natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Interested parties were granted the opportunity to be heard and to comment pursuant to Article 8(9) of the basic anti-dumping Regulation and Article 13(9) of the basic anti-subsidy Regulation.
Zainteresirane strani so imele priložnost, da izrazijo svoja stališča in predložijo pripombe v skladu s členom 8(9) osnovne protidampinške uredbe in členom 13(9) osnovne protisubvencijske uredbe.
Shinetime China submitted comments on behalf of Shinetime China and Shinetime Europe and has been heard.
Družba Shinetime China je v svojem imenu in v imenu družbe Shinetime Europe predložila pripombe in je bila zaslišana.
Authenticity of invoices issued by Shinetime China and Shinetime Europe
Verodostojnost računov, ki sta jih izdali družbi Shinetime China in Shinetime Europe
Shinetime China contested that Shinetime China and Shinetime Europe had issued invoices and re-sale invoices for which the MIP was not respected.
Družba Shinetime China je izpodbijala trditve, da sta z družbo Shinetime Europe izdajali račune in račune nadaljnje prodaje, pri katerih minimalna uvozna cena ni bila upoštevana.
Shinetime China explained that their internal rules require all official invoices to be signed and sealed.
Družba Shinetime China je pojasnila, da morajo biti v skladu z njenimi notranjimi pravili vsi uradni računi podpisani in žigosani.
In the absence of signature and seal on the invoices referred to in recitals (23) and (24), Shinetime China could not trace those invoices in their system.
Ker računi iz uvodnih izjav (23) in (24) niso bili podpisani in žigosani, jih družba Shinetime ni mogla poiskati v svojem sistemu.
Shinetime China only confirmed the issuance of one re-sale invoice that respected the MIP.
Družba Shinetime China je potrdila samo izdajo enega računa nadaljnje prodaje, pri katerem je bila minimalna uvozna cena upoštevana.
The Commission rejects this argument.
Komisija to trditev zavrača.
The Commission did not argue whether the invoices referred to in the above recitals were official invoices of Shinetime China and official re-sale invoices of Shinetime Europe.
Komisija ni razpravljala o tem, ali so računi iz navedenih uvodnih izjav uradni računi družbe Shinetime China in uradni računi nadaljnje prodaje družbe Shinetime Europe.
On the contrary, the claim of Shinetime China on the authenticity of these invoices is irrelevant.
Trditev družbe Shinetime China glede verodostojnosti računov namreč ni relevantna.
The Commission established that an unrelated customer in the Union had engaged to pay an amount below the MIP to Shinetime China for the transaction referred to in recital (23).
Komisija je ugotovila, da se je nepovezana stranka v Uniji zavezala, da bo za transakcijo iz uvodne izjave (23) družbi Shinetime China plačala znesek, ki je nižji od minimalne uvozne cene.
The Commission based this finding on a correspondence which Shinetime China claimed not to be in position to refute due to the departure of the relevant personnel.
Ta ugotovitev Komisije temelji na korespondenci, ki je družba Shinetime China po svojih navedbah ni mogla izpodbijati zaradi prenehanja zaposlitve zadevnega osebja.
The Commission considers that the sole statement of Shinetime China that neither the relevant correspondence nor the invoice in question is traceable in its system or that the company does not have an account in Hong Kong is insufficient to alter the above finding.
Komisija meni, da zgornje ugotovitve ni mogoče spremeniti samo na podlagi izjave družbe Shinetime China, da v njenem sistemu ni mogoče najti niti zadevne korespondence niti zadevnega računa ter da družba nima računa v Hongkongu.
In addition, the Commission also established that the payment from the first unrelated customer in the Union to Shinetime Europe for the transaction referred to in recital (24) corresponded to the re-sale invoice value for which the MIP was not respected.
Poleg tega je Komisija ugotovila, da plačilo prve nepovezane stranke v Uniji družbi Shinetime Europe za transakcijo iz uvodne izjave (24) ustreza vrednosti na računu nadaljnje prodaje, pri katerem minimalna uvozna cena ni bila upoštevana.
