natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Since the DET system limits the possibilities to export CPO, it leads to larger quantities of CPO being available on the domestic market, hence putting pressure down on the domestic CPO prices.
Ker sistem diferenciranih izvoznih davkov omejuje možnosti izvoza surovega palmovega olja, so na domačem trgu na voljo večje količine te surovine, zaradi česar se domače cene surovega palmovega olja nižajo.
This constitutes a particular market situation.
To ustvarja posebne tržne razmere.
During the IP biodiesel exports had an export tax rate between 2 and 5 %.
V OP je bila stopnja izvoznega davka za izvoz biodizla med 2 % in 5 %.
During the same period CPO exports had an export tax rate ranging between 15-20 % while the export tax for RBDPO ranged from 5-18,5 %.
V istem obdobju se je stopnja izvoznega davka za izvoz surovega palmovega olja gibala med 15–20 %, medtem ko se je izvozni davek za rafinirano, beljeno in odišavljeno palmovo olje gibal med 5–18,5 %.
The different tariff rates apply according to the corresponding range of reference prices (which follow the international market trends and have nothing to do with quality differences).
Različne tarifne stopnje se uporabljajo glede na ustrezen razpon referenčnih cen (ki sledijo mednarodnim tržnim gibanjem in niso povezane z razlikami v kvaliteti).
The export tax for the palm fruit is set at a flat rate of 40 %.
Za palmine sadeže je določena 40-odstotna pavšalna stopnja izvoznega davka.
For the reasons mentioned above, recital 63 of the provisional Regulation is revised and the cost of the main raw material (CPO) recorded by the companies concerned has, pursuant to Article 2(5) of the basic Regulation, been replaced by the reference export price (HPE) [11] for CPO published by the Indonesian Authorities which is in turn based on published international prices (Rotterdam, Malaysia and Indonesia).
Iz navedenih razlogov se uvodna izjava 63 začasne uredbe revidira, strošek glavne surovine (surovega palmovega olja), ki so ga evidentirale zadevne družbe, pa se v skladu s členom 2(5) osnovne uredbe nadomesti z referenčno izvozno ceno (ceno HPE) [11] surovega palmovega olja, ki so jo objavili indonezijski organi in ki temelji na objavljenih mednarodnih cenah (v Rotterdamu, Maleziji in Indoneziji).
This adjustment is made in respect of CPO that was purchased from both related and unrelated companies.
Ta prilagoditev zadeva surovo palmovo olje, ki je bilo kupljeno od povezanih in nepovezanih družb.
The cost of the own produced CPO within the same legal entity is accepted given that no evidence has been found that the cost of the own produced CPO within the same legal entity is affected by the distortion.
Cena surovega palmovega olja iz lastne proizvodnje iste pravne osebe se sprejme, ker niso bili ugotovljeni nobeni dokazi, da izkrivljanje vpliva na ceno surovega palmovega olja iz lastne proizvodnje iste pravne osebe.
All exporting producers from Indonesia as well as the Government of Indonesia claim that the replacement of the costs for CPO, as recorded by the companies, with the Indonesian reference export price for CPO is neither permissible under WTO rules nor under Article 2(5) of the basic Regulation and is hence illegal.
Vsi proizvajalci izvozniki iz Indonezije in vlada Indonezije trdijo, da nadomestitev stroškov surovega palmovega olja, kakor so jih evidentirale družbe, z indonezijsko referenčno izvozno ceno za surovo palmovo olje v skladu s pravili STO in členom 2(5) osnovne uredbe ni dopustna in je zato nezakonita.
In this regard the Government of Indonesia claimed that the Commission wrongly treated the Republic of Indonesia as a non-market economy.
V zvezi s tem je vlada Indonezije trdila, da je Komisija Republiko Indonezijo neupravičeno obravnavala kot netržno gospodarstvo.
The arguments put forward by the companies can be summarised as follows.
V nadaljevanju so povzeti argumenti, ki so jih predložile družbe.
