natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The exporting producer further argued that the rates used for selling, general and administrative expenses (SGA) and profit margins of respectively 16 % and 8 % were too high.
Proizvajalec izvoznik je nadalje trdil, da so stopnje, uporabljene za prodajne, splošne in upravne stroške, in stopnji dobička 16 % oziroma 8 % previsoke.
The exporting producer argued that the SGA rate should not exceed 12,59 %, reflecting its own SGA excluding inland freight costs.
Proizvajalec izvoznik je trdil, da stopnja prodajnih, splošnih in upravnih stroškov ne bi smela presegati 12,59 %, kar bi odražalo njegove lastne prodajne, splošne in upravne stroške brez notranjih prevoznih stroškov.
It is recalled that as outlined in recitals 15 to 17 of the provisional Regulation the exporting producer did not cooperate with the investigation and consequently did not provide data about its full SGA costs.
S tem v zvezi je treba spomniti, kot je opisano v uvodnih izjavah 15 do 17 začasne uredbe, da proizvajalec izvoznik ni sodeloval v preiskavi in posledično ni zagotovil podatkov o svojih celotnih prodajnih, splošnih in upravnih stroških.
Under these circumstances and given the fact that no further information was provided on the company’s full SGA costs, it was decided to continue to rely on the information available in the complaint.
V teh okoliščinah in glede na to, da podjetje ni zagotovilo nadaljnjih informacij o celotnih prodajnih, splošnih in upravnih stroških podjetja, se je Komisija odločila, da se bo še naprej zanašala na informacije, navedene v pritožbi.
Furthermore, in the light of the information available and insofar as it could be verified, a SGA rate of 16 % was considered to be reasonable.
Poleg tega se je, na podlagi razpoložljivih informacij in v kolikor jih je bilo mogoče preveriti, za stopnjo prodajnih, splošnih in upravnih stroškov v višini 16 % štelo, da je razumna.
Therefore, the claim was rejected.
Zato je bila trditev zavrnjena.
The exporting producer claimed that the profit level of 8 % used in the provisional calculation was too high and instead, a profit level of 5 % should have been used.
Proizvajalec izvoznik je trdil, da je bila stopnja dobička v višini 8 %, ki je bila uporabljena v začasnem izračunu, previsoka in da bi bilo namesto tega treba uporabiti stopnjo dobička v višini 5 %.
The arguments put forward were, firstly, a profit level of 5 % has been used for the target profit in the injury analysis and, secondly, a profit level of 5 % would be in line with previous investigations on the same product.
Predstavljene trditve so bile, da je bila stopnja dobička v višini 5 % uporabljena za ciljni dobiček v analizi škode in da bi bila stopnja dobička v višini 5 % v skladu s prejšnjimi preiskavami istega izdelka.
On the first argument, the Commission noted that the determination of a target profit for the Union industry and the profit level used for the determination of a normal value do not follow the same logic and therefore, do not have to be the same.
Glede prve trditve je Komisija ugotovila, da določanje ciljnega dobička za industrijo Unije in stopnja dobička, uporabljena za določanje normalne vrednosti, ne temeljita na isti logiki in zato ni treba, da sta enaki.
On the second argument, the Commission agreed that there were some grounds for using the same profit level as in previous investigations on the same product and decided to accept this claim and to change the profit level used in the calculation of the normal values accordingly.
Glede druge trditve se je Komisija strinjala, da je obstajalo nekaj razlogov za uporabo enake stopnje dobička, kot je bila uporabljene v prejšnjih preiskavah o istem izdelku, in se je odločila, da to trditev sprejme ter ustrezno spremeni stopnjo dobička, uporabljeno pri izračunu normalnih vrednosti.
Further to final disclosure, the Union industry and the exporting producer submitted some comments.
Po končnem razkritju sta industrija Unije in proizvajalec izvoznik predložila nekaj pripomb.
The Union industry disagreed with the correction made regarding the profit margin arguing that a profit rate of 5 % would not be sufficient to cover the profitability requirements of the three related companies involved in the production and sales of the product concerned, but without providing any other substantial arguments.
Industrija Unije se ni strinjala s popravkom stopnje dobička z utemeljitvijo, da stopnja dobička v višini 5 % ne bi zadoščala za pokritje zahtev glede dobičkonosnosti treh povezanih podjetij, ki so vključena v proizvodnjo in prodajo zadevnega izdelka, vendar ni predložila nobenih drugih trdnih argumentov.
The exporting producer claimed that the cost for depreciation, building and insurance used in the calculation of the normal value of one type was not the same as the one used for the other types and the same figure should apply to all types.
