natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Three sampled cooperating exporters claim that this is a ‘user subsidy’ and does not confer a benefit to the product concerned, and therefore it is not countervailable within the meaning of Articles 1(1) and 3(2) of the basic Regulation, Article VI:3 GATT 1994, and Article 19.1 of the WTO SCM Agreement.
Trije vzorčeni sodelujoči izvozniki trdijo, da je to „uporabniška subvencija“ in ne prinaša ugodnosti za zadevni izdelek, zato se zanjo ne bi smeli uvesti izravnalni ukrepi v smislu členov 1(1) in 3(2) osnovne uredbe, člena VI:3 GATT 1994 in člena 19.1 Sporazuma SIU STO.
These exporters refer to the EU decision in the Biodiesel from the United States case (Recital 97 of the Commission Regulation (EC) No 194/2009, OJ L 67 of 12.03.2009 p. 50 and to the WTO jurisprudence in U.S.-Lead Bars (Paras 6.50, 6.53, 6.56 and 6.57 of the Panel Report), Canada-Measures Affecting the Export of Civilian Aircraft (Para. 9.112 of the Panel Report), Brazil-Export Financing Programme for Aircraft (Para. 7.24 of the Panel Report), and Canada-Measures Affecting the Export of Civilian Aircraft (Paras. 157 and 159 of the Appellate Body Report).
Ti izvozniki se sklicujejo na sklep EU v zadevi v zvezi z biodizlom iz Združenih držav (uvodna izjava (97) Uredbe Komisije (ES) št. 194/2009, UL L 67 z dne 12. marca 2009, str. 50) in na sodno prakso STO v zadevi ZDA – svinčene palice (odstavki 6.50, 6.53, 6.56 in 6.57 poročila odbora), poročilo Kanada – ukrepi, ki vplivajo na izvoz civilnih letal (odstavek 9.112 poročila odbora), poročilo Brazilija – program za financiranje izvoza letal (odstavek 7.24 poročila odbora) in na poročilo Kanada – ukrepi, ki vplivajo na izvoz civilnih letal (odstavka 157 in 159 poročila pritožbenega organa).
The Commission refers to its findings of the investigation and in particular to Recitals (243) — (246) of this Regulation, which provide exhaustive explanations on the above arguments and confirm that the determination is consistent with the relevant provisions and with the jurisprudence quoted by the GOC and the cooperating sampled exporters.
Komisija se sklicuje na svoje ugotovitve preiskave in zlasti na uvodne izjave od (243) do (246) te uredbe, ki vsebujejo izčrpna pojasnila glede zgoraj navedenih trditev in potrjujejo, da je določitev skladna z ustreznimi določbami in sodno prakso, ki so jo navajali kitajska vlada in sodelujoči vzorčeni izvozniki.
The Commission restates that the grants under the programme are directly linked to the product concerned because the eligible ‘distributed solar PV systems’ specifically include the supply of modules and cells as a significant part of the projects and therefore the nexus between the benefit conferred by the government and the product concerned is direct and inextricable.
Komisija ponavlja, da so nepovratna sredstva v okviru programa neposredno povezana z zadevnim izdelkom, saj upravičeni „dobavljeni solarni fotonapetostni sistemi“ vključujejo zlasti dobavo modulov in celic kot pomemben del projektov, zato je povezava med ugodnostjo, ki jo zagotavlja vlada, in zadevnim izdelkom neposredna in neločljiva.
As also specified particularly in Recitals (244) and (245), the investigation has confirmed that direct payments have been effected by the GOC to several sampled cooperating exporters (i.e. the purpose of installing solar panels to generate energy for their own use, including in the production process of the product concerned) using inter alia their own manufactured solar modules and cells.
Kot je tudi navedeno zlasti v uvodnih izjavah (244) in (245), je preiskava potrdila, da je kitajska vlada izvedla neposredna plačila več vzorčenim sodelujočim izvoznikom (tj. za namen namestitve solarnih panelov za proizvajanje energije za njihovo lastno rabo, vključno za postopek proizvodnje zadevnega izdelka), ki med drugim uporabljajo solarne module in celice, ki so jih proizvedli sami.
