natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
From the information provided by the three sampled producers, it appears that eighteen financial institutions, namely the Agricultural Bank of China, Bank of China, Bank of Communication, China Development Bank, China Everbright Bank, China Trust Commercial Bank, Hua Xia Bank, Industrial Bank of China, Jiangnan Rural Commercial Bank, Ping An Bank, Rural Commercial Bank, Shanghai Pudong Development Bank and Xiantao Finance Bureau had provided loans to those sampled producers, in addition to EXIM, CCB, ICB, MEB and MiB.
fotonapetostni izdelki iz kristalnega silicija, ki so trajno vgrajeni v električne naprave, kadar funkcija električnih naprav ni proizvodnja električne energije in se te električne naprave napajajo z električno energijo, ki jo proizvedejo integrirane fotonapetostne celice iz kristalnega silicija,
Disclosure
moduli ali paneli z izhodno napetostjo, ki ne presega 50 V pri enosmernem toku, in izhodno močjo, ki ne presega 50 W, namenjeni izključno za neposredno uporabo za polnjenje baterij v sistemih z enakimi značilnostmi glede napetosti in moči.
On 20 December 2016, the Commission disclosed to all interested parties the essential facts and considerations on the basis of which it intends to maintain the countervailing measures in force and invited all interested parties to comment.
Podobni izdelek
The Commission considered the comments made by the interested parties and took them into account, where appropriate.
Tako kot v prvotni preiskavi imata izdelek, ki se pregleduje, in izdelek, ki ga v Uniji proizvaja in prodaja industrija Unije, enake osnovne fizikalne, kemijske in tehnične lastnosti ter enako osnovno končno uporabo.
Following disclosure, the Chinese Chamber of Commerce, Wacker, Solar Power Europe (‘SPE’) and Solar Alliance for Europe (‘SAFE’) requested and were granted a hearing with the Hearing Officer in trade proceedings.
Podobno ima izdelek, ki se proizvaja in prodaja na domačem trgu na Kitajskem ter izvaža v Unijo, enake osnovne fizične in tehnične lastnosti ter enako uporabnost.
After the Committee referred to in recital 790 delivered no opinion, the Commission disclosed its intention to reduce the period for which the measures would apply from 24 months to 18 months.
Zato se ti izdelki obravnavajo kot podobni izdelki v smislu člena 2(c) osnovne uredbe.
It invited the interested parties to comment on this aspect.
VERJETNOST NADALJEVANJA SUBVENCIONIRANJA
PRODUCT UNDER REVIEW AND LIKE PRODUCT
Komisija je v skladu s členom 18(1) in (2) osnovne uredbe proučila, ali obstaja verjetnost, da bi iztek obstoječih ukrepov povzročil nadaljevanje ali ponovitev subvencioniranja.
Product under review
Uvodne ugotovitve o delnem nesodelovanju kitajske vlade
The product under review is the same as in the investigation leading to the imposition of the existing measures (‘the original investigation’), i.e. crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules or panels and cells of the type used in crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules or panels (the cells have a thickness not exceeding 400 micrometres), originating in or consigned from the People's Republic of China (‘product under review’ or ‘product concerned’) and currently falling within CN codes ex85013100, ex85013200, ex85013300, ex85013400, ex85016120, ex85016180, ex85016200, ex85016300, ex85016400 and ex85414090 (TARIC codes 8501310081, 8501310089, 8501320041, 8501320049, 8501330061, 8501330069, 8501340041, 8501340049, 8501612041, 8501612049, 8501618041, 8501618049, 8501620061, 8501620069, 8501630041, 8501630049, 8501640041, 8501640049, 8541409021, 8541409029, 8541409031 and 8541409039), unless they are in transit in the sense of Article V GATT.
Komisija je kitajski vladi na njeno zahtevo odobrila precejšnje podaljšanje roka, tj. 14 dodatnih dni za izpolnitev vprašalnika, kar je pomenilo skupaj 50-dnevni rok za predložitev izpolnjenega vprašalnika.