Therefore, even if Shinetime China claimed the re-sale invoice issued for an amount below the MIP as not authentic, the underlying financial transaction (e.g. the amount of money actually received from the buyer after any adjustments for credit/debit notes and the like) was not in conformity with the face value of the commercial re-sale invoice confirmed to be the official re-sale invoice of Shinetime Europe.
Čeprav je družba Shinetime China trdila, da račun nadaljnje prodaje, izdan za znesek, nižji od minimalne uvozne cene, ni verodostojen, osnovna finančna transakcija (npr. znesek sredstev, dejansko prejetih od kupca po morebitnih popravkih zaradi dobropisov/bremepisov in podobnega) ni bila skladna z nominalno vrednostjo trgovinskega računa nadaljnje prodaje, ki je bil potrjen kot uradni račun nadaljnje prodaje družbe Shinetime Europe.
The arguments of Shinetime China concerning the payment of the invoice are addressed in recitals (41) to (48).
Trditve družbe Shinetime China glede plačila računa so obravnavane v uvodnih izjavah od (41) do (48).
Sale below MIP by Shinetime China
Prodaja pod minimalno uvozno ceno s strani družbe Shinetime China
Shinetime China claimed that the payment received from the allegedly unrelated importer referred to in recital (22) was only a prepayment.
Družba Shinetime China je trdila, da je bilo plačilo domnevno nepovezanega uvoznika iz uvodne izjave (22) le predplačilo.
Shinetime China submitted the export documentation and an extract from the customer ledger concerning the allegedly unrelated importer to substantiate this claim.
V podporo svoji trditvi je predložila izvozno dokumentacijo in izvleček iz glavne knjige strank v zvezi z domnevno nepovezanim uvoznikom.
The evidence received from the national customs authorities demonstrate that the final customer in the Union directly paid to Shinetime China the re-sale invoice that the allegedly unrelated importer referred to in recital (22) issued.
Dokazi, ki so jih predložili nacionalni carinski organi, kažejo, da je končna stranka v Uniji neposredno družbi Shinetime China plačala račun nadaljnje prodaje, ki ga je izdal domnevno nepovezani uvoznik iz uvodne izjave (22).
This (below MIP) payment to Shinetime China referenced the re-sale invoice number which the allegedly unrelated importer issued.
To plačilo družbi Shinetime China (nižje od minimalne uvozne cene) je bilo izvedeno s sklicem na račun nadaljnje prodaje, ki ga je izdal domnevno nepovezani uvoznik.
An extract from the customer ledger, without any further evidence to link the payment received from the allegedly unrelated importer to the transaction of the final customer in the Union is irrelevant, hence does not refute the evidence disclosed to Shinetime China.
Izvleček iz glavne knjige stranke ni relevanten brez dodatnih dokazov, ki bi plačilo domnevno nepovezanega uvoznika povezovali s transakcijo končne stranke v Uniji, zato ne ovrže dokazov, ki so bili predloženi družbi Shinetime China.
The argument on the possible prepayment by the allegedly unrelated importer is also irrelevant in this regard.
V tem oziru tudi ni relevantna trditev o morebitnem predplačilu s strani domnevno nepovezanega uvoznika.
Therefore, the Commission upholds its finding that Shinetime China breached the undertaking by selling below the MIP via an allegedly unrelated importer in the Union.
Zato Komisija potrjuje svojo ugotovitev, da je družba Shinetime China s prodajo pod minimalno uvozno ceno prek domnevno nepovezanega uvoznika kršila zavezo.
Sale below MIP by Shinetime Europe
Prodaja pod minimalno uvozno ceno s strani družbe Shinetime Europe
Shinetime China claimed that the documentation related to the transaction referred to in recital (24) was in line with the requirements of the undertaking and that it respected the MIP.
Družba Shinetime China je trdila, da je dokumentacija v zvezi s transakcijo iz uvodne izjave (24) skladna z zahtevami zaveze in da je bila minimalna uvozna cena upoštevana.
Shinetime China submitted the underlying export documentation and the customs declaration.
Družba Shinetime China je predložila pripadajočo izvozno dokumentacijo in carinsko deklaracijo.
The alleged compliance with the MIP on the basis of such documentation is irrelevant to the assessment whether the underlying payment transaction confirmed that the MIP was in fact respected.