It has also been established that the direct payments made to the exporters in their capacity as suppliers of the product concerned to third-party project operators are in fact at odds with the provisions in the relevant legislation and that the GOC has failed to provide evidence to reconcile the situation (see namely Recitals (245) and (246)).
Ugotovljeno je bilo tudi, da so neposredna plačila izvoznikom v njihovi vlogi dobaviteljev zadevnega izdelka tretjim upravljavcem projektov dejansko v nasprotju z določbami ustrezne zakonodaje in da kitajska vlada ni zagotovila dokazov, ki bi uskladili to situacijo (glej uvodni izjavi (245) in (246)).
The limited explanation provided by the GOC and the sampled cooperating exporter that the direct transfer of funds, in violation of the Chinese legislation, was necessary because the project operator was in financial difficulty and to ensure that the grants would be used only for authorised PV systems strongly indicates that, in the absence of this direct transfer from the government, the sampled cooperating exporter acting as supplier would not have been able to receive any money for the supply of the product concerned and that the government would not have been able to ensure that the subsidy would be used for its intended purpose.
Omejena pojasnila, ki sta jih zagotovila kitajska vlada in vzorčeni sodelujoči izvoznik, da je bil neposreden prenos sredstev, ki je v nasprotju s kitajsko zakonodajo, potreben, ker je bil upravljavec projekta v finančnih težavah in zaradi zagotovitve, da bodo nepovratna sredstva uporabljena le za odobrene fotonapetostne sisteme, jasno kažejo, da vzorčeni sodelujoči izvoznik, ki je deloval kot dobavitelj, brez tega neposrednega prenosa s strani vlade ne bi prejel denarja za dobavo zadevnega izdelka in da vlada ne bi mogla zagotoviti, da bo subvencija uporabljena za predvideni namen.
From this perspective and in the absence of further evidence these payments must be viewed as a direct grant from the GOC to the producer of the product concerned, which would not otherwise have received any money for the supply of the product concerned (assuming that this supply ever took place, for which again there is no evidence on the record).
Glede na to in ob odsotnosti nadaljnjih dokazov je treba ta plačila obravnavati kot neposredno subvencijo kitajske vlade, dodeljeno proizvajalcu zadevnega izdelka, ki drugače ne bi prejel denarja za dobavo zadevnega izdelka (ob predpostavki, da je bila ta dobava sploh izvedena, za kar spet ni evidentiranih dokazov).
On this basis the Commission believes that the arguments raised by the GOC and by the sampled cooperating exporters are legally unfounded.
Na tej podlagi Komisija meni, da so trditve kitajske vlade in vzorčenega sodelujočega izvoznika pravno neutemeljene.
The GOC also claims that for situations in which the benefits from the programme concerned the supply of the product concerned to unrelated project operators, the Commission was obliged to conduct a pass-through analysis to establish this point, citing the WTO decision in US-Softwood Lumber IV (paras. 141 and 142 of the Appellate Body Report).
Kitajska vlada poleg tega trdi, da bi morala Komisija v primerih, v katerih so ugodnosti programa zadevale dobavo zadevnega izdelka nepovezanim upravljavcem projektov, opraviti analizo prenosa za določitev te točke, pri tem pa se sklicuje na odločitev STO v zadevi ZDA – mehki stavbni les (odstavka 141 in 142 poročila pritožbenega organa).
The Commission refers to the explanations in Recitals (244) — (246) and in Recital (352) above to dismiss this claim.
Komisija zavrača to trditev in se pri tem sklicuje na pojasnila v uvodnih izjavah od (244) do (246) in (352).
Furthermore, due to the non-cooperation of the GOC and interested parties, the Commission was not in a position to carry out a pass-through analysis.
Poleg tega Komisija zaradi nesodelovanja kitajske vlade in zainteresiranih strani ni mogla opraviti analize prenosa.