The following product types are excluded from the definition of the product under review:
Po razkritju je kitajska vlada pripomnila, da glede na obseg vprašalnika 50 dni, ki so na voljo za njegovo izpolnitev, ne zadostuje.
solar chargers that consist of less than six cells, are portable and supply electricity to devices or charge batteries,
Kitajska vlada je navedla, da Komisija ni ravnala po najboljših močeh, saj je potrebovala 11 mesecev, da je ocenila informacije, ki jih je morala kitajska vlada posredovati v 50 dneh.
thin film photovoltaic products,
Kitajska vlada je tudi primerjala roke iz prvotne preiskave in drugih protisubvencijskih preiskav z roki iz tega pregleda zaradi izteka ukrepa.
crystalline silicon photovoltaic products that are permanently integrated into electrical goods, where the function of the electrical goods is other than power generation, and where these electrical goods consume the electricity generated by the integrated crystalline silicon photovoltaic cell(s),
Trdila je tudi, da je bil namen rokov iz pregleda zaradi izteka ukrepa, da se jo spravi v težak položaj in se ji prepreči, da bi sodelovala po svojih najboljših možnostih.
modules or panels with a output voltage not exceeding 50 V DC and a power output not exceeding 50 W solely for direct use as battery chargers in systems with the same voltage and power characteristics.
Komisija poudarja, da morajo imeti v skladu z osnovno uredbo zainteresirane strani za odgovor na vprašalnik na voljo vsaj 30 dni, Komisija pa za zaključek pregleda zaradi izteka ukrepa največ 15 mesecev.
Like product
Ti pravni roki so se spoštovali, kitajska vlada pa je imela na voljo 20 dni več od določenega najkrajšega roka.
As in the original investigation, the product under review as well as the product produced and sold in the Union by the Union industry have the same basic physical, chemical and technical characteristics as well as the same basic end uses.
Argument kitajska vlade je zato brezpredmeten.
Similarly, the product produced and sold on the domestic market in China and sold for export to the Union share the same basic physical and technical characteristics and uses.
Komisija je v dopisu o podaljšanju roka z dne 7. januarja 2016 kitajsko vlado opozorila, da mora izpolnjen vprašalnik zajemati subvencijske programe in ugodnosti za vse proizvajalce izvoznike izdelka, ki se pregleduje.
Therefore, they are considered as alike within the meaning of Article 2(c) of the basic Regulation.
Kitajska vlada je odgovorila z dopisom z dne 21. januarja 2016, v katerem je izrazila pomisleke glede obsega vprašalnika in Komisijo obvestila, da bodo podatki o posameznih družbah v izpolnjenem vprašalniku tako kot v prvotni preiskavi zajemali samo vzorčene proizvajalce izvoznike (skupine proizvajalcev izvoznikov).
LIKELIHOOD OF A CONTINUATION OF SUBSIDISATION
Komisija je z dopisom z dne 22. januarja 2016 izrazila nestrinjanje s stališčem kitajske vlade glede tega vprašanja in poudarila, da za razliko od prvotne preiskave večje število največjih proizvajalcev izvoznikov v Unijo, med katerimi so trije največji po obsegu izvoza izdelka, ki se pregleduje, ni sodelovalo v pregledu zaradi izteka ukrepov, zato je bila stopnja sodelovanja znatno nižja kot v prvotni preiskavi.
In accordance with Article 18(1) and 18(2) of the basic Regulation, the Commission examined whether the expiry of the existing measures would be likely to lead to a continuation or recurrence of subsidisation.
Če bi izpolnjen vprašalnik zajemal samo vzorčene skupine proizvajalcev izvoznikov, bi bile zato verjetno izpuščene pomembne informacije za ugotovitev o subvencioniranju.