Proizvajalec izvoznik je trdil, da stroški amortizacije, gradnje in zavarovanja, ki so bili uporabljeni pri izračunu normalne vrednosti ene vrste, niso bili enaki kot tisti, ki so bili uporabljeni za druge vrste in da bi morale biti za vse vrste uporabljene iste številke.
The Commission verified the claim and indeed found an error in the calculation.
Komisija je preverila trditev in dejansko našla napako v izračunu.
However, contrary to the exporting producer’s claim the error was found to be made in the calculation of the normal value of the other types.
Vendar je bila v nasprotju s trditvijo proizvajalca izvoznika napaka narejena pri izračunu normalne vrednosti drugih vrst izdelka.
A correction to the normal value for the other types was made accordingly.
Narejen je bil ustrezen popravek normalne vrednosti za druge vrste.
The exporting producer also claimed that the normal values for types other than those for which a specific normal value was established did not take fully into account the actual product mix of the exporting producer.
Proizvajalec izvoznik je tudi trdil, da pri normalnih vrednostih za vrste, razen tistih, za katere je bila določena posebna normalna vrednost, ni bila v celoti upoštevana dejanska ponudba izdelkov proizvajalca izvoznika.
In this respect, the exporting producer reiterated his claim that a weighted average of the normal values found should be used for the other types, thus reflecting the actual product mix of the exporting producer.
S tem v zvezi je proizvajalec izvoznik ponovil svojo trditev, da bi moralo biti tehtano povprečje ugotovljenih normalnih vrednosti uporabljeno za druge vrste in tako odražati dejansko ponudbo izdelkov proizvajalca izvoznika.
As mentioned in recital 10 above, the Commission agreed to revise the calculation of the normal values for these other types in order to take into account of the actual product mix of the Thai producer and, irrespective of the actual sales volumes for each type, a normal value for small, medium and large RBM was calculated.
Kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 10, se je Komisija strinjala, da preveri izračun normalnih vrednosti za te druge vrste, da bi upoštevala dejansko ponudbo izdelkov tajskega proizvajalca, in izračunana je bila normalna vrednost za male, srednje velike in velike obročne mehanizme za vezavo, ne glede na dejanski obseg prodaje vsake vrste izdelka.
However, the Commission rejected the argument that in addition a weighting factor based on the exporter’s sales to the Union should be taken into consideration in the absence of substantiated reasons.
Vendar je Komisija zaradi pomanjkanja utemeljenih razlogov zavrnila trditev, da bi moral biti upoštevan tudi faktor tehtanja na podlagi prodaje izvoznika v Unijo.
In addition, the exporting producer claimed that the Commission’s method of calculating NV on the basis of the length of the ring binder mechanisms was imprecise and incomplete and proposed a new method for the calculation of the averages which would take into account their various lengths more accurately.
Poleg tega je proizvajalec izvoznik trdil, da je metoda Komisije za izračunavanje normalne vrednosti na podlagi dolžine obročnih mehanizmov za vezavo nenatančna in nepopolna, ter predlagal novo metodo izračuna povprečij, ki bi natančneje upoštevali njihove različne dolžine.
As explained in recital 16 above the Commission calculated a normal value for types other than those for which a specific normal value was established and calculated normal values reflecting small, medium and large RBM.
Kot je razloženo v uvodni izjavi 16, je Komisija izračunala normalno vrednost za vrste, razen tistih, za katere je bila določena posebna normalna vrednost, in izračunala normalne vrednosti, ki odražajo male, srednje velike in velike obročne mehanizme za vezavo.
The exporter’s calculation was found to be flawed and result-oriented.
Ugotovljeno je bilo, da je izračun izvoznika pomanjkljiv in usmerjen k rezultatom.
Apart from the changes mentioned above and in the absence of any other comments, the content of recitals 15 to 20 of the provisional Regulation concerning the establishing of the normal value is hereby definitively confirmed.
Razen navedenih sprememb in ker v zvezi s tem ni drugih pripomb, se vsebina uvodnih izjav 15 do 20 začasne uredbe v zvezi z določitvijo normalne vrednosti dokončno potrdi.
Export price and comparison
Izvozna cena in primerjava
The exporting producer claimed that the currency used for the computation of transport costs in the dumping calculation was not the correct one.
Proizvajalec izvoznik je trdil, da valuta, uporabljena za primerjavo prevoznih stroškov v izračunu dampinga, ni bila pravilna.
The Commission accepted this claim.
Komisija je to trditev sprejela.
In the absence of any other comments, the content of recitals 21 to 24 of the provisional Regulation concerning the establishing of export prices and comparing the export prices with the respective normal value is hereby definitively confirmed.
