natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Finally one company was not able to demonstrate that certain assets transferred to it were made for monetary consideration or otherwise at prices reflecting market values.
Nazadnje ena družba ni mogla dokazati, da se nekatera sredstva, ki so nanjo prenesena, uporabljajo kot denarno nadomestilo ali kako drugače, po cenah, ki odražajo tržne vrednosti.
Finally, with regard to criteria 4 and 5, it was found that the companies met the criteria as the companies were subject to bankruptcy and property laws which guaranteed stability and legal certainty.
Nazadnje je bilo glede merila 4 in 5 ugotovljeno, da družbe izpolnjujejo merila, ker so se za družbe uporabljali stečajni in lastninski zakoni, ki so zagotavljali stabilnost in pravno varnost.
Currency conversions were carried out at or following the official rate published by the Bank of China.
Pretvorbe valut so bile izvedene po uradnem menjalnem tečaju, ki ga je objavila banka Kitajske na dan objave ali po njem.
The group of companies concerned and the complainant were given an opportunity to comment on the above findings.
Zadevna skupina družb in pritožnik so dobili priložnost, da odgovorijo na zgoraj navedene ugotovitve.
The complainant had no comments but the group of companies concerned objected on several grounds.
Pritožnik ni imel pripomb, zadevna skupina družb pa je ugovarjala zaradi različnih razlogov.
Some of these comments were reiterated after final disclosure of the facts and considerations on the basis of which it was proposed to impose definitive measures.
Nekatere pripombe so bile ponovljene po končnem razkritju dejstev in premislekov, na podlagi katerih so bili predlagani dokončni ukrepi.
The most important comments received are described in the recitals below.
Najpomembnejše prejete pripombe so opisane v spodnjih uvodnih izjavah.
The Rainbow group firstly stated that the Commission illegally imposed an obligation to re-qualify for MET as the group was given MET in the original investigation and the expiry review and thus the legal obligation to apply the same methodology in reviews as in the original investigation was breached.
Skupina Rainbow je najprej navedla, da je Komisija nezakonito uvedla ponovno obravnavo o izpolnjevanju pogojev za TGO, ker sta bila v prvotni preiskavi skupini odobrena TGO in pregled zaradi izteka, in je bila zato kršena pravna obveznost o uporabi iste metodologije za preglede in prvotno preiskavo.
It argued that the Commission has not shown that circumstances of this company had changed in a way that would justify a different method to that applied in the original investigation.
Trdila je, da Komisija ni dokazala, da bi spremenjene okoliščine v zvezi s to družbo upravičile različno metodo od tiste, ki je bila uporabljena v prvotni preiskavi.
According to the claimant several of the issues identified by the Commission had already existed at the time of the original investigation and thus the Commission’s new findings do not relate to new circumstances but are merely a different interpretation of the same circumstances.
Po mnenju vložnika zahtevka so številne težave, ki jih je odkrila Komisija, že obstajale v prvotni preiskavi, zato nove ugotovitve Komisije niso povezane z novimi okoliščinami, pač pa so le drugačna razlaga istih okoliščin.
It should be noted that, contrary to the claimant’s statement, the same methodology was applied both in the original investigation and in the current review whereas due account was taken of the fact that certain circumstances have changed since the original investigation.
Treba je opozoriti, da je bila v nasprotju z vložnikovo izjavo uporabljena ista metodologija v prvotni preiskavi in sedanjem pregledu, ustrezno pa se je upoštevalo tudi dejstvo, da so se glede na prvotno preiskavo spremenile nekatere okoliščine.
Even if the claimant’s argumentation would be correct in relation to certain facts that were indeed the same during both the original and current investigations, namely in relation to GT Enterprise’s land use right agreement, the following can be noted.
Tudi če bi bila utemeljitev vložnika zahtevka pravilna glede nekaterih dejstev, ki so bila med prvotno in sedanjo preiskavo dejansko ista, in sicer glede sporazuma o pravici do uporabe zemljišča družbe GT Enterprise, se lahko ugotovi naslednje.
The current review established additional other facts that — even though they had already existed during the original investigation — were not disclosed at that time by GT Enterprise, such as the local government’s authority to approve the hiring and dismissal of its personnel.
S sedanjim pregledom so bila ugotovljena druga dodatna dejstva, ki so že obstajala med prvotno preiskavo, vendar jih GT Enterprise takrat ni razkrila, kot na primer, da je organ lokalne vlade potrjeval zaposlovanje in odpuščanje njenega osebja.