Preliminary remarks on partial non-cooperation by the GOC
Kljub temu je Komisija v duhu dobrega sodelovanja v navedenem dopisu izjemoma privolila, da lahko kitajska vlada v izpolnjenem vprašalniku omeji podatke o posameznih družbah na deset največjih (skupin) proizvajalcev izvoznikov v OPP, ki so bili v dopisu poimensko navedeni in so vključevali tri vzorčene družbe, izrazila pa je tudi pripravljenost, da odobri še eno podaljšanje roka do 2. februarja 2016.
At the request of the GOC, the Commission granted a deadline extension of 14 days for the reply to the questionnaire which resulted in an overall period of 50 days for submitting the questionnaire response.
Ta pozna predložitev ni imela pravnih posledic.
Following disclosure, the GOC commented that considering the breadth of the questionnaire, the 50 days granted for completing the questionnaire response were inadequate.
V duhu dobrega sodelovanja je Komisija 19. julija 2016 poslala podroben predpreveritveni dopis.
The GOC stated that the Commission did not act to the best of its ability as it ‘granted itself 11 months to assess information that it required the GOC to provide in 50 days’.
Kitajska vlada je v odgovoru z dne 2. avgusta 2016 predlagala drugačen časovni načrt preveritev, vključno s spremembami trajanja preveritve določenih oddelkov.
The Commission notes that the basic Regulation stipulates that at least 30 days shall be granted to interested parties to submit a questionnaire response and 15 months at most for concluding an expiry review.
Po razkritju je kitajska vlada komentirala, da je iz navedenega razvidno, da je bila pri svojem sodelovanju prožna, Komisija pa ne.
The argument of the GOC is therefore inoperative.
Preveritveni obisk je potekal od 8. do 12. avgusta 2016 na podlagi urnika, ki ga je predlagala Komisija.
In its deadline extension letter dated 7 January 2016, the Commission reminded the GOC that the questionnaire reply should cover subsidy programs and benefits to all exporting producers of the product under review.
Nobena od bank iz uvodne izjave 29 ni predložila zahtevanih informacij v zvezi s fotonapetostno industrijo; trdile so, da jih zakonske zahteve in pogodbene klavzule zavezujejo k zaupnosti informacij o posojilih za posamezne družbe.
The GOC replied by letter on 21 January 2016 expressing concerns on the scope of the questionnaire and informing the Commission that the company-specific data in its questionnaire reply, as in the original investigation, would only cover the sampled (groups of) exporting producers.
Banke so Komisijo pozvale, naj se opre na informacije, ki so jih predložili vzorčeni proizvajalci izvozniki (skupine proizvajalcev izvoznikov).
The Commission, by letter of 22 January 2016, indicated its disagreement with the position of the GOC on this issue and pointed out that, unlike in the original investigation, several of the largest exporting producers, amongst which the three largest in terms of export volume of the product under review to the Union, did not co-operate in the expiry review, leading to a level of cooperation which was significantly lower than in the original investigation.
Komisija je v drugem pozivu k dopolnitvi kitajsko vlado pozvala, naj od desetih največjih (skupin) proizvajalcev izvoznikov izdelka, ki se pregleduje, zahteva, da banke pooblastijo za predložitev informacij o posameznih družbah Komisiji v okviru sedanje preiskave v zvezi s pregledom zaradi izteka ukrepov.
As a consequence, important information to establish the subsidy findings were likely to be omitted if the GOC's questionnaire reply were to cover only the sampled groups of exporting producers.
Kitajska vlada je navedla, da kitajskih proizvajalcev izvoznikov ne more zaprositi, prisiliti ali od njih zahtevati, naj sodelujejo v tej ali kateri koli drugi preiskavi.
Nevertheless the Commission, in the spirit of good cooperation, exceptionally accepted in that letter that the GOC could limit the company-specific data in its questionnaire reply to the ten largest (groups of) exporting producers in the RIP, listed by name in the letter and which included the three sampled companies, and it expressed its willingness to grant another deadline extension until 2 February 2016.
Vendar ta trditev nima povezave s pozivom Komisije.
The GOC submitted an incomplete reply to the questionnaire in three parts: the first on 26 January 2016, the second on 3 February 2016 and the third on 5 February 2016.