Ker ni bilo nobenih drugih pripomb, se vsebina uvodnih izjav 21 do 24 začasne uredbe v zvezi z določitvijo izvoznih cen in primerjavo izvoznih cen z ustrezno normalno vrednostjo dokončno potrdi.
The exporting producer claimed that the calculation of the dumping margin did not take into account the specific normal value for two types.
Proizvajalec izvoznik je trdil, da pri izračunu stopnje dampinga ni bila upoštevana posebna normalna vrednost za dve vrsti.
The claim was accepted and corrected accordingly.
Trditev je bila sprejeta in ustrezno popravljena.
In the light of the above-mentioned changes in the calculation of the normal value and the comparison, and after correction of the calculation error regarding export price mentioned above, the amount of dumping finally determined, expressed as a percentage of the CIF Union frontier price, duty unpaid, is as follows:
Glede na zgoraj navedene spremembe izračuna normalne vrednosti in primerjavo, ter po popravku navedene napake v izračunu v zvezi z zgoraj omenjeno izvozno ceno, je dokončno določen znesek dampinga, izražen kot odstotek cene CIF meja Unije, brez plačane dajatve, naslednji:
Thai Stationery Industry Co. Ltd, Bangkok, Thailand
Thai Stationery Industry Co. Ltd, Bangkok, Tajska
Since the cooperating exporting producer accounted for all Thai exports to the Union of the product concerned, it was considered that the residual dumping margin should be set at the level of dumping margin found for this cooperating exporting producer, i.e. 16,3 %.
Ker je ves tajski izvoz zadevnega izdelka v Unijo opravil sodelujoči proizvajalec izvoznik, se je štelo, da bi se morala preostala stopnja dampinga določiti v višini stopnje dampinga, ugotovljene za sodelujočega proizvajalca izvoznika, torej na stopnji 16,3 %.
In the absence of any comments concerning the definition of the Union industry, the findings set out in recitals 28 to 32 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Ker v zvezi z opredelitvijo industrije Unije ni bilo nobenih pripomb, se potrdijo ugotovitve iz uvodnih izjav 28 do 32 začasne uredbe.
Union consumption and imports from Thailand
Potrošnja Unije in uvoz iz Tajske
The Thai producer and several importers questioned the trends in Union consumption established in the provisional Regulation.
Tajski proizvajalec in več uvoznikov so izrazili dvome glede gibanj potrošnje Unije, ugotovljenih v začasni uredbi.
In particular, they argued that the consumption decreased to a higher extent than what was provisionally established (by around 30 %).
Zlasti so trdili, da se je potrošnja zmanjšala bolj, kot je bilo začasno ugotovljeno (za okoli 30 %).
They also asked for clarifications concerning the methodology followed by the Commission to establish consumption, because the RBM is included in a customs tariff heading including other products.
Zaprosili so tudi za pojasnila glede metodologije, ki jo je Komisija uporabila pri določanju potrošnje, ker so obročni mehanizmi za vezavo vključeni v carinsko tarifno številko, ki vključuje druge izdelke.
It should be mentioned that although these interested parties contested the findings related to the consumption, no supporting evidence or figures have been provided to substantiate their arguments.
Omeniti bi bilo treba, da čeprav so te zainteresirane strani ugovarjale ugotovitvam v zvezi s potrošnjo, v podporo svojih trditev niso predložile nobenih podpornih dokazov ali podatkov.
They also did not point to any methodological flaw.
Prav tako niso izpostavile nobenih metodoloških napak.
As to the methodology, it should be recalled that, as mentioned in recital 33 of the provisional Regulation, the consumption was established on the basis of the verified sales figures provided in the questionnaire’s reply of the cooperating parties (the two Union producers and the Thai exporter for the periods 2008-IP) and on the basis of Eurostat figures for the rest of the imports.
Glede metodologije bi bilo treba spomniti, kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 33 začasne uredbe, da je bila potrošnja ugotovljena na podlagi preverjenih podatkov o prodaji, predloženih v odgovorih na vprašalnik sodelujočih strani (dveh proizvajalcev Unije in tajskega izvoznika za obdobje 2008–OP) na vprašalnik in na podlagi podatkov Eurostata za preostali uvoz.
Given that RBM from other sources are subject to anti-dumping measures, imports (from all sources) are registered under sub-headings codes in the customs tariff database (TARIC) which are very largely specific to the product under investigation.
Glede na to, da se za obročne mehanizme za vezavo iz drugih virov uporabljajo protidampinški ukrepi, so uvozi (iz vseh virov) v podatkovni bazi carinske tarife (TARIC) navedeni pod tarifnimi podštevilkami, ki so v veliki meri specifične za izdelek v preiskavi.