Firstly, the Commission has not demonstrated any reason to depart from the actual costs recorded or that these costs do not reasonably reflect the costs associated with the production of product concerned but has simply stated that the recorded costs are artificially low compared to international prices and should therefore be replaced.
Prvič, Komisija ni navedla nobenega razloga za odstopanje od evidentiranih dejanskih stroškov ali za to, da ti stroški niso realni odraz stroškov, ki so povezani s proizvodnjo zadevnega izdelka, temveč je zgolj navedla, da so evidentirani stroški umetno nizki v primerjavi z mednarodnimi cenami in bi jih bilo treba zato nadomestiti.
This is contrary to WTO rules according to which the test for determining whether a particular cost can be used for calculating production costs is whether that cost is associated with the production and sale of the product and not whether that cost reasonably reflect market value.
To je v nasprotju s pravili STO, v skladu s katerimi je treba s preverjanjem, ali je določene stroške mogoče uporabiti za izračun proizvodnih stroškov, ugotoviti, ali so ti stroški povezani s proizvodnjo in prodajo izdelka, in ne, ali ti stroški ustrezno odražajo tržno vrednost.
Secondly, even if Article 2(5) of the basic Regulation seemingly allows for an adjustment to be made, the application of that Article would be limited to situations where the State interferes directly on the market by setting or regulating the prices at an artificially low level.
Drugič, čeprav se zdi, da člen 2(5) osnovne uredbe dovoljuje prilagoditev, bi bilo treba uporabo tega člena omejiti na okoliščine, v katerih država neposredno posega v trg, in sicer z določitvijo ali urejanjem cen na umetno nizki ravni.
However, in this particular case, the Commission alleges that the domestic price of CPO, rather than being regulated by the State, is artificially low simply due to the export tax imposed on CPO.
Vendar pa v tem primeru Komisija trdi, da je domača cena surovega plamovega olja umetno nizka zaradi izvoznih davkov za surovo palmovo olje, ne pa zaradi tega, ker bi jo urejala država.
Even if this were to be true, any effect on the domestic price can only be considered as accidental or mere side-effects of the export tax system.
Tudi če bi bilo to res, se morebitni učinek na domačo ceno lahko obravnava le kot naključen ali zgolj stranski učinek sistema izvoznih davkov.
Thirdly, the Commission wrongly relies on the Acron judgment to justify the legality of the CPO adjustment.
Tretjič, Komisija se zmotno opira na sodbo v zadevi Acron, da bi upravičila zakonitost prilagoditve za surovo palmovo olje.
This judgment is currently under appeal and cannot therefore be relied upon as a precedent.
Ta sodba je trenutno predmet pritožbe, zato se nanjo ni mogoče sklicevati kot na precedens.
In any case, the factual circumstance in Acron was different as it relates to a situation where, contrary to CPO prices in Indonesia which are set freely on the market, the gas prices had been regulated by the State.
Ne glede na to pa so bile dejanske okoliščine v zadevi Acron drugačne, saj so se nanašale na razmere, v katerih je cene plina določala država, kar je v nasprotju s cenami surovega palmovega olja v Indoneziji, ki so bile prosto določene na trgu.
Finally, the Government of Indonesia claimed that the Article 2(5) adjustment was done solely to increase dumping margins by reason of differences in taxation.
Nazadnje je vlada Indonezije trdila, da je bila prilagoditev, ki je bila opravljena v skladu s členom 2(5) osnovne uredbe, uvedena samo z namenom, da se povišajo stopnje dampinga zaradi razlik v obdavčitvi.
The claim that the adjustment under Article 2(5) of the basic Regulation is illegal under WTO and/or Union rules must be rejected.
Trditev, da prilagoditev, ki je bila opravljena v skladu s členom 2(5) osnovne uredbe, ni zakonita v skladu s pravili STO in/ali pravili Unije, je treba zavrniti.
The basic Regulation has transposed the WTO anti-dumping agreement (ADA) and it is therefore considered that all provisions of this Regulation, including Article 2(5), are consistent with the Union’s obligations under ADA.