Finally, the circumstances of the company have also changed since the original investigation in respect of criterion 2.
Nazadnje so se okoliščine za družbo od prvotne preiskave spremenile glede merila 2.
That is because it was established in the current review that during the RIP GT Enterprise had not had a clear set of accounting records that were independently audited in line with international accounting standards and applied for all purposes.
To pa zato, ker je bilo v sedanjem pregledu ugotovljeno, da v OPP družba GT Enterprise ni imela enotne jasne zbirke računovodskih evidenc, ki se neodvisno pregledujejo v skladu z mednarodnimi računovodskimi standardi in se uporabljajo za vse namene.
The claimant later explained that it considers that it had disclosed the local government’s authority to approve the hiring and dismissal of its personnel by providing in the original investigation the same Articles of Association as in the current review.
Vložnik je pozneje v obrazložitvi menil, da je s predložitvijo istega poslovnika v sedanjem pregledu in prvotni preiskavi ustrezno razkril, da organ lokalne vlade potrjuje zaposlovanje in odpuščanje njenega osebja.
However, the translation of this document provided by the claimant both during the original and current investigation was incomplete as it did not disclose the powers given by the Articles of Association to the local government.
Vendar je bil prevod tega dokumenta, ki ga je vložnik predložil tako v prvotni kot sedanji preiskavi, nepopoln, saj ni razkril vseh pristojnosti, ki jih je poslovnik podeljeval organom lokalne vlade.
The Rainbow group further argued that the MET regime was introduced for countries with an economy in transition, i.e. from the former non-market economy system towards a market economy.
Skupina Rainbow je nadalje trdila, da je bila TGO uvedena za države z gospodarstvom v prehodu, tj. za gospodarstva, ki od nekdanjega sistema netržnega gospodarstva prehajajo k tržnemu gospodarstvu.
It would therefore be illogical to require a company that previously qualified for MET to once again submit sufficient evidence in an interim review that it still qualifies for MET.
Zato bi bilo nesmiselno zahtevati, da mora družba, ki ji je bila TGO že prej odobrena, za namene vmesnega pregleda še enkrat predložiti zadostne dokaze, ki potrjujejo, da še vedno izpolnjuje pogoje za TGO.
In this respect it should be noted that there is nothing in the basic Regulation which would support such an interpretation and which would prevent the application of Article 2(7)(c) of the basic Regulation in reviews initiated pursuant to Article 11(3) of the basic Regulation.
V zvezi s tem je treba opozoriti, da osnovna uredba nikakor ne vsebuje besedila, ki bi bilo lahko podlaga za tako interpretacijo in ki bi lahko preprečilo uporabo člena 2(7)(c) osnovne uredbe pri pregledih, začetih v skladu s členom 11(3) osnovne uredbe.
Therefore, this argument had to be dismissed.
Zato je bilo treba to trditev zavrniti.
The Rainbow group also invoked the procedural requirement in Article 2(7)(c) that an MET determination shall be made within three months of the initiation of the investigation.
Skupina Rainbow se je sklicevala tudi na postopkovne zahteve iz člena 2(7)(c), da je treba TGO opraviti v treh mesecih od začetka preiskave.
Rainbow itself acknowledges that exceeding this deadline is in itself insufficient ground to contest the results of the investigation, but it highlights that the Commission services already had all the information necessary to calculate the dumping margin at their disposal when MET findings were disclosed.
Priznava, da prekoračitev tega roka sama po sebi ne zadostuje za spodbijanje rezultatov preiskave, vendar poudarja, da so službe Komisije že imele na voljo vse informacije, potrebne za izračun stopnje dampinga, ko so bile razkrite ugotovitve v zvezi s TGO.
In its argumentation Rainbow however ignores the fact that even though the Commission indeed for administrative efficiency requested and verified all necessary information from the group of companies concerned at the same time, it had not had at its disposal information about the analogue country that would have made it possible to determine the dumping margin in case of rejecting MET.
Rainbow v svoji utemeljitvi ne upošteva dejstva, da Komisija ni imela na voljo informacij o primerljivi državi, kar bi omogočilo ugotovitev stopnje dampinga, v primeru zavrnitve TGO, čeprav je zaradi upravne učinkovitosti zahtevala in preverila vse informacije zadevne skupine družb istočasno.
Indeed, information concerning the normal value in the analogue country was made available to the Commission only after the findings concerning MET had been disclosed to Rainbow.
Dejansko so bile informacije o normalni vrednosti v primerljivi državi Komisiji na voljo šele potem, ko je družbi Rainbow razkrila ugotovitve o TGO.
