) začasne uredbe potrdi.
One interested party, whilst accepting that capacity utilisation rates remained fairly high for the sampled Community producers, claimed that the overcapacity of the sampled Community producers would still be a cause of injury in view of the fact that it would result in higher fixed costs that would have a negative effect on profitability.
Ena od zainteresiranih strank je sicer priznala, da so stopnje izkoriščenosti zmogljivosti pri vzorčenih proizvajalcih Skupnosti ostale precej visoke, vendar je trdila, da je presežna zmogljivost vzorčenih proizvajalcev Skupnosti še vseeno povzročila škodo, ker je vodila k višjim stalnim stroškom, kar je negativno vplivalo na dobičkonosnost.
It further claimed that the increase in the net asset value of the said producers would have resulted in fixed cost increases as depreciation and financial costs would have been higher.
Poleg tega je trdila, da bi povečanje neto vrednosti sredstev navedenih proizvajalcev vodilo k povečanju stalnih stroškov, ker bi bili stroški amortizacije in finančni stroški večji.
In this regard it is recalled that from detailed analysis of the repartition of variable and fixed costs in the cost structure of the Community industry it was established that the share of fixed costs represented only 6 % of overall costs (recital 228 of the provisional Regulation).
V zvezi s tem je treba spomniti, da je bilo na podlagi podrobne analize porazdelitve spremenljivih in stalnih stroškov v stroškovni strukturi industrije Skupnosti ugotovljeno, da je delež stalnih stroškov znašal le 6 % celotnih stroškov (uvodna izjava (228) začasne uredbe).
In addition, it should be noted that this analysis showed insignificant fluctuations of this percentage over the period analysed.
Poleg tega je treba opozoriti, da je ta analiza pokazala zanemarljivo nihanje tega deleža v analiziranem obdobju.
With regard to the claim concerning the effect on profitability caused by the increase in the net asset value, it should be noted that the increase in costs in absolute terms, does not automatically lead to an increase in the unit production cost as the latter depends on the volume of output which as shown in Table 4 of the provisional Regulation increased steadily over the period analysed.
V zvezi s trditvijo glede učinka neto povečanja vrednosti sredstev na dobičkonosnost je treba opozoriti, da povečanje stroškov v absolutnem smislu ne vodi samodejno k povečanju proizvodnih stroškov na enoto, ker so ti odvisni od obsega proizvodnje, ki se je v analiziranem obdobju postopoma povečeval, kot je prikazano v preglednici 4 začasne uredbe.
Therefore higher fixed costs in absolute terms were attributed to higher output volume resulting in the above mentioned repartition of fixed costs in relation to overall costs.
Zato so bili večji stalni stroški v absolutnem smislu pripisani večjemu obsegu proizvodnje, zaradi česar je bila izvedeno zgoraj navedeno razmerje med stalnimi stroški in celotnimi stroški.
On this basis the claims made by this interested party had to be rejected.
Na tej podlagi je bilo treba trditve te zainteresirane stranke zavrniti.
The same party alleged that overall overcapacity of the Community producers has a direct impact on prices as there would be a fierce battle among producers to gain contracts up to marginal costs and therefore, producers with high utilisation rates must have been the most aggressive on their sales to undercut the price of their competitors.
Ista stranka je navedla, da splošna presežna zmogljivost proizvajalcev Skupnosti neposredno vpliva na cene, ker se lahko pojavi huda konkurenca med proizvajalci za pridobitev pogodb manjšega obsega do mejnih stroškov, zato so bili proizvajalci z najvišjimi stopnjami izkoriščenosti zmogljivosti najagresivnejši pri prodaji, da bi nelojalno nižali cene svojih tekmecev.
In support of its claim it submitted an announcement of one sampled company to its financial statements of year 2007.
Stranka je svojo trditev podprla s predložitvijo izjave ene od vzorčenih družb, priložene računovodskim izkazom za leto 2007.
The allegations, however, of this party were not supported by any evidence as no reference to the alleged battle of prices due to overcapacity was indicated in this statement.
Vendar navedbe te stranke niso bile podprte z nobenim dokazom, ker v tej izjavi ni bila navedena domnevna cenovna vojna zaradi presežne zmogljivosti.
The statement rather referred to the increase by the German government of the energy tax on B100 biodiesel as of 1 January 2008 which stimulated competition in the B5 market of biodiesel.
Namesto tega je izjava vsebovala sklicevanje na povišanje davka na energijo za biodizel B100, ki ga je nemška vlada sprejela s 1. januarjem 2008 in je spodbudilo konkurenco na trgu za biodizel B5.
On the basis of the above the claim had to be rejected.
Na podlagi zgoraj navedenega je bilo treba trditev zavrniti.
In the absence of any other comments concerning the idle capacity of Community producers, recitals (227) to (230) of the provisional Regulation are confirmed.
Ker ni bilo drugih pripomb k neizkoriščenosti zmogljivosti proizvajalcev Skupnosti, se uvodne izjave od (227) do (230) začasne uredbe potrdijo.
One interested party and the US government claimed that none of the arguments in recitals (231) to (235) of the provisional Regulation addresses the issue that the prices of soybean oil, palm oil and canola oil in the USA at all times since 2004 remained significantly below the prices for rapeseed in the Community which yields a significant competitive advantage to the biodiesel imported from the USA.