Protidampinški sporazum STO je bil prenesen z osnovno uredbo, zato se šteje, da so vse določbe te uredbe, vključno s členom 2(5), skladne z obveznostmi Unije, ki izhajajo iz Protidampinškega sporazuma STO.
In this respect it is recalled that Article 2(5) of the basic Regulation is applicable to both market and non-market economies equally.
V zvezi s tem se opozarja, da se člen 2(5) osnovne uredbe uporablja enako za tržna in netržna gospodarstva.
As mentioned above (recital 42), the General Court established in the Acron case the principle of law that if the costs associated with the production of the product under investigation are not reasonably reflected in the records of the companies, they do not serve as a basis for calculating normal value and that such costs could be replaced with costs reflecting a price set by market forces pursuant to Article 2(5) of the basic Regulation.
Kot je navedeno zgoraj (uvodna izjava 42), je Splošno sodišče v zadevi Acron uvedlo pravno načelo, v skladu s katerim stroški, povezani s proizvodnjo izdelka v preiskavi, niso osnova za izračun normalne vrednosti, če se ne odražajo ustrezno v evidencah podjetij, in da je take stroške v skladu s členom 2(5) osnovne uredbe mogoče nadomestiti s stroški, ki odražajo ceno, kakor jo določajo tržne sile.
The fact that the Acron case concerned prices that were regulated by the State cannot, however, be interpreted as meaning that the Commission is precluded to apply Article 2(5) in respect to other forms of State intervention that distorts, directly or indirectly, a particular market by depressing prices to an artificially low level.
Dejstva, da je šlo v zadevi Acron za cene, ki jih je urejala država, ni mogoče razlagati tako, da Komisija ne more uporabljati člena 2(5) v zvezi z drugimi oblikami posredovanja države, ki izkrivljajo, neposredno ali posredno, razmere na določenem trgu z nižanjem cen na umetno nizko raven.
The panel in China — Broilers has recently reached a similar conclusion when interpreting Article 2.2.1.1 of the ADA.
Odbor v zadevi China – Broilers je pri razlagi člena 2.2.1.1. Protidampinškega sporazuma STO nedavno oblikoval podoben sklep.
In the present case the Commission has found that the costs associated with the production of the product concerned are not reasonably reflected in the records of the companies concerned because they are artificially low by virtue of the Indonesian DET system.
V tej zadevi je Komisija ugotovila, da se stroški, povezani s proizvodnjo zadevnega izdelka, niso ustrezno odražali v evidencah zadevnih družb, ker so umetno nizki zaradi indonezijskega sistema diferenciranih izvoznih davkov.
It was therefore fully justified for the Commission to adjust the costs for COP under Article 2(5) of the basic Regulation.
Zato je bilo popolnoma upravičeno, da Komisija prilagodi stroške za surovo palmovo olje v skladu s členom 2(5) osnovne uredbe.
With regard to the claim by the Indonesian Government it is noted that that the Article 2(5) adjustment is based on the demonstrated difference between domestic and international CPO prices and not on any differences in taxation.
V zvezi s trditvijo vlade Indonezije se opozarja, da prilagoditev, ki je bila opravljena v skladu s členom 2(5) osnovne uredbe, temelji na dokazani razliki med domačimi in mednarodnimi cenami surovega palmovega olja in ne na morebitnih razlikah v obdavčitvi.
Two exporting producers in Indonesia claimed that the Commission has failed to demonstrate that the price of Indonesian domestic CPO is distorted.
Dva proizvajalca izvoznika iz Indonezije sta trdila, da Komisija ni dokazala, da je cena indonezijskega domačega palmovega olja izkrivljena.
They argue that Commission’s basic assumption that the DET limits the possibilities to export CPO, thereby leading to larger quantities of CPO being available on the domestic market and hence depressing the domestic CPO prices is factually incorrect as CPO is exported in large quantities (70 % of all production).