Domnevna skladnost z minimalno uvozno ceno na podlagi take dokumentacije ne vpliva na presojo, ali osnovna finančna transakcija potrjuje, da je bila minimalna uvozna cena dejansko upoštevana.
Shinetime China also argued that the payment to Shinetime Europe was only a partial payment.
Družba Shinetime China je trdila tudi, da je bilo plačilo družbi Shinetime Europe le delno plačilo.
The balance, including a late payment interest, due to the cease of Shinetime Europe's business activity was paid to Shinetime China 10 months later.
Preostali znesek, vključno z zamudnimi obrestmi, je bil deset mesecev pozneje zaradi prenehanja poslovne dejavnosti družbe Shinetime Europe plačan družbi Shinetime China.
Shinetime China submitted the underlying confirmation of payment to substantiate its argument on partial payment.
Družba Shinetime China je v podporo svoji trditvi o delnem plačilu predložila potrdilo o plačilu.
The Commission cannot accept this argument for the following reasons.
Komisija te trditve ne more sprejeti iz naslednjih razlogov:
On the contrary, it contained reference to the re-sale invoice and corresponded to the re-sale invoice value not respecting the MIP.
Izplačilo preostalega zneska se ni zahtevalo skoraj deset dodatnih mesecev po dobavi.
Second, the delivery notice submitted by Shinetime China suggests that the solar modules were indeed delivered to the unrelated customer in the Union despite the non-respect of the payment term.
Tretjič, družba Shinetime China ni predložila nobenih dodatnih dokazov (npr. dogovora s stranko o domnevnem delnem plačilu ali bremepisa za zamudne obresti) v podporo svoji trditvi v zvezi z domnevnim delnim plačilom in zamudnimi obrestmi, temveč je samo potrdila plačilo teh zneskov.
The balance payment was not requested for almost ten additional months following the delivery.
Četrtič, Komisija ni bila obveščena o nobenem od domnevnih zahtevkov za plačilo, vključno z zahtevkom za plačilo zamudnih obresti.
Third, Shinetime China did not submit any further evidence (such as agreement with the customer on the alleged partial payment or debit note for late payment interest) to support its claim concerning the alleged partial payment and late payment interest, apart from the confirmation of payment for these amounts.
Zato Komisija meni, da so trditve družbe Shinetime China neutemeljene in potrjuje svojo ugotovitev, da je družba Shinetime Europe s prodajo pod minimalno uvozno ceno nepovezani stranki v Uniji kršila zavezo.
Finally, none of the alleged requests for payment, including the request for late payment interest were reported to the Commission.
Neporočanje
Therefore, the Commission considers the arguments of Shinetime China unfounded and upholds its conclusions that Shinetime Europe breached the undertaking by selling below the MIP to an unrelated customer in the Union.
Družba Shinetime China je trdila, da je družba Shinetime Europe zadevno četrtletno prodajno poročilo predložila z zamudo.
Non-reporting
Poleg tega je priznala, da Komisija ni bila obveščena o transakciji iz uvodne izjave (24).
Shinetime China claimed that Shinetime Europe submitted the relevant quarterly sales report late.
Družba Shinetime China ni spoštovala svoje obveznosti, da mora Komisijo obvestiti o prenehanju poslovne dejavnosti družbe Shinetime Europe, Komisija pa tudi poudarja, da obveznost poročanja zajema vse transakcije v danem četrtletju.
In addition, Shinetime China admitted that the transaction referred to in recital (24) was not reported to the Commission.
Družba Shinetime Europe ni sporočila transakcije iz uvodne izjave (24), ki je bila izvedena v četrtletju pred prenehanjem njene poslovne dejavnosti.
Set aside that Shinetime China has not respected its obligation to inform the Commission about the cease of the business activity of Shinetime Europe, the Commission points out that the reporting obligation covers all transactions in the given calendar quarter.
Komisija zato potrjuje svojo ugotovitev, da je družba Shinetime Europe kršila svojo obveznost poročanja na podlagi zaveze.
Shinetime Europe has failed to report the transaction referred to in recital (24) which took place in a quarter prior to the cease of its business activity.
Družba Shinetime China je trdila tudi, da pozna predložitev četrtletnega poročila ni zadosten razlog za razveljavitev transakcije iz uvodne izjave (24).
