natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In the absence of any comments regarding the comparison between normal value and export price, recital 29 of the provisional Regulation is hereby confirmed.
Ker ni bilo pripomb glede primerjave med normalno vrednostjo in izvozno ceno, se uvodna izjava 29 začasne uredbe potrdi.
In the absence of any other comments concerning the determination of the dumping margin, which would alter the provisional findings, recitals 30 to 32 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Ker ni bilo drugih pripomb glede določitve stopnje dampinga, ki bi spremenile začasne ugotovitve, se uvodne izjave 30 do 32 začasne uredbe potrdijo.
Comments on the findings concerning injury were received from certain Union producers, two users in the EU and from the sole Bosnian exporting producer.
Pripombe k ugotovitvam glede škode so bile prejete od nekaterih proizvajalcev Unije, dveh uporabnikov v EU in enega bosanskega proizvajalca izvoznika.
To the extent that arguments have already been fully addressed in the provisional Regulation they are are not repeated in this Regulation.
Če so bili argumenti že obravnavani v začasni uredbi, se ne ponovijo v tej uredbi.
General remarks
Splošne ugotovitve
It is made clear at recitals 45 and 68 of the provisional Regulation that the term ‘Union industry’ in this investigation covers all Union producers.
Uvodni izjavi 45 in 68 začasne uredbe jasno določata, da industrija Unije v tej preiskavi zajema vse proizvajalce Unije.
In addition the injury factors on which the finding of injury was reached are, as a rule, based on data relating to the Union industry.
Poleg tega dejavniki škode, na podlagi katerih je bila ugotovljena škoda, praviloma temeljijo na podatkih, povezanih z industrijo Unije.
When data relating to the Union industry have been used, section 5.4 of the provisional Regulation identifies this by referring to ‘macro data’.
Kadar so bili uporabljeni podatki, povezani z industrijo Unije, jih oddelek 5.4 začasne uredbe opredeli z nanašanjem na „makropodatke“.
However, where information was not available for the entire Union industry the data of the representative sample of Union producers was used.
Kadar pa informacije niso bile na voljo za celotno industrijo Unije, so bili uporabljeni podatki reprezentativnega vzorca proizvajalcev Unije.
No comments were received on these issues and thus the provisional findings are definitively confirmed.
K tem vprašanjem ni nihče poslal pripomb in tako so začasne ugotovitve dokončno potrjene.
However, an erroneous statement was made in recital 34 of the provisional Regulation.
Vendar je bila trditev v uvodni izjavi 34 začasne uredbe napačna.
This recital should have read ‘All Union producers constitute the Union industry within the meaning of Article 4(1) and Article 5(4) of the basic Regulation and will be hereafter referred to as the “Union industry”’.
Ta uvodna izjava bi se morala glasiti: „Vsi proizvajalci Unije predstavljajo industrijo Unije v smislu člena 4(1) in člena 5(4) osnovne uredbe ter bodo v nadaljnjem besedilu imenovani industrija Unije.“
In the absence of any other comments, the findings set out in recitals 52 to 56 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Ker ni bilo drugih pripomb, se ugotovitve iz uvodnih izjav 52 do 56 začasne uredbe potrdijo.
In the absence of any comments, the findings set out in recitals 35 to 38 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Ker ni bilo pripomb, se ugotovitve iz uvodnih izjav 35 do 38 začasne uredbe potrdijo.
In the absence of any comments, the findings set out in recitals 39 to 43 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Ker ni bilo pripomb, se ugotovitve iz uvodnih izjav 39 do 43 začasne uredbe potrdijo.
In October 2010 an industrial incident occurred at the site of one of the Union producers, MAL.
(32) Oktobra 2010 se je na območju MAL, enega od proizvajalcev Unije, zgodila industrijska nesreča.
However, figures supplied by the company show that its deliveries of the product concerned had recovered by January 2011.
Vendar številke, ki jih je družba predložila, kažejo, da se je dobava zadevnega izdelka popravila do januarja 2011.
It was therefore clear that this incident did not cause serious supply problems on the EU market.
Zato je bilo jasno, da ta nesreča ni povzročila resnih težav z dobavo na trgu EU.
Birac asserted that as the above-mentioned Bosnian mining company related to MAL made profits in the IP, the Commission should adjust MAL’s COP and profit in the calculation of the economic indicators because MAL’s profit situation was allegedly reduced as a result of high profits made by its related mining company in BiH.
Birac je trdil, da bi Komisija glede na to, da je imela navedena bosanska rudarska družba, povezana z MAL, dobiček v OP, morala prilagoditi proizvodne stroške in dobiček MAL pri izračunu ekonomskih kazalnikov, ker se je stanje glede dobička MAL domnevno poslabšalo zaradi visokega dobička, ki ga je imela z njim povezana rudarska družba v BiH.