These sub-headings were used in order to ensure that only imports of the product concerned were considered, despite a minor update of the product definition in this investigation.
Te podštevilke so bile uporabljene, da se zagotovi upoštevanje samo uvoza zadevnega izdelka, kljub manjši posodobitvi opredelitve izdelka v tej preiskavi.
Furthermore, given that Eurostat figures are expressed in kilograms, while the consumption has been calculated in pieces, one importer requested clarifications as to the methodology used to covert kilograms into pieces.
Poleg tega je, glede na to, da so podatki Eurostata izraženi v kilogramih, potrošnja pa je bila izračunana v kosih, en uvoznik zahteval pojasnila glede metodologije, uporabljene za pretvorbo kilogramov v kose.
It should thus be clarified that a conversion factor of 50 gram/piece has been used, which is in line with previous investigations and was found to be reasonable, when compared to the information provided by the Thai exporting producer.
Zato je treba pojasniti, da je bil uporabljen faktor pretvorbe 50 gramov/kos, kar je v skladu s prejšnjimi preiskavami in za kar je bilo ob primerjavi z informacijami, ki jih je predložil tajski proizvajalec izvoznik, ugotovljeno, da je razumno.
It should be also added that, if the Commission had used exactly the average weight per piece resulting from the information provided by the Thai exporting producer, the imports from Thailand would have shown during the overall injury investigation period a steeper increase in terms of both absolute volume (by 25 %, as compared to 19 % established in the provisional Regulation) and market shares (from 11,8 % to 15,5 %, as compared to 12,0 % to 15,0 % established in the provisional Regulation).
Dodati bi bilo treba tudi, da bi v primeru, če bi Komisija uporabila natančno povprečno težo na kos v skladu z informacijami, ki jih je predložil tajski proizvajalec izvoznik, uvoz iz Tajske med celotnim obdobjem preiskave škode pokazal precej večji porast tako glede absolutnega obsega (za 25 % v primerjavi z 19 %, ugotovljenimi v začasni uredbi) kot tržnega deleža (z 11,8 % na 15,5 % v primerjavi z 12,0 % na 15,0 %, ugotovljenimi v začasni uredbi).
One importer also claimed that the Thai imports actually decreased by 40 % during the injury investigation period, but this was based on the import value — and not on the volume — for the totality of the customs code, thus including products other than those under investigation.
En uvoznik je trdil, da se je med obdobjem preiskave škode tajski uvoz dejansko zmanjšal za 40 %, vendar je ta trditev temeljila na uvozni vrednosti – in ne obsegu – za celotno carinsko oznako, s čimer so bili vključeni izdelki, ki niso predmet preiskave.
In view of the above, the findings in recitals 33 to 40 of the provisional Regulation concerning the Union consumption (which decreased by more than 15 % between 2008 and the IP) and the imports from Thailand, are hereby confirmed.
Glede na navedeno se ugotovitve iz uvodnih izjav 33 do 40 začasne uredbe v zvezi s potrošnjo Unije (ki se je med letom 2008 in OP zmanjšala za več kot 15 %) in uvozom iz Tajske, potrdijo.
One importer submitted that the injury analysis was biased because the poor financial situation of the Union industry should be seen in conjunction with the situation of one of its related companies, which is allegedly making profits in the RBM’s business.
En uvoznik je trdil, da je bila analiza škode pristranska, ker bi bilo treba slab finančni položaj industrije Unije obravnavati v povezavi s položajem enega od njenih povezanih podjetij, ki domnevno ustvarja dobiček s poslovno dejavnostjo na področju obročnih mehanizmov za vezavo.
In this respect it is noted that the injury analysis should only focus on the Union industry’ sales on the Union market of the product concerned produced in the Union.
S tem v zvezi je treba spomniti, da bi se morala analiza škode osredotočiti samo na prodajo industrije Unije na trgu Unije zadevnega izdelka, proizvedenega v Uniji.
Since, as mentioned in recital 69 of the provisional Regulation, the related company in question is not a producer in the Union and is mostly trading products not originating in the Union, it should not be taken into consideration for the purpose of the injury analysis.
Ker, kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 69 začasne uredbe, zadevno povezano podjetje ni proizvajalec v Uniji in večinoma trguje z izdelki, ki nimajo porekla v Unije, se ga za namene analize škode ne bi smelo upoštevati.
Without prejudice to the above, it is nevertheless underlined that the importer has provided no information showing that the above-mentioned related company would be in a good financial situation.