Trdita, da osnovna predpostavka Komisije, v skladu s katero sistem diferenciranih izvoznih davkov omejuje možnost izvoza surovega palmovega olja, zaradi česar so na domačem trgu na voljo večje količine surovega palmovega olja, cena surovega palmovega olja pa se niža, nima dejanske podlage, saj se surovo palmovo olje izvaža v večjih količinah (70 % celotne proizvodnje).
In any event, even if the domestic CPO market would be considered distorted by virtue of the DET, also the HPE price is equally distorted, as it is based on international export prices, which include the export tax.
Ne glede na to, cena HPE temelji na mednarodnih izvoznih cenah, ki vključujejo izvozni davek, zaradi česar je prav tako izkrivljena kakor domači trg za surovo palmovo olje, če se zanj šteje, da je izkrivljen zaradi sistema diferenciranih izvoznih davkov.
Therefore, the HPE price for CPO cannot be used as an appropriate benchmark price for adjusting the cost of CPO.
Zato cene HPE za surovo palmovo olje ni mogoče uporabiti kot primerno referenčno ceno za prilagoditev stroškov surovega palmovega olja.
Notwithstanding the fact that CPO is exported from Indonesia in large quantities, the investigation has revealed that the domestic price of CPO is artificially low as compared with international prices.
Ne glede na dejstvo, da se surovo palmovo olje iz Indonezije izvaža v večjih količinah, je preiskava razkrila, da je domača cena surovega palmovega olja umetno nizka v primerjavi z mednarodnimi cenami.
Moreover, the price difference found is close to the export tax imposed on DET.
Poleg tega je ugotovljena cenovna razlika blizu izvoznemu davku, ki ga nalaga sistem diferenciranih izvoznih davkov.
It is therefore reasonable to conclude that the low domestic price level is a result of a distortion by virtue of the DET.
Zato je smiselno sklepati, da je nizka stopnja domače cene rezultat izkrivljanja zaradi sistema diferenciranih izvoznih davkov.
In addition, international prices of commodities, including CPO, are determined based on supply and demand, reflecting the dynamics of market forces.
Poleg tega se mednarodne cene blaga, tudi surovega palmovega olja, določijo na podlagi ponudbe in povpraševanja, kar odraža dinamiko tržnih sil.
No evidence have been adduced that would indicate those market forces have become distorted by virtue of the Indonesian DET.
Navedeni niso bili nobeni dokazi, ki bi kazali na to, da so bile navedene tržne sile izkrivljene zaradi indonezijskega sistema diferenciranih izvoznih davkov.
The claim that the HPE is an inappropriate benchmark is therefore rejected.
Trditev, da je cena HPE neustrezna referenčna cena, se zato zavrne.
One exporting producer, which was found not to have representative domestic sales (recital 60 of the provisional Regulation) claimed that the Commission had erroneously made the representativity test on the basis of sales by related companies individually instead of the global sales of all companies within the group.
En proizvajalec izvoznik, katerega domača prodaja ni bila opredeljena kot reprezentativna (uvodna izjava 60 začasne uredbe), je navedel, da je Komisija reprezentativnost napačno preverila na podlagi prodaje posameznih povezanih podjetij namesto na podlagi celotne prodaje vseh podjetij v skupini.
It nonetheless acknowledges that this alleged error had no impact on the provisional finding made in respect of it.
Klub temu priznava, da ta domnevna napaka ni vplivala na začasno ugotovitev v zvezi z navedenim.
It is recalled that in respect to this exporting producer all related companies failed individually the representativity test.
Opozoriti je treba, da v zvezi s tem proizvajalcem izvoznikom nobeno od posameznih povezanih podjetij ni opravilo preizkusa reprezentativnosti.
Therefore, even if this claim was to be founded it is clear that a representativity test on the basis of the totality of domestic sales of the all related companies could not, as acknowledged by the exporting producer, have had an impact on the provisional findings.
Zato je jasno, da preizkus reprezentativnosti na podlagi celotne domače prodaje vseh povezanih podjetij ne bi mogel vplivati na začasne ugotovitve, kot je priznal proizvajalec izvoznik, tudi če bi bila ta trditev utemeljena.