Therefore, the Commission upholds its conclusion that Shinetime Europe breached the reporting obligation under the undertaking.
Komisija poudarja, da so razlogi za razveljavitev zadevne transakcije pojasnjeni v uvodnih izjavah (24) in (27).
Shinetime China also claimed that the late submission of the quarterly report is not sufficient to invalidate the transaction referred to in recital (24).
Pozna predložitev četrtletnega poročila o prodaji, zlasti dejstvo, da zadevna transakcija ni bila sporočena, pomeni kršitev obveznosti poročanja na podlagi zaveze.
The Commission points out that the reasons to invalidate the given transaction are explained in recital (24) and (27).
Takšne kršitve so sicer zadosten razlog za umik zaveze za družbo Shinetime China, vendar se ne upoštevajo pri presoji v zvezi z razveljavitvijo zadevne transakcije.
The late submission of the quarterly sales report, in particular the fact that the transaction in question was not reported, are breaches of the reporting obligation under the undertaking.
H. UMIK ZAVEZE IN DOLOČITEV DOKONČNIH DAJATEV
Such breaches, although they constitute sufficient grounds for the withdrawal of Shinetime China from the undertaking, are not taken into account in the assessment concerning the invalidation of the given transaction.
Zato je Komisija v skladu s členom 8(9) osnovne protidampinške uredbe in členom 13(9) osnovne protisubvencijske uredbe ter tudi v skladu s pogoji zaveze sklenila, da se sprejetje zaveze za družbo Shinetime China in njeno povezano družbo v Uniji umakne.
H. WITHDRAWAL OF THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE UNDERTAKING AND IMPOSITIONS OF DEFINITIVE DUTIES
V skladu s členom 8(9) osnovne protidampinške uredbe in členom 13(9) osnovne protisubvencijske uredbe se dokončna protidampinška dajatev, uvedena s členom 1 Izvedbene uredbe (EU) št. 1238/2013, in dokončna izravnalna dajatev, uvedena s členom 1 Izvedbene uredbe (EU) št. 1239/2013, začneta samodejno uporabljati za uvoz zadevnih izdelkov s poreklom iz LRK ali ki je od tam poslan in ga proizvaja družba Shinetime China (dodatna oznaka TARIC B919) z dnem začetka veljavnosti te uredbe.
Therefore, in accordance with Article 8(9) of the basic anti-dumping Regulation, Article 13(9) of the basic anti-subsidy Regulation and also in accordance with the terms of the undertaking, the Commission has concluded that the acceptance of the undertaking for Shinetime China together with its related company in the Union shall be withdrawn.
V informativne namene so v tabeli v Prilogi k tej uredbi navedeni proizvajalci izvozniki, za katere se ohrani sprejetje zaveze z Izvedbenim sklepom 2013/707/EU –
Accordingly, pursuant to Article 8(9) of the basic anti-dumping Regulation and Article 13(9) of the basic anti-subsidy Regulation, the definitive anti-dumping duty imposed by Article 1 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1238/2013 and the definitive countervailing duty imposed by Article 1 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1239/2013 automatically apply to imports originating in or consigned from the PRC of the product concerned and produced by Shinetime China (TARIC additional code: B919) as of the day of entry into force of this Regulation.
SPREJELA NASLEDNJO UREDBO:
For information purposes the table in the Annex to this Regulation lists the exporting producers for whom the acceptance of the undertaking by Implementing Decision 2013/707/EU is not affected,
Člen 1
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Sprejetje zaveze se za družbo Zhejiang Xiongtai Photovoltaic Technology Co.
Article 1
Ltd in njeno povezano družbo v Uniji, ki sta skupaj zajeti z dodatno oznako TARIC B919, umakne.
Acceptance of the undertaking in relation to Zhejiang Xiongtai Photovoltaic Technology Co.
Člen 2
Ltd together with its related company in the Union, jointly covered by the TARIC additional code: B919 is hereby withdrawn.
Trgovinski račun št.
Article 2
XTSSG1501-004-CI, ki ga je 16. januarja 2015 družba Zhejiang Xiongtai Photovoltaic Technology Co.