Therefore there is no question of pass-through and the WTO jurisprudence quoted is irrelevant in this situation given that the proceeds were directly paid to the producers of the product concerned and directly linked to the supply of inter alia the product concerned.
Zato se prenos ne upošteva, navedena sodna praksa STO pa v tem primeru ni pomembna, saj so se sredstva izplačala neposredno proizvajalcem zadevnega izdelka in so neposredno povezana z dobavo med drugim zadevnega izdelka.
Since these payments were non-repayable grants, there is a financial contribution (a direct transfer of funds) and the Commission is entitled to presume that they confer a benefit to the recipient (the producers), in the absence of any evidence on further use made of the sums concerned.
Ker so bila ta plačila nepovratna sredstva, gre za finančni prispevek (neposredni prenos sredstev) in ima Komisija v odsotnosti dokazov o nadaljnji uporabi zadevnih zneskov pravico domnevati, da prejemniku (proizvajalcem) prinašajo ugodnost.
Had payments under this programme been made by the government to third-party project operators and the equipment acquired for fair market value, there would be no benefit to the exporters concerned.
Če bi vlada v okviru tega programa izvedla plačila tretjim upravljavcem projektov in če bi bila oprema pridobljena po pošteni tržni vrednosti, zadevni izvozniki ne bi prejeli ugodnosti.
However, in a situation where payments are made to the exporting producers, the amounts used by these companies for the installation of solar panels confer a benefit because it relieves them of costs they would otherwise have incurred in this process.
Vendar v primeru, ko plačila prejmejo proizvajalci izvozniki, zneski, ki jih te družbe uporabijo za namestitev solarnih panelov, pomenijo ugodnost, ker jih razbremenijo stroškov, ki bi jih sicer ustvarile v tem postopku.
If the exporting producer is unable to demonstrate that a part of the grant has been transferred to third-party users, it is presumed, on the basis of facts available, that this part of the grant confers a benefit to the exporter as a general subsidy which benefits the company's activities as a whole.
Če proizvajalec izvoznik ne more dokazati, da je bil del nepovratnih sredstev prenesen na tretje uporabnike, se na podlagi razpoložljivih dejstev domneva, da ta del nepovratnih sredstev pomeni ugodnost za izvoznika v smislu splošne subvencije, ki koristi vsem dejavnostim družbe.
This is the case here.
To velja za ta primer.
Two sampled cooperating exporters claim that the Golden Sun programme is not specific because the relevant requirements in the Chinese legislation are objective and all enterprises meeting them can benefit from the programme, and eligibility is open to all companies, whether or not manufacturers of the product concerned.
Dva vzorčena sodelujoča izvoznika trdita, da program Golden Sun ni specifičen, ker so ustrezne zahteve v kitajski zakonodaji objektivne in lahko vsa podjetja, ki te zahteve izpolnjujejo, koristijo program, upravičene pa so lahko vse družbe, ne glede na to, ali so proizvajalci zadevnega izdelka ali ne.
The Commission refers to its finding of specificity in Recital (247) showing that the conditions and selection criteria are not objective and do not apply automatically.
Komisija se sklicuje na svoje ugotovitve glede specifičnosti v uvodni izjavi (247), ki kažejo, da pogoji in merila za izbor niso objektivni in se ne uporabljajo samodejno.
The relevant required criteria confirm that the programme is limited only to the limited subset of enterprises able to fulfil them, namely those with a substantial installed capacity of at least 300kWh and with substantial assets of at least RMB 100 million.
Zadevna zahtevana merila potrjujejo, da je program omejen zgolj na omejeno podmnožico podjetij, ki izpolnjujejo ta merila, in sicer na podjetja z znatno nameščeno zmogljivostjo vsaj 300 kWh in znatnimi sredstvi v višini vsaj 100 milijonov CNY.
The selection criteria also refer to the need for the recipient enterprises to be included in the local Golden Sun demonstration project implementation plan, and the investigation has established that the inclusion in these local plans depend on a discretionary decision of the competent authorities not transparent and not based on objective criteria.