Ena od zainteresiranih strank in ameriška vlada sta trdili, da v nobenem od argumentov iz uvodnih izjav od (231) do (235) začasne uredbe ni obravnavano vprašanje cen sojinega in palmovega olja ter olja kanole v ZDA, ki so bile od leta 2004 vedno precej nižje od cen repičnega semena v Skupnosti, kar biodizlu, uvoženemu iz ZDA, zagotavlja precejšnjo konkurenčno prednost.
It is recalled that the investigation has to establish whether the subsidised imports (in terms of prices and volume) have caused material injury to the Community industry or whether such material injury was due to other factors.
Opozoriti je treba, da je treba s preiskavo ugotoviti, ali je subvencionirani uvoz (glede cen in obsega) industriji Skupnosti povzročil znatno škodo ali je takšna znatna škoda nastala zaradi drugih dejavnikov.
In this respect, Article 8(6) of the basic Regulation states that it is necessary to show that the price level of the subsidised imports cause injury.
V zvezi s tem člen 8(6) osnovne uredbe določa, da je treba dokazati, da raven cen subvencioniranega uvoza povzroča škodo.
In practice, the effect of the subsidised imports on the Community industry’s prices is essentially examined by establishing price undercutting, price depression and price suppression.
Učinek dampinškega uvoza na cene industrije Skupnosti se dejansko prouči predvsem tako, da se ugotovijo nelojalno nižanje, padanje in zajezitev cen.
For this purpose, the subsidised export prices and the Community industry’s sales prices are compared, and export prices used for the injury calculations may need in certain cases to be adjusted in order to have a comparable basis.
Pri tem se primerjajo izvozne cene subvencioniranega izvoza in prodajne cene industrije Skupnosti, pri čemer je treba izvozne cene, ki se uporabljajo za izračun škode, zaradi primerljivosti v nekaterih primerih prilagoditi.
Consequently, the use of adjustments in this context only ensures that the price difference is established on a comparable basis.
Zato uporaba prilagoditev v tem smislu zagotavlja le, da se razlika v cenah ugotovi na primerljivi osnovi.
From this, it becomes obvious that the prices of raw materials in the exporting country cannot in principle be another factor of injury.
Na podlagi tega je jasno, da cene surovin v državi izvoznici načeloma ne morejo biti še en dejavnik škode.
The above is also confirmed by the wording of Article 8(7) of the basic Regulation, which refers to known factors other than subsidised imports.
Zgoraj navedeno potrjuje tudi besedilo člena 8(7) osnovne uredbe, ki se sklicuje na znane dejavnike razen subvencioniranega uvoza.
The list of the other known factors in this Article does not make reference to any factor affecting the price level of the subsidised imports.
Seznam drugih znanih dejavnikov v tem členu ne vključuje sklicev na nobene dejavnike, ki vplivajo na raven cene subvencioniranega uvoza.
To summarise, if the imports are subsidised, and even if they benefited from a favourable development of raw material prices, it is not considered that such development could be another factor causing injury.
Če povzamemo, če gre za subvencionirani uvoz in čeprav je nanj pozitivno vplival ugoden razvoj cen surovin, se ne šteje, da bi lahko bil tak razvoj dodaten dejavnik, ki povzroča škodo.
Thus, the analysis of the factors affecting the level of the prices of the subsidised imports, such as the alleged competitive advantage due to lower raw material prices, cannot be conclusive and such analysis would go beyond the requirements of the basic Regulation.
Zato analiza dejavnikov, ki vplivajo na raven cen subvencioniranega uvoza, kot je domnevna konkurenčna prednost zaradi nižjih cen surovin, ne more biti odločilna in bi presegala zahteve osnovne uredbe.
In any event, and without prejudice to the above, it has to be recalled that a general increase in prices of agricultural products worldwide took place during the IP and that the increase in soybean oil (the main feedstock used by the producers in the country concerned) was more pronounced than the increase of rapeseed oil over the same period.
Vsekakor in brez poseganja v zgoraj navedeno je treba spomniti, da so se med OP splošno povišale cene kmetijskih proizvodov po svetu, pri čemer je bilo povišanje pri sojinem olju (glavna surovina, ki jo uporabljajo proizvajalci v zadevni državi) v istem obdobju večje kot povišanje pri repičnem olju.
However, these increases in costs in the USA were not reflected in the prices of the subsidised imports in the Community market which significantly undercut the prices of the Community industry.
Vendar se povečanje stroškov v ZDA ni odrazilo v cenah subvencioniranega uvoza na trg Skupnosti, ki je nelojalno precej znižal cene industrije Skupnosti.
In light of the above, the claim made by theses parties had to be rejected.
Na podlagi zgoraj navedenega je bilo treba trditev teh strank zavrniti.
In the absence of any other comments concerning the increased demand for feedstock and increasing prices recitals (231) to (238) of the provisional Regulation are confirmed.
Ker ni drugih pripomb k povečanemu povpraševanju po surovinah in zvišanju cen, se uvodne izjave od (231) do (238) začasne uredbe potrdijo.