Thus the timing of the MET determination could not have any impact on its content.
Zato časovni okvir za določitev TGO ni mogel vplivati na njegovo vsebino.
In the light of the above, this claim is rejected as unfounded.
Na podlagi navedenega se ta trditev zavrne kot neutemeljena.
With respect to criterion 1, it has been submitted as a general comment that the theoretical possibility of State influence or State control per se does not automatically mean that there is an actual and significant State interference within the meaning of Article 2(7)(c).
Glede merila 1 je bila predložena splošna pripomba, da teoretična možnost vplivanja države ali državnega nadzora sama po sebi ne pomeni, da je prišlo do dejanskega znatnega vmešavanja države v smislu člena 2(7)(c).
Rainbow repeatedly quotes a decision of the Court of First Instance [5] to argue that State control does not equal significant State interference because this would ‘lead to the exclusion, in principle, of state-controlled companies from entitlement to MES, irrespective of the real factual, legal and economic context in which they operate.’ Rainbow also claims that it would mean an unreasonable burden of proof on MET applicants if they were to show that there can never be a possibility for the State to interfere in business decisions.
Skupina Rainbow je večkrat navedla odločitev Sodišča prve stopnje [5], s katero je utemeljevala, da državni nadzor ne pomeni znatnega vmešavanja države, ker to „načeloma pripelje do tega, da so državno nadzorovane družbe izključene od ugodnosti STG ne glede na konkretne dejanske, pravne ali ekonomske razmere, v katerih delujejo“. Trdi tudi, da bi vložniki zahtevka za TGO nosili nerazumno dokazno breme, če bi dokazali, da možnost vmešavanja države v odločitve družbe ni mogoča.
Further it argues that the State action would have to render the company’s decisions incompatible with market considerations so as not to be in line with criterion 1.
Nadalje trdi, da bi v dokaz, da družba ni v skladu z merilom 1, morale biti odločitve družbe zaradi dejavnosti države nezdružljive z dogajanji na trgu.
Contrary to the above assertions by the Rainbow group, the current investigation established specific and significant State interference in the operations of several companies within the group.
V nasprotju z zgoraj navedenimi trditvami skupine Rainbow so bili v sedanji preiskavi ugotovljeni posamezni primeri znatnega vmešavanja države v poslovanje več družb znotraj skupine.
In the case of the group company in which the hiring and dismissal of personnel was subject to the approval of the local government, it is the company’s own rules of internal functioning, i.e. its Articles of Association, that clearly provide the authority for the State to interfere in its operational decisions.
V primeru družbe iz skupine, v kateri zaposlovanje in odpuščanje osebja potrdi lokalna vlada, je to zapisano v pravilih notranjega delovanja družbe, tj. poslovnik, iz katerega je nedvoumno razvidno, da državi dovoljuje vmešavanje v njene operativne odločitve.
In the case of another group company, the State partner was found to have had an influence in the company in a manner which is incompatible with market considerations.
V primeru druge družbe iz skupine je bilo ugotovljeno, da je država partnerica vplivala na družbo, na način, ki je nezdružljiv z dogajanji na trgu.
Firstly, the State partner had contributed most of the capital to this company without this fact being reflected in the share of its ownership of the company.
Prvič, država partnerica je k tej družbi prispevala večino kapitala, vendar se to ni kazalo v deležu lastništva družbe.
Secondly, the company’s operations were always loss-making, which was mostly detrimental to the State partner given the capital it invested.
Drugič, poslovanje družbe je vedno prinašalo izgube, kar je zaradi vloženega kapitala večinoma škodilo državi partnerici.
Thirdly, the State partner itself incurred continuous losses as it supplied inputs such as water and electricity to the group company at below market prices and without proper receipt of payment.
Tretjič, država partnerica sama je imela stalno izgubo, saj je družbi iz skupine dobavljala vložke, kot sta voda in elektrika, po cenah, nižjih od tržnih cen in brez pravega potrdila o plačilu.
Concerning the conclusion on State interference in the financing and investment decisions of another member of the group of companies concerned, it was submitted that factual findings of the Commission on a loan and its conditions were incorrect.
V zvezi z ugotovitvijo o vmešavanju države v finančne in naložbene odločitve druge članice iz zadevne skupine družb je bila predložena trditev, da so bile dejanske ugotovitve Komisije o posojilu in pogojih zanj napačne.
The Commission however, has evidence collected during the verification showing that the company was instructed by a local government agency to take a loan which was not related to its business operations.