Merila za izbor zahtevajo tudi, da so podjetja prejemniki vključeni v lokalni načrt izvajanja demonstracijskega projekta Golden Sun, v preiskavi pa je bilo ugotovljeno, da je vključitev v te lokalne načrte odvisna od diskrecijske odločitve pristojnih organov, ki ni pregledna in ne temelji na objektivnih merilih.
The Commission adds that eligible ‘distributed solar systems’ rely on the manufacture and supply of solar-powered generating equipment the bulk of which is made by solar modules and cells.
Komisija dodaja, da so upravičeni „dobavljeni solarni sistemi“ odvisni od proizvodnje in dobave opreme za proizvodnjo sončne energije, večina katere je izdelana iz solarnih modulov in celic.
Therefore, contrary to the arguments of the sampled exporters this scheme is also specific in that only producers of solar systems, or in other words producers of the product concerned, are in practice eligible for the benefits under this programme either directly in their quality as project owners or indirectly in their alleged quality as suppliers of the product concerned to projects owners.
Zato je v nasprotju s trditvami vzorčenih izvoznikov ta shema specifična tudi zato, ker so v praksi samo proizvajalci solarnih sistemov, drugače povedano proizvajalci zadevnega izdelka, upravičeni do ugodnosti v okviru tega programa, bodisi neposredno v vlogi lastnikov projektov bodisi posredno v domnevni vlogi dobaviteljev, ki naj bi zadevni izdelek dobavljali lastnikom projektov.
Therefore, also considering the absence of cooperation of the GOC that has failed to provide all the budget documents requested by the Commission (see Recitals (234)-(239)), it is concluded that this programme is also de facto specific under Article 4(2)(c) of the basic Regulation because mainly producers of the product concerned in fact benefit directly or indirectly from this programme.
Zato se tudi ob upoštevanju dejstva, da kitajska vlada ni sodelovala in ni predložila vseh proračunskih dokumentov, ki jih je zahtevala Komisija (glej uvodne izjave od (234) do (239)), sklene, da je ta program dejansko specifičen v skladu s členom 4(2)(c) osnovne uredbe, ker v resnici neposredno ali posredno prinaša ugodnosti predvsem proizvajalcem zadevnega izdelka.
The subsidy is also used by a limited number of enterprises (the producers of the product concerned), or is used predominantly or disproportionately by these firms, since they are only a subset of the allegedly potential recipients but seem to receive all the funding.
Subvencijo tudi uporablja omejeno število podjetij (proizvajalcev zadevnega izdelka) ali jo ta podjetja uporabljajo v večinskem ali nesorazmernem deležu, saj so samo podmnožica domnevnih potencialnih prejemnikov, vendar se zdi, da prejmejo vsa sredstva.
The two free/three half programme for foreign invested enterprises
Program „dve leti brez, tri leta polovica“ za podjetja s tujimi naložbami
This is confirmed by the finding of the investigation, which has found benefits conferred during the IP under this programme to several sampled cooperating exporters.
To potrjuje ugotovitev preiskave, pri kateri so bile odkrite ugodnosti, odobrene v OP v okviru tega programa več vzorčenim sodelujočim izvoznikom.
The benefits conferred under the programme, even if the programme was terminated in 2013, also continue in the future.
Koristi, dodeljene v okviru programa, se bodo kljub temu, da se je program zaključil v letu 2013, nadaljevale tudi v prihodnosti.
The GOC and one sampled cooperating exporter further claim that the variant scheme for High and New Technology Enterprises (HNTEs) cannot be countervailed on the basis of Article 10(1) of the basic Regulation as it was not alleged in the complaint.
Kitajska vlada in en vzorčeni sodelujoči izvoznik nadalje trdita, da proti različici sheme za visokotehnološka podjetja in podjetja z novo tehnologijo (VPPNT) ni mogoče uvesti izravnalnih ukrepov na podlagi člena 10(1) osnovne uredbe, ker to ni bilo navedeno v pritožbi.