In the absence of any further comments, recitals 60 to 62 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Ker ni bilo nobenih drugih pripomb, se uvodne izjave 60 do 62 začasne uredbe potrdijo.
One party claimed that in relation to recital 63 of the provisional Regulation an overstated SG&A was used for that party.
Ena stran je trdila, da so bili v zvezi z uvodno izjavo 63 začasne uredbe za zadevno stran uporabljeni preveliki prodajni, splošni in upravni stroški.
After having examined this claim, it appeared that the SG&A for both domestic and export sales was included in the construction of normal value.
Po proučitvi te trditve je bilo ugotovljeno, da so bili v konstruiranje normalne vrednosti vključeni prodajni, splošni in upravni stroški za domačo in izvozno prodajo.
The necessary corrections to use the SG&A for only the domestic sales were accordingly made.
Opravili so se ustrezni popravki, tako da so se upoštevali le prodajni, splošni in upravni stroški za domačo prodajo.
One party questioned the construction of normal value and in particular the choice of methodology under Article 2(6) as stated in recital 65 of the provisional Regulation.
Ena stran je izrazila dvome glede konstruiranja normalne vrednosti in zlasti glede izbire metodologije v skladu s členom 2(6), kakor je navedena v uvodni izjavi 65 začasne uredbe.
Article 2(6) provides for three alternative methodologies to establish SG&A and profit in case the actual data of the company cannot be used.
V členu 2(6) so zagotovljene tri alternativne metodologije za določitev prodajnih, splošnih in upravnih stroškov ter dobička, če ni mogoče uporabiti dejanskih podatkov družbe.
This party claimed that these three methodologies must be considered in the order in which they are presented and that therefore Article 2(6)(a) and (b) should be considered first to be applied.
Ta stran je trdila, da je treba te tri metodologije proučiti v vrstnem redu, v katerem so navedene, in da je zato treba najprej proučiti možnost uporabe metodologij iz člena 2(6)(a) in (b).
Whereas the provisional Regulation appeared to address only the methodology under Article 2(6)(c), the following recitals elaborate why Article 2(6)(a) and (b) are not applicable in this case.
Čeprav se zdi, da je v začasni uredbi obravnavana le metodologija iz člena 2(6)(c), je v nadaljnjih uvodnih izjavah razloženo, zakaj v tem primeru člen 2(6)(a) in (b) ni relevanten.
Article 2(6)(a) is not applicable given that no actual amounts for any of the sampled Indonesian (and Argentinian) companies were established given the fact that they did not have any sales in the ordinary course of trade.
Člen 2(6)(a) ni relevanten, ker niso bili ugotovljeni nobeni dejanski zneski za nobeno od vzorčenih indonezijskih (in argentinskih) družb, saj se njihova prodaja ni izvajala v običajnem poteku trgovine.
Therefore, no data on actual amounts of any other exporter or producer (in the sample) is available to apply Article 2(6)(a).
Zato niso na voljo nobeni podatki o dejanskih zneskih katerega koli drugega izvoznika ali proizvajalca (v vzorcu), na podlagi katerih bi se lahko uporabil člen 2(6)(a).
Article 2(6)(b) is not applicable given that all Indonesian (and Argentinian) companies in the sample do not have sales of products of the same general category of products that are made in the ordinary course of trade.
Člen 2(6)(b) ni relevanten, saj vse indonezijske (in argentinske) družbe iz vzorca v običajnem poteku trgovine ne prodajajo izdelkov iz iste splošne kategorije.
In relation to Article 2(6)(b), this party also argued that the Basic Regulation is inconsistent with the WTO Regulation to the extent that it contains the requirement in Article 2(6)(b) that the sales should be made in the ordinary course of trade.
V zvezi s členom 2(6)(b) je ta stran navedla tudi, da osnovna uredba ni usklajena z uredbo STO zaradi zahteve iz člena 2(6)(b), da je treba prodajo izvajati v običajnem poteku trgovine.