Kitajska vlada je nadalje navedla, da bi lahko Komisija od teh družb neposredno zahtevala, naj ji predložijo ustrezne informacije.
In the cover letter of the submission of 26 January 2016, the GOC expressed its wish to clarify the reasons for its incomplete questionnaire reply and re-iterated its position as regards the scope of the questionnaire reply being limited to the three sampled groups of exporting producers, which was also repeated throughout its questionnaire reply.
Komisija je res uporabila relevantne informacije, ki so jih posredovale tri vzorčene družbe.
Following disclosure, the GOC expressed dissatisfaction with the fact the Commission ‘is critical of the fact that the GOC provided information after 26 January 2016’.
Ker pa se je zahtevek za pooblastitev nanašal na informacije, ki jih imajo finančne institucije, zlasti ocene kreditnega tveganja, tri vzorčene družbe teh informacij niso mogle predložiti.
The Commission notes that the recital above is a factual account of the way in which the GOC submitted its questionnaire reply.
Po mnenju Komisije bi morala kitajska vlada olajšati potrebne stike med bankami in proizvajalci izvozniki, tako da bi banke lahko predložile zahtevane informacije.
No legal consequences have been drawn from that late reply.
Kitajska vlada je med preveritvenim obiskom trdila, da je od vzorčenih proizvajalcev izvoznikov zahtevala, naj relevantni dodatek k vprašalniku zanjo posredujejo finančnim institucijam, od katerih so prejeli posojila, kreditne linije in/ali kreditno zavarovanje.
The Commission sent deficiency letters to the GOC on 14 March 2016 (‘first deficiency letter’) and 14 July 2016 (‘second deficiency letter’), to which the GOC replied on 8 April 2016 and 22 July 2016.
Trdila je tudi, da je dodatek posredovala drugim finančnim institucijam, navedenim v spremnem dopisu k vprašalniku.
On 14 July 2016 the Commission sent the verification schedule to the GOC requesting the GOC to comment and to complete the missing logistical information.
Vendar med preveritvenim obiskom Komisiji na njeno zahtevo ni mogla predložiti ničesar, kar bi to dokazovalo.
In the spirit of good cooperation, the Commission sent a detailed pre-verification letter on 19 July 2016.
Po razkritju je kitajska vlada izrazila nezadovoljstvo z zgornjimi trditvami.
The GOC replied on 2 August 2016, proposing a different time structure for the verification including changes to the duration of some of the sections to be verified.
Komisija poudarja, da uvodna izjava 49 verodostojno povzema dogodke, kot so potekali.
This, as the Commission explained by reply on the same day, could not be accepted since the modified schedule no longer followed a logical flow.
Komisija si je med preveritvenim obiskom pri kitajski vladi prizadevala preveriti izpolnjeni vprašalnik in je zahtevala dokazila, na podlagi katerih je bil pripravljen odgovor kitajske vlade, v skladu z določbami členov 11 in 26 osnovne uredbe.
In addition, the Commission could not accept the changes made to the allocation of verification time to each of the sections.
Z nekaj izjemami ta dokazila niso bila na voljo, tudi če so se izrecno zahtevala.
Following disclosure, the GOC commented that the above showed that the GOC was flexible in its cooperation while the Commission was not.
Zaradi tega ni boli mogoče v celoti preveriti odgovorov iz vprašalnika.
The Commission would like to underline that the previous recital is a factual account on the exchanges prior to the verification visit.
Komisija je zato poleg standardnega seznama dokaznega gradiva pripravila tudi seznam dokumentov, ki so se zahtevali na kraju samem, vendar niso bili predloženi.
The verification visit took place from 8 August 2016 to 12 August 2016 based on the schedule proposed by the Commission.
Ko je bila preveritev zaključena, se je ta seznam pregledal s kitajsko vlado, ki ga je tako kot Komisija podpisala („seznam dokumentov, ki niso bili predloženi“).