With respect to the above claim it is noted that the purchases of bauxite from the related company were made at arm’s length.
V zvezi z navedeno trditvijo je treba opozoriti, da je bil nakup boksita od zadevne družbe opravljen po načelu tržnih cen med neodvisnimi strankami.
This issue was covered during the on-the-spot verification.
To vprašanje je bilo zajeto med preverjanjem na kraju samem.
Because MAL purchased bauxite from both related and unrelated companies during the IP at roughly the same average prices, the Commission was satisfied that bauxite purchases were made at arm’s length and therefore no adjustments are necessary to the profitability trend of MAL which was used in the calculation of the trend shown at recital 52 of the provisional Regulation.
Ker je MAL kupil boksit od povezanih in nepovezanih družb med OP po približno enakih povprečnih cenah, se je Komisija prepričala, da so bili nakupi opravljeni po načelu tržnih cen med neodvisnimi strankami in zato ni potrebna nobena prilagoditev gibanja dobičkonosnosti MAL, ki je bil uporabljen pri izračunu gibanja, prikazanega v uvodni izjavi 52 začasne uredbe.
Birac also claimed that since it obtained certain raw materials directly from its production of alumina it had significant competitive advantages over the majority of the Union producers and this should be reflected in the injury margins.
Birac je trdil tudi, da je imel znatno konkurenčno prednost pred večino proizvajalcev Unije, ker je dobil nekatere surovine neposredno iz svoje proizvodnje aluminijevega oksida, zato bi se to moralo izraziti v stopnjah škode.
If a company has a competitive advantage this should normally have an effect on its overall dumping calculation in terms of lower costs and hence also a lower normal value.
Če ima družba konkurenčno prednost, bi to običajno moralo vplivati na njen skupni izračun dampinga z vidika nižjih stroškov ter posledično tudi na nižjo normalno vrednost.
This kind of competitive advantage has conceptually nothing to do with the injury margin.
Taka konkurenčna prednost nima konceptualno nobene zveze s stopnjo škode.
The latter examines whether a level of duty lower than the dumping margin would be sufficient to remove the injury.
Stopnja škode pojasnjuje, ali bi bila stopnja dajatve, ki je nižja od stopnje dampinga, zadostna za odpravo škode.
Union users claimed that the positive development of certain injury factors was ignored in the Commission provisional assessment (profitability, cash flow and return on investment) stating that all factors should be analysed.
Uporabniki Unije so trdili, da je bil pozitiven razvoj nekaterih dejavnikov škode v začasni oceni Komisije zanemarjen (dobičkonosnost, denarni tok in donosnost naložb) ter da bi morali biti analizirani vsi dejavniki.
However in the injury assessment these positive developments are fully analysed.
Vendar so ti pozitivni razvoji v celoti analizirani v oceni škode.
They were taken into account but they were not considered decisive in this case for the reasons set out in recitals 52 to 60 of the provisional Regulation.
Bili so upoštevani, vendar se v tem primeru niso obravnavali kot odločujoči zaradi razlogov iz uvodnih izjav 52 do 60 začasne uredbe.
That claim was therefore rejected.
Trditev je bila zato zavrnjena.
In the absence of any other comments, the findings set out in recitals 44 to 64 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Ker ni bilo drugih pripomb, se ugotovitve iz uvodnih izjav 44 do 64 začasne uredbe potrdijo.
Accordingly, and in the absence of any other comments in this respect, the conclusions reached at recitals 65 to 69 of the provisional Regulation, are hereby confirmed.
Skladno s tem in ker drugih pripomb v zvezi s tem ni bilo, se sklepne ugotovitve iz uvodnih izjav 65 do 69 začasne uredbe potrdijo.
One cooperating user claimed that the causation analysis is flawed because the Commission stated that a temporary improvement was seen in certain injury factors for the IP (2009).
Eden od sodelujočih uporabnikov je trdil, da je analiza vzročne zveze pomanjkljiva, ker je Komisija navedla, da so se nekateri dejavniki škode začasno izboljšali v OP (2009).
That user did not agree with the assessment made by the Commission that the higher profitability in 2009 as compared to 2008 was the result of short-lived temporary developments which would not be repeated in 2010.
Ta uporabnik se ni strinjal z oceno Komisije, da je večja dobičkonosnost v letu 2009 v primerjavi z letom 2008 posledica kratkoročnega začasnega razvoja, ki naj se ne bi ponovil leta 2010.