Brez poseganja v navedeno je treba kljub temu poudariti, da uvoznik ni predložil nobenih informacij, ki bi pokazale, da je navedeno povezano podjetje v dobrem finančnem položaju.
To the contrary, the figures obtained during the investigation show that also this company decreased significantly its sales volume of RBM during the investigation period.
Nasprotno, podatki, pridobljeni med preiskavo, kažejo, da se je v obdobju preiskave obseg prodaje obročnih mehanizmov za vezavo tega podjetja prav tako znatno zmanjšal.
Account taken of the above and in the absence of other comments in respect to the injury analysis, the recitals 41 to 57 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed, and it is concluded that the Union industry has suffered material injury within the meaning of Article 3(5) of the basic Regulation.
Ob upoštevanju navedenega in ker v zvezi s tem ni bilo drugih pripomb, se uvodne izjave 41 do 57 začasne uredbe potrdijo in se ugotovi, da je industrija Unije utrpela znatno škodo v smislu člena 3(5) osnovne uredbe.
Even though some interested parties contested the provisional findings regarding the effect of other factors (see below), none of them contested the provisional conclusion that dumped imports from Thailand caused injury to the Union industry.
Čeprav so nekatere zainteresirane strani ugovarjale začasnim ugotovitvam glede učinka drugih dejavnikov (glej v nadaljevanju), nobena ni ugovarjala začasni ugotovitvi, da je dampinški uvoz iz Tajske industriji Unije povzročil škodo.
The recitals 58 to 64 of the provisional Regulation are thus hereby confirmed.
Zato se potrdijo uvodne izjave 58 do 64 začasne uredbe.
Some interested parties contested the provisional findings concerning the effect of other factors, and submitted that alternately contraction in demand, competition between Union producers, imports from India and self-inflicted injury would be the main cause of injury.
Nekatere zainteresirane strani so ugovarjale začasnim ugotovitvam glede učinka drugih dejavnikov in trdile, da bi bili izmenično glavni vzroki za škodo zmanjšanje povpraševanja, konkurenca med proizvajalci Unije, uvoz iz Indije in samopovzročena škoda.
Concerning the contraction in demand, reference is made to recitals 25 to 30 above which confirm the trend of the consumption established in the provisional Regulation.
Glede zmanjšanja povpraševanja je naveden sklic na uvodne izjave 25 do 30, ki potrjujejo gibanje potrošnje, ugotovljeno v začasni uredbi.
The allegations that the effects of the contraction in demand have been underestimated should therefore be rejected.
Trditve, da so bili učinki zmanjšanja povpraševanja podcenjeni, je treba zato zavrniti.
Nevertheless, it should be recalled that the recital 67 of the provisional Regulation concluded that the decrease in consumption indeed might have contributed to the material injury suffered by the Union industry, although this effect was considerably reinforced by the effect caused by the dumped imports.
Kljub temu je treba spomniti, da je bilo v uvodni izjavi 67 začasne uredbe ugotovljeno, da bi zmanjšanje povpraševanja dejansko lahko prispevalo k znatni škodi, ki jo je utrpela industrija Unije, čeprav je bil ta učinek močno okrepljen z učinkom dampinškega uvoza.
However, the effect of the decrease in consumption was not such as to break the causal link between the dumped imports and the injury found.
Vendar učinek zmanjšanega povpraševanja ni bil tako velik, da bi prekinil vzročno zvezo med dampinškim uvozom in ugotovljeno škodo.
It was also argued by the Thai exporter that the injury suffered by the Union industry was also caused by the competition between the Union producers.
Tajski izvoznik je tudi trdil, da je škodo, ki jo je utrpela industrija Unije, povzročila tudi konkurenca med proizvajalci Unije.
This is mainly because the loss of the Union industry’s market share coincided with the market share increase of the other Union producer.
To je v glavnem zato, ker je izguba tržnega deleža industrije Unije sovpadala s povečanjem tržnega deleža drugega proizvajalca Unije.
In this respect, even if the calculations presented by the Thai exporter are not entirely correct, it is true that overall the market share of the second producer also increased during the injury investigation period.
S tem v zvezi drži, tudi če izračuni, ki jih je predložil tajski izvoznik, niso popolnoma pravilni, da se je na splošno med obdobjem preiskave škode tržni delež drugega proizvajalca prav tako povečal.
It should however be recalled that, as mentioned in the recital 30 of the provisional Regulation, this producer is importing a significant quantity of RBM from Thailand.
Vendar bi bilo treba spomniti, da ta proizvajalec, kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 30 začasne uredbe, uvaža znatne količine obročnih mehanizmov za vezavo iz Tajske.