The Commission refers to its detailed rebuttal of this argument contained in recital (286).
Komisija se sklicuje na svojo podrobno zavrnitev tega argumenta v uvodni izjavi (286).
The Commission also recalls that the GOC has decided not to cooperate during the investigation concerning the variant of this programme.
Komisija prav tako opozarja, da se je kitajska vlada odločila, da ne bo sodelovala v preiskavi v zvezi z različico tega programa.
In addition to these elements, the Commission notes that the complaint lists other preferential direct tax schemes for HNTEs in addition to the two free/three half variant for FIEs (section 4.2.5.1 of the complaint), that is either the tax reductions for HNTEs (section 4.2.5.9 of the complaint) or the preferential tax programmes for FIEs recognised as HTNE (section 4.2.5.8 of the complaint).
Komisija poleg teh elementov ugotavlja, da so v pritožbi poleg različice „dve leti brez, tri leta polovica“ za PTN navedene druge preferenčne sheme neposrednih davkov za VPPNT (oddelek 4.2.5.1 pritožbe), tj. znižanje davka za VPPNT (oddelek 4.2.5.9 pritožbe) ali preferenčni davčni programi za PTN, priznana kot VPPNT (oddelek 4.2.5.8 pritožbe).
Therefore, this programme may also be considered to have a very close nexus with either or both of these other alleged tax programmes in that it concerns a reduction of the direct tax rate and is specifically targeting the same set of beneficiaries HNTEs.
Zato se lahko za ta program šteje, da je tesno povezan z enim ali obema navedenima drugima davčnima programoma, ker vključuje znižanje stopnje neposrednih davkov in je posebej usmerjen na isti niz upravičenih VPPNT.
Once again, cooperation by the GOC could have allowed the Commission to assess properly and thoroughly all the elements that relate to the nexus with the programmes alleged in the complaint and to fill any information gaps that are present in the complaint, which is based on the prima facie evidence reasonably available to the complainant.
Znova je treba poudariti, da bi sodelovanje kitajske vlade Komisiji lahko omogočilo ustrezen in temeljit dostop do vseh elementov v zvezi s povezanostjo s programi, navedenimi v pritožbi, in zapolnitev morebitnih informacijskih vrzeli v pritožbi, ki temelji na dokazih prima facie, ki so v razumni meri na voljo pritožniku.
On the basis of these arguments, the Commission restates that countervailing this programme is fully in line with Article 10(1) of the basic Regulation, as this provision allows for the investigation of any ‘alleged subsidy’ identified by the complainant, not just to a specific programme.
Komisija na podlagi teh argumentov ponovi, da je uvedba izravnalnih ukrepov proti temu programu popolnoma v skladu s členom 10(1) osnovne uredbe, saj ta določba omogoča preiskavo katere koli „domnevne subvencije“, ki jo ugotovi pritožnik, in ni omejena na določen program.
In this case, the alleged subsidy, the foregoing of government tax revenue targeting the same type of beneficiaries, is common to all the programmes in question.
V tem primeru je domnevna subvencija, tj. navedeni državni prihodki od davkov, namenjeni isti vrsti upravičencev, skupna vsem zadevnim programom.
With regard to the calculation of the subsidy amount, two sampled cooperating exporters argue that the Commission has erroneously used the full year figures in the 2011 Annual Income Tax Return despite the fact that the IP covers half of 2011 and half of 2012, and this violates the calculation method in Section E(a)(ii) of the Commission Guidelines for the calculation of the amount of subsidy in countervailing duty investigations, OJ C 394, 17.12.1998, p. 6.
Glede izračuna zneska subvencije dva vzorčena sodelujoča izvoznika trdita, da je Komisija napačno uporabila celoletne številke v letni napovedi za odmero davka na dohodek za leto 2011, kljub dejstvu, da OP pokriva polovico leta 2011 in polovico leta 2012, in da to ni v skladu z metodo izračuna iz oddelka E(a)(ii) smernic Komisije za izračun zneska subvencije v preiskavah v zvezi z izravnalnimi dajatvami, UL C 394, 17.12.1998, str. 6.