None of the banks mentioned in recital 29 provided the requested information concerning the PV industry arguing that they were bound by legal requirements and contractual clauses as regards the confidentiality of company-specific loan information.
Seznam je za vsak element vseboval 28 elementov in pojasnil/pripomb.
The banks invited the Commission to rely on the information provided by the sampled (groups of) exporting producers.
Po razkritju je kitajska vlada navedla, da je mogoče seznam dokumentov, ki so bili zahtevani, vendar jih ni predložila, uvrstiti v eno od naslednjih štirih kategorij; „neobstoječi dokumenti“, „dokumenti v pripravi, ki niso bili uradno izdani“, „občutljiva in zaupna poročila o oceni kreditnega tveganja“ in „informacije, navedene v drugih predloženih dokumentih“.
In its second deficiency letter, the Commission invited the GOC to request the ten largest (groups of) exporting producers of the product under review to authorise the banks to provide company-specific information to the Commission in the framework of the current expiry review investigation.
Komisija opozarja, da je na seznamu dokumentov, ki niso bili predloženi, tudi „dokaz za liberalizacijo finančnih trgov (Ljudska banka Kitajske – People's Bank of China, PBOC), glede katerega je imela kitajska vlada očitno pomisleke v svojih pripombah po razkritju.
The GOC stated that it could not ask, force nor compel the Chinese exporting producers to cooperate in the present investigation or any other investigation.
Poleg tega je kitajska vlada trdila, da bi v primeru, da ne bi upoštevali dokumentov, ki spadajo v eno od zgoraj navedenih kategorij, seznam vseboval le majhno število dokumentov, ki so bili zahtevani, vendar jih ni predložila.
However, this statement does not relate to the Commission's invitation.
Komisija se s to trditvijo ni strinjala.
The GOC further indicated that the Commission could directly request these companies to provide the relevant information to the Commission.
Kar zadeva t. i. „neobstoječe dokumente“, je Komisija imela razlog, da jih zahteva, saj so bili omenjeni v drugih dokumentih, ki so bili predloženi med to in/ali prvotno preiskavo.
The Commission has indeed used the relevant information provided by the three sampled companies.
Kar zadeva „dokumente v pripravi, ki niso bili uradno izdani“, bi kitajska vlada nekatere od njih lahko predložila Komisiji po njihovem uradnem sprejetju, vendar jih ni.
However, since the request for authorization concerned information held by the financial institutions, in particular credit risk assessments, the three sampled companies could not provide all relevant information.
Za „občutljiva in zaupna poročila o oceni kreditnega tveganja“ osnovna uredba zagotavlja procesna jamstva, da se prepreči nadaljnje razširjanje takih informacij.
The Commission considers that it was the responsibility of the GOC to facilitate the necessary contacts between the banks and the exporting producers, so that the banks would have been able to provide the requested information.
Čeprav je Komisija sprejela informacije v „drugih dokumentih“, so taki dokumenti predstavljali le majhen del seznama.
The GOC claimed during the verification visit that it had requested the sampled exporting producers to forward the relevant Appendix to the questionnaire for the GOC to the financial institutions from which they had received loans, credit lines and/or credit insurance.
Po razkritju je kitajska vlada trdila tudi, da je Komisija uporabila razpoložljiva dejstva za nepredložitev „nekaterih dokumentov“, ne da bi te dokumente povezala z informacijami, ki jih je potrebovala.
The GOC also claimed to have forwarded the Appendix to the other financial institutions mentioned in the cover letter of the questionnaire.
Kitajska vlada je trdila, da je Komisija tako uporabila dejstva, ki so bila na voljo na podlagi neznane vsebine, kar ne bi bilo skladno z določbami STO.
When so asked during the verification visit, no trace of either of these actions could be shown to the Commission.
Komisija ugotavlja, da so bili razlogi za zahtevo za dokumente navedeni v vprašalniku, med preveritvenim obiskom, v dopisih Komisije kitajski vladi z dne 22. januarja 2016 in 23. septembra 2016 ter dokumentu o dokončnem razkritju.