With respect to the above submission it is noted that the party’s arguments are simply statements and not backed up by any new evidence.
V zvezi z navedeno predložitvijo se opominja, da so argumenti strani samo izjave in niso okrepljene z nobenim novim dokazom.
In contrast, the Commission’s position is supported by information submitted by the Union producers during the investigation both during the provisional and definitive stages.
Nasprotno pa stališče Komisije podpirajo informacije, ki so jih predložili proizvajalci Unije med preiskavo v začasni in dokončni fazi.
The information submitted in the run up to the verification visits was also verified on the spot.
Informacije, ki so bile predložene pred preveritvenimi obiski, so bile preverjene tudi na kraju samem.
The post-IP deterioration in profit margins predicted by the Commission is also confirmed by data for the entire year 2010 provided by two Union producers.
Poslabšanje stopnje dobička po OP predvideno s strani Komisije potrjujejo tudi podatki za celotno leto 2010, ki sta jih predložila dva proizvajalca Unije.
That claim is therefore rejected.
Ta trditev se zato zavrne.
Birac contested the provisional finding concerning the impact of imports from third countries.
Birac je izpodbijal začasno ugotovitev glede učinka uvoza iz tretjih držav.
However, the Commission’s analysis in the provisional Regulation (recital 77) was that Birac was the only major exporter to the EU market.
Vendar je Komisija v svoji analizi v začasni uredbi (uvodna izjava 77) navedla, da je bil Birac edini večji izvoznik na trg EU.
There were practically no imports from other sources.
Iz drugih virov praktično ni bilo uvoza.
Birac provides no new evidence in this respect and its claim is therefore rejected.
Birac v zvezi s tem ne zagotavlja nobenih novih dokazov in njegova trditev se zato zavrne.
One cooperating user contested the analysis made in the provisional Regulation concerning the fall in consumption and quoted the cathode-ray colour television tubes anti-dumping investigation as a precedent regarding a contraction in demand [3].
Eden od sodelujočih uporabnikov je izpodbijal analizo iz začasne uredbe v zvezi s padcem potrošnje ter navedel, da je protidampinška preiskava katodnih cevi za barvne televizijske sprejemnike precedens glede zmanjševanja povpraševanja [3].
It was claimed that in that investigation a contraction in demand led to the closure of the proceedings.
Trdil je, da je v tej preiskavi zmanjševanje povpraševanja povzročilo zaključek postopka.
However there is no parallel between the cathode-ray colour television tubes case and the current investigation.
Vendar ni povezave med primerom katodnih cevi za barvne televizijske sprejemnike in sedanjo preiskavo.
In the former, consumption fell dramatically because the product concerned was substituted by other products.
Pri prvem je potrošnja strmo padla, ker je bil zadevni izdelek nadomeščen z drugimi izdelki.
By contrast, the fall in consumption in the current investigation is very moderate (7 % — as stated in recitals 37 and 38 of the provisional Regulation).
Nasprotno pa je padec potrošnje v sedanji preiskavi zelo skromen (7 %, kot je navedeno v uvodnih izjavah 37 in 38 začasne uredbe).
In this respect it is also noted that the development of consumption was further elaborated in recitals 78 to 80 of the provisional Regulation, but the cooperating user concerned was not in a position to provide any evidence to rebut the Commission’s findings.
V zvezi s tem se opozarja tudi, da se je razvoj potrošnje nadalje obravnaval v uvodnih izjavah 78 do 80 začasne uredbe, vendar zadevni sodelujoči uporabnik ni mogel zagotoviti nobenega dokaza, ki bi izpodbil ugotovitve Komisije.
Those claims are therefore rejected.
Te trditve se zato zavrnejo.
In the light of the above, the findings set out in recitals 70 to 92 of the provisional Regulation, i.e. that the material injury to the Union industry was caused by the dumped imports, are herby confirmed.
Glede na navedeno se ugotovitve iz uvodnih izjav 70 do 92 začasne uredbe potrdijo, tj. da je znatno škodo industriji Unije povzročil dampinški uvoz.
One cooperating user claimed that the Commission provided misleading information regarding the importance of zeolite costs in its total costs at recital 104 of the provisional Regulation.
Eden od sodelujočih uporabnikov je trdil, da je Komisija v uvodni izjavi 104 začasne uredbe zagotovila zavajajoče informacije o pomenu stroškov zeolita glede na celotne stroške.
In particular it claimed that costs of zeolite are more than the 5 % of total cost as quoted at that recital.
Zlasti je trdil, da stroški zeolita predstavljajo več kot 5 % celotnih stroškov, kakor navaja ta uvodna izjava.