Vendar je Komisija med preverjanjem zbrala dokaze, ki so potrdili, da je lokalna vladna agencija naročila družbi, naj vzame posojilo, ki ni bilo povezano z njenimi poslovnimi dejavnostmi.
The company reasons that the financing decisions were taken as a favour to this government agency and not as an obligation and the transaction in question was without further risk to the company since it would have had the possibility to seek compensation through the non-payment of utilities’ invoices issued to it by the agency.
Družba navaja, da so bile finančne odločitve sprejete kot usluga tej vladni agenciji in ne kot obveznost, zadevna transakcija pa ni pomenila tveganja za družbo, saj bi ta lahko zahtevala nadomestilo v obliki neplačevanja računov za komunalne storitve, ki jih je agencija izdala družbi.
The evidence collected by the Commission shows that the land use right of the company is indirectly used as a security in the relevant financial transaction; therefore the company bears significant risk.
Dokazi, ki jih je zbrala Komisija, kažejo, da se pravica družbe do uporabe zemljišča posredno uporablja kot zavarovanje v pomembnih finančnih transakcijah, kar za družbo pomeni znatno tveganje.
The land use right itself was acquired through the same government agency to whom the company alleges to have been providing only a favour.
Pravica do uporabe zemljišča je bila pridobljena prek iste vladne agencije, za katero družba trdi, da ji je delala le uslugo.
The allegation that a compensation would have been possible through non-payment for utilities demonstrates a basic misunderstanding of basic accounting standards (offsetting) and contradicts the company’s further claim that influence on financial operations as such do not mean an influence on ‘decisions on firms regarding prices, costs and inputs’ as required by Article 2(7)(c).
Trditev, da bi bilo nadomestilo mogoče prek neplačevanj komunalnih storitev kaže na napačno razumevanje osnovnih računovodskih standardov (pobot) in je v nasprotju s trditvijo družbe, da vpliv na finančne dejavnosti kot take ne pomeni vpliva „na odločitve družb glede cen, stroškov in vložkov“, kot to zahteva člen 2(7)(c).
Furthermore, investment decisions are clearly and significantly influenced by the government agency as there are company-specific requirements set in the land use right agreement of the company on the investment to be performed and these requirements go beyond local zoning laws contrary to what has been suggested by the company.
Poleg tega vladna agencija nedvoumno in znatno vpliva na naložbene odločitve, saj je treba zahteve za posamezno družbo, določene v sporazumu o pravicah za uporabo zemljišča, izpolniti, te zahteve pa presegajo lokalne zakone v zvezi z uporabo zemljišča, kar je v nasprotju s trditvami družbe.
Therefore the claim that State interference in the financing and investment decisions do not amount to an influence according to Article 2(7)(c) is rejected.
Zato se trditev, da vmešavanje države v finančne in naložbene odločitve ni imelo nobenega vpliva v skladu s členom 2(7)(c), zavrne.
As to the group company producing one of the raw materials used in the production of sodium cyclamate, it was claimed that any shortcomings with respect to the company’s decision-making and financial situation would have a very limited impact as the raw material produced by this company represents only around 10 % of the cost of production of sodium cyclamate.
Za družbo iz skupine, ki proizvaja eno od surovin, ki se uporablja v proizvodnji natrijevega ciklamata, se je trdilo, da bi kakršne koli pomanjkljivosti v zvezi z odločitvami in finančnim stanjem družbe imele omejen vpliv, saj surovine, ki jih ta družba proizvede, predstavljajo le približno 10 % stroškov proizvodnje natrijevega ciklamata.
As the Commission was able to calculate the difference between profitable sales price and actual sales price of the raw material, the company suggests that it would be more appropriate to adjust the costs of low-priced raw material rather than rejecting MET.
Ker je Komisija lahko izračunala razliko med dobičkonosno prodajno ceno in dejansko prodajno ceno surovine, družba predlaga, da bi bilo primerneje prilagoditi stroške poceni surovin kot pa zavrniti TGO.
However, the objective of the MET assessment is to ascertain that inputs reflect market values and business decisions are made in response to market signals.
Vendar se z oceno za TGO ugotavlja, ali vložki odražajo dejstvo, da se tržne vrednosti in poslovne odločitve oblikujejo glede na tržne signale.
It should be noted that Article 2(7)(c) of the basic Regulation explicitly requires that costs of major inputs substantially reflect market value in order the conditions for the MET to be met without making any reference to the possibility of adjusting the distorted costs of major inputs.