Following disclosure, the GOC expressed its dissatisfaction on the above statements.
Komisija je po preveritvenem obisku na kraju samem, in sicer 23. septembra 2016, kitajsko vlado uradno obvestila, da proučuje možnost uporabe razpoložljivih dejstev namesto manjkajočih informacij, in jo seznanila s posledicami nesodelovanja v skladu s členom 28(1) in (6) osnovne uredbe.
The Commission notes that recital 49 sets out a factual account of the events as they happened.
Kitajska vlada je v dopisu z dne 13. oktobra 2016 nasprotovala možnosti, da bi Komisija uporabila določbe člena 28 osnovne uredbe, in trdila, da to ni pravno in dejansko utemeljeno.
During the verification visit to the GOC, the Commission endeavoured to verify the questionnaire reply and requested the supporting documents that were used to prepare it, in line with the provisions of Articles 11 and 26 of the basic Regulation.
Navedla je tudi, da dejstvo, da banke Komisiji niso predložile zahtevanih informacij, kaže, da kitajska vlada ne izvaja bistvenega nadzora nad njimi.
With few exceptions, those supporting documents, although and even where it was specifically requested, were not available.
Ponovno je navedla tudi prejšnja pojasnila, zakaj zahtevanih informacij ni bilo mogoče predložiti.
This did not allow a complete verification of the reply to the questionnaire.
Kitajska vlada je navedla, da Komisija ni pojasnila, zakaj informacije, ki jih je predložila kitajska vlada, niso zadostovale in zakaj so bile potrebne dodatne informacije.
As a consequence, the Commission, in addition to the standard list of exhibits, also compiled a list of documents that were requested on the spot, but were not provided.
Komisija je kitajski vladi pojasnila, zakaj so bile po njenem mnenju zahtevane informacije potrebne (glej uvodno izjavo 40 zgoraj).
At the end of the verification, this list was reviewed with the GOC and signed by the GOC and the Commission (‘list of documents not provided’).
Kitajska vlada je nadalje trdila, da je bil dopis Komisije o nameri, da uporabi razpoložljiva dejstva, izredno nejasen in nenatančen.
The list contained 28 items and explanations/comments for each item.
Kitajska vlada je v svojih pripombah po razkritju ponovno navedla, da je dopis Komisije vseboval izjemno skope informacije o razlogih za uporabo razpoložljivih dejstev.
Following disclosure, the GOC commented that the list of documents requested but not provided could be categorised into four types, namely allegedly ‘non-existent documents’, ‘documents under preparation and not officially issued’, ‘sensitive and confidential credit risk assessment reports’, and ‘information provided in other documents submitted’.
Komisija poudarja, da so bile pomanjkljivosti naštete glede na predmet, subvencijsko shemo in/ali subjekt (npr. finančni subjekti) in da je bil seznam dokumentov, ki niso bili predloženi, pripravljen sporazumno (glej uvodno izjavo 51).
The Commission notes that the list of documents not provided includes the item ‘Evidence for liberalisation of financial markets (People's Bank of China, “PBOC”)’, with which the GOC seemed to take issue in its comments after the disclosure.
Kitajska vlada je trdila, da ji Komisija ne more pripisati odgovornosti glede nesodelovanja proizvajalcev izvoznikov iz Kitajske, saj so te družbe neodvisne in kitajska vlada nima nadzora nad njimi.
Furthermore, the GOC argued that if eliminating the documents falling within one of the four above mentioned categories, the list would contain only a few documents that were requested but not provided.
O njih ni predložila nobenih informacij.
The Commission disagreed with that statement.
Komisija kitajski vladi ne pripisuje odgovornosti za nesodelovanje.
As to the so-called ‘non-existent’ documents, the Commission had reason to ask for them as they had been mentioned in other documents submitted previously during this and/or the original investigation.
Vendar je kitajska vlada odgovorna za svoje odgovore na vprašalnik, kar glede na zahtevane informacije o posameznih družbah zadeva samo tri vzorčene proizvajalce izvoznike.