In this respect it is noted that this party did not supply any new data to support its claim while the Commission’s findings were based on verified information from the cooperating users.
V zvezi s tem se opozarja, da ta stran ni zagotovila nobenih novih podatkov, ki bi podprli njeno trditev, pri čemer so ugotovitve Komisije temeljile na preverjenih informacijah sodelujočih uporabnikov.
It is noted that the term ‘total costs’ used in recital 104 of the provisional Regulation includes all manufacturing costs plus SG&A expenses.
Opozarja se, da pojem „celotni stroški“, ki je bil uporabljen v uvodni izjavi 104 začasne uredbe vključuje vse proizvodne stroške ter PSA stroške.
In addition, the ‘less than 5 %’ statement is an average covering both laundry detergent and water softener products combined.
Poleg tega je navedba „manj kot 5 %“ povprečje, ki zajema hkrati detergente za perilo in mehčalce za vodo.
Finally it should be clarified that the zeolite costs in water softener are higher than those of laundry detergent but by far the most important use relates to laundry detergent.
Nazadnje je treba pojasniti, da so stroški zeolita v mehčalcih za vodo višji kot v detergentih za perilo, vendar je uporaba zdaleč pomembnejša pri detergentih za perilo.
Indeed with respect to this particular cooperating user the water softeners constituted a minor part of the turnover of its downstream products using zeolite.
Pri tem konkretnem sodelujočem uporabniku so mehčalci za vodo dejansko pomenili manjši del prometa z izdelki s konca proizvodne verige, v katerih je bil uporabljen zeolit.
One cooperating user challenged the finding in recital 102 of the provisional Regulation that China is a potential alternative source of supply.
Eden od sodelujočih uporabnikov je izpodbijal ugotovitev v uvodni izjavi 102 začasne uredbe, da je Kitajska možen alternativni vir dobave.
Bearing in mind the comments made, the Commission accepts that, although some Chinese merchandise has entered the EU market during the IP, it is unlikely that China will in the near future become a major supplier (see recital 41 above).
Komisija ob upoštevanju pripomb soglaša, da je malo verjetno, da bo Kitajska v bližnji prihodnosti postala glavni dobavitelj, čeprav je nekaj kitajskega blaga vstopilo na trg EU med OP (glej uvodno izjavo 41).
However, given the capacity utilisation rates in the Union for the product concerned, the Commission maintains its view that there are no supply problems in respect of the product concerned.
Vendar Komisija glede na stopnjo izkoriščenosti zmogljivosti v Uniji za zadevni izdelek vztraja pri svojem stališču, da v zvezi zadevnim izdelkom ni težav z dobavo.
One cooperating user claimed that if duties were imposed as a result of this investigation, zeolite costs would increase to such an extent that its prices for laundry detergent and water softener products would also increase thereby increasing consumer prices.
Eden od sodelujočih uporabnikov je trdil, da se bodo stroški zeolita v primeru uvedbe dajatev na podlagi te preiskave tako povečali, da se bodo zvišale tudi cene njegovih detergentov za perilo in mehčalcev za vodo, s tem pa se bodo zvišale cene za potrošnike.
This argument is based on the assumption that users will pass on price increases of zeolite as a result of an anti-dumping duty.
Ta trditev temelji na predpostavki, da bodo uporabniki prenesli povišanje cen zeolita zaradi protidampinške dajatve.
In the first place, the Commission is of the opinion that Union producers would rather benefit from the measures by increased economies of scale and not by increasing prices (see recitals 108 and 111 of the provisional Regulation).
Komisija pravzaprav meni, da bodo proizvajalci Unije imeli koristi od ukrepov zaradi povečane ekonomije obsega in ne zaradi zvišanja cen (glej uvodni izjavi 108 in 111 začasne uredbe).
Finally, as stated above, the proportion of costs associated with zeolite in the total cost of production of downstream products is small so any consequence of the duty, albeit unlikely, would not put into question the provisional conclusion that there are no overriding Union interest reasons against the imposition of measures.
Nazadnje pa je, kot že navedeno, delež stroškov, povezanih z zeolitom, glede na celotne stroške proizvodnje izdelkov s konca proizvodne verige tako majhen, da nobena posledica dajatve, čeprav ni verjetna, ne bi nasprotovala začasni ugotovitvi, da ni prednostnih razlogov z vidika interesov Unije proti uvedbi ukrepov.
One cooperating user claimed that it may switch to non-zeolite formulas in its laundry detergents which would negatively impact the Union producers of zeolite.
Eden od sodelujočih uporabnikov je trdil, da bo morda prešel na formule brez zeolita v svojih detergentih za perilo, kar bi negativno vplivalo na proizvajalce zeolita v Uniji.