The commercial invoice No XTSSG1501-004-CI, issued on 16 January 2015 by Zhejiang Xiongtai Photovoltaic Technology Co.
Ltd izdala družbi SHINETIME SOLAR GMBH, se razglasi za neveljavnega.
Ltd to SHINETIME SOLAR GMBH is declared invalid.
Nacionalnim carinskim organom se odreja, da izterjajo carinski dolg, ki je nastal ob sprejetju deklaracije za sprostitev v prosti promet, v skladu s členom 3(2)(b) Izvedbene Uredbe (EU) št. 1238/2013 in členom 2(2)(b) Izvedbene Uredbe (EU) št. 1239/2013.
National customs authorities are hereby directed to recover the customs debt incurred at the time of acceptance of the declaration for release into free circulation under Article 3(2)(b) of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1238/2013 and Article 2(2)(b) of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1239/2013.
Člen 3
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
V Bruslju, 28. junija 2016
Done at Brussels, 28 June 2016.
Za Komisijo
OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 51.
UL L 188, 18.7.2009, str. 93.
OJ L 188, 18.7.2009, p. 93.
UL L 152, 5.6.2013, str. 5.
OJ L 152, 5.6.2013, p. 5.
UL L 209, 3.8.2013, str. 26.
OJ L 209, 3.8.2013, p. 26.
UL L 209, 3.8.2013, str. 1.
OJ L 209, 3.8.2013, p. 1.
UL L 325, 5.12.2013, str. 1.
OJ L 325, 5.12.2013, p. 1.
UL L 325, 5.12.2013, str. 66.
OJ L 325, 5.12.2013, p. 66.
UL L 325, 5.12.2013, str. 214.
OJ L 325, 5.12.2013, p. 214.
UL L 270, 11.9.2014, str. 6.
OJ L 270, 11.9.2014, p. 6.
UL L 139, 5.6.2015, str. 30.
OJ L 139, 5.6.2015, p. 30.
UL L 218, 19.8.2015, str. 1.
OJ L 218, 19.8.2015, p. 1.
UL L 295, 12.11.2015, str. 23.
OJ L 295, 12.11.2015, p. 23.
UL C 405, 5.12.2015, str. 8.
OJ C 405, 5.12.2015, p. 8.
UL C 405, 5.12.2015, str. 20.
OJ C 405, 5.12.2015, p. 20.
UL C 405, 5.12.2015, str. 33.
OJ C 405, 5.12.2015, p. 33.
UL L 23, 29.1.2016, str. 23.
OJ L 23, 29.1.2016, p. 23.
UL L 37, 12.2.2016, str. 76.
OJ L 37, 12.2.2016, p. 76.
UL L 37, 12.2.2016, str. 56.
OJ L 37, 12.2.2016, p. 56.
UL L 269, 10.10.2013, str. 1.
OJ L 269, 10.10.2013, p. 1.
PRILOGA
ANNEX
Seznam družb
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1046
Izvedbena uredba Komisije (EU) 2016/1046
imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain molybdenum wires originating in the People's Republic of China following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009
o uvedbi dokončne protidampinške dajatve na uvoz nekaterih žic iz molibdena s poreklom iz Ljudske republike Kitajske po pregledu zaradi izteka ukrepa v skladu s členom 11(2) Uredbe (ES) št. 1225/2009
Following an anti-dumping investigation (‘the original investigation’) in accordance with Article 5 of the basic Regulation, the Council imposed a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain molybdenum wires originating in the People's Republic of China (‘the PRC’ or ‘country concerned’), by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 511/2010 [2] (the ‘original measures’).
Svet je po protidampinški preiskavi („prvotna preiskava“) v skladu s členom 5 osnovne uredbe z Izvedbeno uredbo Sveta (EU) št. 511/2010 [2] uvedel dokončno protidampinško dajatev („prvotni ukrepi“) na uvoz nekaterih žic iz molibdena s poreklom iz Ljudske republike Kitajske („LRK“ ali „zadevna država“).
The original measures took the form of an ad valorem duty rate of 64,3 %.
Prvotni ukrepi so bili v obliki stopnje dajatve ad valorem v višini 64,3 %.