Treba je opozoriti, da člen 2(7)(c) osnovne uredbe izrecno zahteva, da za izpolnitev pogojev za TGO stroški glavnih vložkov v veliki meri odražajo tržno vrednost, pri čemer se ne navaja na možnost prilagoditve izkrivljenih stroškov glavnih vložkov.
Therefore this claim has to be rejected.
Zato je treba to trditev zavrniti.
The company’s claim concerning the abnormally low prices paid for water and electricity and labour costs — arguing that these are not major inputs only representing in total around 14 % of the total cost of production of the raw material — had to be rejected as this is considered, both individually and cumulatively, a significant enough cost element to have an impact on the total costs of the company.
Trditev družbe v zvezi z nenormalno nizkimi cenami za vodo, elektriko in stroški dela, ki kažejo na to, da ne gre za glavne vložke, saj skupno predstavljajo le približno 14 % celotnih stroškov proizvodnje surovin, je bilo treba zavrniti, saj se šteje, da gre za stroške, ki so tako posamezno kot skupaj dovolj visoki, da vplivajo na skupne stroške družbe.
In the case of labour costs it is also noted that it was not possible to fully verify these elements as the company was not able to provide contracts or other documentation.
V primeru stroškov dela je treba tudi opozoriti, da teh elementov ni bilo mogoče v celoti preveriti, saj družba ni mogla predložiti pogodb ali druge dokumentacije.
Therefore it could not be ascertained that these costs reflected market values.
Zato ni bilo mogoče ugotoviti, ali so ti stroški odražali tržne vrednosti.
With respect to criterion 2 it was argued that the Commission ignored the materiality principle pursuant to which omissions or misstatements of items are material only if they could influence the economic decisions that users make on the basis of financial statements and that such immaterial shortcomings would not need to be reported by the auditor either.
Glede merila 2 je bila predložena trditev, da Komisija ni upoštevala načela pomembnosti, v skladu s katerim so opustitve ali napačne navedbe postavk pomembne le, če lahko vplivajo na gospodarske odločitve, ki jih uporabniki sprejmejo na podlagi računovodskih izkazov, in če revizorju ni treba poročati o teh nepomembnih primanjkljajih.
Contrary to what the group claims, there were serious shortcomings in the accounting of the companies in relation to basic accounting principles (see, for more details, the next paragraph).
V nasprotju s trditvijo skupine so bile v računovodskih evidencah družb ugotovljene resne pomanjkljivosti v zvezi z osnovnimi računovodskimi načeli (za podrobno razlago glej naslednji odstavek).
Secondly, the objective of requiring a clear set of accounts for MET purposes is not for a user making economic decisions but to ensure that the financial statements provide a true and fair view of revenues, costs, etc. The objective of the MET investigation is to establish whether accounts are kept and audited in accordance with international accounting standards.
Drugič, namen zahteve po predložitvi enotne jasne zbirke računovodskih evidenc za namene TGO je zagotoviti, da računovodski izkazi prikažejo resnično in pošteno sliko prihodkov, stroškov, itd., ne pa uporabniku omogočiti sprejemanje gospodarskih odločitev. Namen preiskave v zvezi s TGO je določiti, ali se računovodski izkazi vodijo in revidirajo v skladu z mednarodnimi računovodskimi standardi.
The Rainbow group disputed that its companies breached the elements of the IAS rules and accounting practices mentioned in the MET assessment such as the accrual principle, faithful representation of transactions principle and offsetting, going concern principle, correct classification of balance sheets items, recognition of losses, only business related transactions and recordings within the accounts, correct classification and depreciation of expenses, respect of IAS and/or Chinese GAAP rules on the recognition of the value and depreciation of assets.
Skupina Rainbow je oporekala, da so njene družbe kršile elemente pravil MRS in računovodske prakse, navedene v oceni TGO, kot so obračunsko načelo, načelo poštenega prikazovanja transakcij in pobotanje, načelo delujoče družbe, pravilna razvrstitev postavk bilance stanja, prepoznavanje izgub, načelo, da se v računovodske izkaze zapišejo samo poslovne transakcije in posnetki, pravilna razvrstitev in amortizacija stroškov, upoštevanje MRS in/ali kitajskih računovodskih pravil o priznavanju vrednosti in amortizaciji sredstev.
The abovementioned breaches of IAS were identified from the information provided by the group in its MET claim form and all issues were subject to verification at the premises of the companies.
Zgoraj navedene kršitve MRS so bile ugotovljene iz informacij, ki jih je zagotovila skupina v obrazcu zahtevka za TGO, vsa vprašanja pa so se preverila v prostorih družb.