The Union producers are aware from information on the file ‘Open for Inspection by Interested Parties’ that this risk to their business exists.
Proizvajalci Unije se zavedajo obstoja tega tveganja za svoje poslovanje iz informacij iz dokumenta odprtega za pregled zainteresiranih strani.
However, no concrete evidence exists in order to evaluate the alleged impact to the Union industry of this hypothetical switch.
Vendar ni nobenega konkretnega dokaza, na podlagi katerega bi ocenili predvideni učinek tega hipotetičnega prehoda na industrijo Unije.
The points made above were taken into account in the definitive stage of the investigation but do not alter its main conclusions.
Navedene točke so se upoštevale v zaključni fazi preiskave, vendar niso spremenile njenih glavnih sklepov.
In the absence of any other comments, the findings set out in recitals 93 to 112 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Ker ni bilo drugih pripomb, se ugotovitve iz uvodnih izjav 93 do 112 začasne uredbe potrdijo.
It is therefore concluded that no arguments have been raised to suggest that it is not in the Union interest to impose measures as a result of this investigation.
Zato se zaključi, da niso bili predloženi nobeni argumenti, ki bi nakazovali, da uvedba ukrepov na podlagi te preiskave ni v interesu Unije.
In the absence of any comments, the findings set out in recitals 114 to 116 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Ker ni bilo pripomb, se ugotovitve iz uvodnih izjav 114 do 116 začasne uredbe potrdijo.
In this case, the duty rate should accordingly be set at the level of the dumping found.
V tem primeru se dajatev določi na ugotovljeni stopnji dampinga.
This was calculated at 28,1 %.
Ta je bila izračunana v višini 28,1 %.
On the basis of the above, the rate of the definitive anti-dumping duty for BiH is 28,1 %.
Glede na navedeno je stopnja dokončne protidampinške dajatve za BiH 28,1 %.
FORM OF THE MEASURES
OBLIKA UKREPOV
It is noted that recently Fabrica glinice ‘Birac’ became a holding company and Alumina d.o.o, located in Zvornik, remained the sole exporting producer of the group.
Ugotovljeno je bilo, da je podjetje Fabrica glinice „Birac“ nedavno postalo holdinška družba in da je podjetje Alumina d.o.o. s sedežem v Zvorniku ostalo edini proizvajalec izvoznik skupine.
The Commission examined the offer.
Komisija je proučila ponudbo.
The product concerned is a commodity product which only exists in one product type and specification, thus excluding a possible risk of price compensation through various product types.
Zadevni izdelek je osnovni izdelek, ki obstaja le v eni vrsti in specifikaciji izdelka, zato je izključeno možno tveganje cenovnega nadomestila z različnimi vrstami izdelkov.
The investigation showed that all exports to the Union were invoiced via the related company in the Union (i.e. Kauno Tiekimas AB, Kaunas, Lithuania).
Preiskava je pokazala, da je bil ves izvoz v Unijo zaračunan prek povezane družbe v Uniji (tj. Kauno Tiekimas AB, Kaunas, Litva).
This related company sells also other products produced by the Birac group.
Ta povezana družba prodaja tudi druge izdelke, ki jih proizvaja skupina Birac.
However, the market for zeolite A powder is well defined and the customers purchasing zeolite A powder would by nature not buy the other products produced by the Birac Group.
Vendar je trg zeolita A v prahu že izoblikovan in kupci zeolita A v prahu že po naravi ne bi kupovali drugih izdelkov skupine Birac Group.
Therefore, it was concluded that a risk of cross-compensation by possibly selling other products to the same clients was very low.
Zato je bilo ugotovljeno, da je bila nevarnost navzkrižne kompenzacije z morebitno prodajo drugih izdelkov istim strankam zelo majhna.
By Decision 2011/279/EU [4] the Commission accepted the undertaking offer from Alumina d.o.o.
Komisija je s sklepom 2011/279/EU [4] sprejela zavezo, ki sta jo ponudili družba Alumina d.o.o.
Zvornik and its related company Kauno Tiekimas.
Zvornik in povezana družba Kauno Tiekimas.
The Council recognises that the offer of a price undertaking eliminates the injurious effect of dumping and limits to a sufficient degree the risk of circumvention.
Svet priznava, da cenovno zavezujoča ponudba odpravlja škodljiv učinek dampinga in v zadostnem obsegu omejuje tveganje izogibanja.
To further enable the Commission and the customs authorities to effectively monitor the compliance of Alumina d.o.o.
Da se Komisiji in carinskim organom nadalje omogoči učinkovito spremljanje skladnosti družbe Alumina d.o.o.