In 2012 and 2013, following two anti-circumvention investigations, the original measures were first extended to imports of molybdenum wire consigned from Malaysia [3] and, secondly, to imports of molybdenum wire from the PRC containing by weight at least 97 % of molybdenum, of which the maximum cross-sectional dimension exceeds 1,35 mm but does not exceed 4,0 mm [4].
Po dveh preiskavah proti izogibanju so bili prvotni ukrepi leta 2012 najprej razširjeni na uvoz žice iz molibdena, dobavljene iz Malezije [3], leta 2013 pa na uvoz žice iz molibdena, ki vsebuje najmanj 97 mas. % molibdena, s prečnim prerezom več kot 1,35 mm, vendar največ 4,0 mm, iz LRK [4].
On 30 October 2015, following a third anti-circumvention investigation, the measures were extended to molybdenum wire containing by weight at least 97 % of molybdenum, with a maximum cross-sectional dimension that exceeds 4,0 mm but does not exceed 11,0 mm [5].
Po tretji preiskavi proti izogibanju so bili ukrepi 30. oktobra 2015 razširjeni na žico iz molibdena, ki vsebuje najmanj 97 mas. % molibdena, s prečnim prerezom več kot 4,0 mm, vendar največ 11,0 mm [5].
Following the publication of a notice of impending expiry [6] of the anti-dumping measures in force, the Commission received a request for the initiation of an expiry review of these measures pursuant to Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation.
Komisija je po objavi obvestila o bližnjem izteku [6] veljavnih protidampinških ukrepov prejela zahtevek za začetek pregleda zaradi izteka teh ukrepov v skladu s členom 11(2) osnovne uredbe.
The request was lodged by Plansee SE (‘the applicant’), the main Union producer of molybdenum wire, representing 90 % of total Union production.
Zahtevek je vložil glavni proizvajalec žice iz molibdena v Uniji Plansee SE („vložnik“), ki predstavlja 90 % celotne proizvodnje Unije.
On 12 June 2015, the Commission initiated an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation in order to determine whether the expiry of the measures would be likely to lead to a continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury.
Komisija je 12. junija 2015 začela pregled zaradi izteka ukrepa v skladu s členom 11(2) osnovne uredbe, da bi ugotovila, ali bi iztek veljavnosti ukrepov lahko privedel do nadaljevanja ali ponovitve dampinga in škode.
It published a notice in the Official Journal of the European Union [7] (‘Notice of Initiation’).
Obvestilo o začetku je objavila v Uradnem listu Evropske unije [7].
In addition, the Commission specifically informed the applicant, other known Union producers, exporting producers, importers and users in the Union known to be concerned, and the Chinese authorities of the initiation of the expiry review and invited them to participate.
Poleg tega je o začetku pregleda zaradi izteka ukrepa posebej obvestila vložnika, druge znane proizvajalce Unije, proizvajalce izvoznike, uvoznike in uporabnike v Uniji, za katere je znano, da jih to zadeva, in kitajske organe ter jih pozvala k sodelovanju.
To decide whether sampling was necessary and, if so, to select a sample, the Commission requested all unrelated importers to provide the information specified in the Notice of Initiation.
Da bi se Komisija lahko odločila, ali je vzorčenje potrebno, in da bi v tem primeru lahko izbrala vzorec, je vse nepovezane uvoznike pozvala, naj zagotovijo informacije, določene v obvestilu o začetku.
No importers came forward to provide the information requested in the Notice of Initiation.
Informacij, zahtevanih v obvestilu o začetku, ni predložil noben uvoznik.
In view of the apparent large number of exporting producers in the PRC, sampling was envisaged in the Notice of Initiation.
Glede na očitno veliko število proizvajalcev izvoznikov iz LRK je bilo v obvestilu o začetku predvideno vzorčenje.
To decide whether sampling was necessary and, if so, to select a sample, the Commission asked all exporting producers in the PRC to provide the information specified in the Notice of Initiation.
Da bi se Komisija lahko odločila, ali je vzorčenje potrebno, in da bi v tem primeru lahko izbrala vzorec, je vse proizvajalce izvoznike iz LRK pozvala, naj predložijo informacije, določene v obvestilu o začetku.