One of these exporters further claims that, since the full 2012 tax return was not available at the time of verification, for 2012 the Commission should have based its calculation on the quarterly income tax declarations concerning the first half of the year 2012 collected on spot and/or on the profit and loss tables for 2012, which show that the company was in a loss position.
En izvoznik nadalje trdi, da bi Komisija, ker v času preverjanja ni bila na voljo celotna davčna napoved za leto 2012, morala svoj izračun za leto 2012 opraviti na podlagi četrtletnih napovedi za odmero davka na dohodek za prvo polovico leta 2012, zbranih na kraju samem in/ali v tabelah s poslovnih izidom za leto 2012, ki kažejo, da je družba imela izgubo.
The Commission refers to recital (300) and restates the importance that the calculation of benefit be based on final audited tax returns for a certain tax year.
Komisija se sklicuje na uvodno izjavo (300) in znova poudarja, da je pomembno, da izračun ugodnosti temelji na končnih revidiranih davčnih napovedih za določeno davčno leto.
The Commission adds that the final settlement of the 2011 tax return during the IP makes any benefit claimed on the return final, further underlying the correctness of its approach.
Dodaja, da je po končni ureditvi davčne napovedi za leto 2011 v OP vsaka ugodnost, uveljavljena v napovedi, dokončna, kar nadalje podpira pravilnost njenega pristopa.
The Commission cannot base its calculation on quarterly tax returns, because these returns reflect the on-going provisional situation at the time of filing and by definition do not take into account the final consolidated situation of the annual tax year.
Komisija ne more opraviti svojega izračuna na podlagi četrtletnih davčnih napovedi, ker te napovedi izražajo trenutno začasno stanje v času oddaje in po definiciji ne upoštevajo končnega konsolidiranega stanja davčnega leta.
The objective of these returns is to ensure liquidity to the government in case taxes are provisionally due, but they reflect only the partial situation at the time of filing.
Cilj teh napovedi je zagotoviti likvidnost vlade v primeru začasno zapadlih davkov, vendar izražajo samo delno stanje v času oddaje.
It may well be the case that if the company turns a substantial profit in the last two quarters of the year that more than offset the losses in the initial quarters, then it will report a taxable profit on the final tax return.
Lahko se zgodi, da družba v zadnjih dveh četrtletjih leta ustvari znaten dobiček, ki več kot izravna izgube v prvih četrtletjih, in v tem primeru v končni davčni napovedi prijavi obdavčljiv dobiček.
Therefore while the provisional tax returns in 2012 give a partial indication of the situation of the exporter at the time of filing and explains why the Commission collected them, their relevance is not absolute as it cannot be excluded that the situation at the end of the fiscal year as shown on the definitive return is completely different.
Čeprav začasne davčne napovedi za leto 2012 delno prikazujejo stanje izvoznika v času oddaje in je pojasnjeno, zakaj jih je Komisija zbrala, njihova pomembnost ni absolutna, ker ni mogoče izključiti možnosti, da je stanje na koncu finančnega leta, kot je prikazano na končni napovedi, popolnoma drugačno.
As for the profit and loss tables concerning the year 2012, the Commission notes that financial accounting does not always correspond to the fiscal accounting and it may well be that the obligation to report items of income and loss for direct tax purposes may substantially differ from the reporting obligations for accounting purposes.
Komisija v zvezi s tabelami s poslovnih izidom za leto 2012 ugotavlja, da finančno računovodstvo ne ustreza vedno davčnemu računovodstvu, in lahko se zgodi, da se obveznost poročanja o dohodku in izgubi za namene neposrednih davkov znatno razlikuje od obveznosti poročanja za računovodske namene.
There may also be adjustment for tax purposes that are not fully reflected on the financial accounts.
Lahko pride tudi do popravkov za davčne namene, ki niso povsem izraženi v finančnih poročilih.