However, as mentioned in recital 72 above, the basic Regulation has transposed the WTO anti-dumping agreement (ADA) and it is therefore considered that all provisions of this Regulation, including Article 2(6), are consistent with the Union’s obligations under ADA and that the sales in the ordinary course of trade element is fully compliant.
Vendar pa je bil, kakor je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 72 zgoraj, z osnovno uredbo prenesen Protidampinški sporazum STO in se zato šteje, da so vse določbe te uredbe, vključno s členom 2(6), skladne z obveznostmi Unije, ki izhajajo iz Protidampinškega sporazuma STO, in da je prodaja v običajnem teku trgovine element, ki je popolnoma usklajen s tem sporazumom.
Therefore, the choice of applying Article 2(6)(c) in using any other reasonable method to determine a profit margin is confirmed.
Zato se izbira člena 2(6)(c) za uporabo katere koli druge razumne metode za določitev stopnje dobička potrdi.
Furthermore, several parties considered the 15 % profit margin used when constructing normal value to be excessive.
Poleg tega je več strani izrazilo mnenje, da je 15-odstotna stopnja dobička, ki se je uporabila pri konstruiranju normalne vrednosti, previsoka.
They claim that the provisional Regulation does not explain how the Commission has calculated the 15 % and therefore they assume that the Commission took the 15 % from the profit margin used in the injury calculations.
Trdijo, da v začasni uredbi ni pojasnjeno, kako je Komisija izračunala teh 15 %, zato predvidevajo, da je Komisija uporabila 15-odstotno stopnjo dobička iz izračunov škode.
They claimed that in several other cases concerning commodities the Commission used profit margins in the region of 5 %.
Navedle so, da je Komisija v več drugih zadevah v zvezi z blagom uporabila stopnje dobička, ki so znašale približno 5 %.
Several parties suggested using the profit margin of the bioethanol case from the United States.
Več strani je predlagalo, da se uporabi stopnja dobička kot v primeru bioetanola iz Združenih držav Amerike.
One party also suggested using the lower profit margin of its sales of a blend of biodiesel with mineral diesel.
Ena stran je tudi predlagala, da se za prodajo mešanice biodizla in mineralnega dizla uporabi nižja stopnja dobička.
In addition, the Government of Indonesia claimed that it is duplicative to replace the CPO cost under Article 2(5) of the basic Regulation while using at the same time a 15 % profit margin under Article 2(6)(c) which would reflect the profit margin of an undistorted market.
Poleg tega je vlada Indonezije trdila, da se učinek podvoji, če se stroški surovega palmovega olja iz člena 2(5) osnovne uredbe nadomestijo, hkrati pa se uporabi 15-odstotna stopnja dobička iz člena 2(6)(c), ki bi ustrezala stopnji dobička na neizkrivljenem trgu.
First, it is incorrect that the Commission systematically uses a 5 % profit margin when constructing normal value.
Prvič, ne drži, da Komisija pri konstruiranju normalne vrednosti sistematično uporablja 5-odstotno stopnjo dobička.
For example, in the 2009 biodiesel proceeding against the United States, various different profit levels were used with the weighted average profit being well above 15 %.
V postopku v zvezi z biodizlom, ki je bil leta 2009 uveden proti Združenim državam Amerike, so se na primer uporabile različne stopnje dobička, pri čemer je tehtana povprečna stopnja dobička bistveno presegala 15 %.
Second, given that the short and medium term borrowing rate in Indonesia is around 12 % according to World bank data, it seems reasonable to expect that the profit margin of doing business in the domestic biodiesel market would be higher than the borrowing cost of capital. The reference to the medium-term borrowing rate is not meant to set a benchmark but to test the reasonableness of the margin used.
Drugič, ker kratkoročna in srednjeročna posojilna obrestna mera v Indoneziji po podatkih Svetovne banke znaša približno 12 %, se zdi razumno pričakovati, da bo stopnja dobička pri poslovanju na domačem trgu biodizla višja od stroškov izposoje kapitala.