natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Both the Panel and the Appellate Body shared the opinion that the Commission's determination that domestic prices of soybeans in Argentina were lower than international prices due to the Argentine export tax system was not, in itself, a sufficient basis for concluding that the producers' records did not reasonably reflect the costs of soybeans associated with the production and sale of biodiesel, or for disregarding the relevant costs in those records when constructing the normal value of biodiesel.
Odbor in pritožbeni organ sta menila, da ugotovitev Komisije, da so bile domače cene soje v Argentini nižje od mednarodnih cen zaradi argentinskega sistema izvoznih dajatev, sama po sebi ni pomenila zadostne podlage za sklep, da evidence proizvajalcev ne izražajo ustrezno stroškov soje, povezanih s proizvodnjo in prodajo biodizla, ali za neupoštevanje ustreznih stroškov iz navedenih evidenc pri konstruiranju normalne vrednosti biodizla.
This was done by adding to the adjusted production costs during the investigation period, the selling, general and administrative expenses incurred (‘SG&A’) and a reasonable profit margin.
EBB je med tem pregledom večkrat trdil, da poročili Komisiji ne preprečujeta, da pri konstruiranju normalne vrednosti prilagodi stroške surovin, če je prilagoditev ustrezno utemeljena.
As explained in recital 46 of the provisional Regulation, the Commission considered that the amount for profit could not be based on the actual data of the sampled companies in Argentina.
Trdil je, da bi bilo treba zaradi velikega učinka mehanizma diferenciranih izvoznih davkov na trg Unije in različnih pravnih možnosti, ki so se v teh poročilih obravnavale kot podlaga za tako prilagoditev, ukrepe zoper Argentino ohraniti na sedanji ravni, vendar zanje uporabiti drugačno logiko.
Therefore, the amount for profit used when constructing the normal value was determined under Article 2(6)(c) of the basic Regulation on the basis of the reasonable amount of profit that a young and innovative capital intensive industry of this type under normal conditions of competition in a free and open market could achieve, that is 15 % based on turnover.
EBB se je skliceval zlasti na navedbo iz poročila pritožbenega organa, da „ugotovitev organov EU, da so bile domače cene soje v Argentini nižje od mednarodnih cen zaradi argentinskega sistema izvoznih dajatev, sama po sebi ni pomenila zadostne podlage za sklep, da evidence proizvajalcev ne izražajo ustrezno stroškov soje“ (odstavek 6.55 poročila pritožbenega organa), ter trdil, da se je v poročilih STO ohranila možnost neupoštevanja stroškov surovin in prilagoditve teh stroškov, če bi bilo za njih ugotovljeno, da so nezanesljivi.
In several submissions made during this review, EBB claimed that the Reports do not preclude the Commission from making an adjustment to the raw material costs when constructing the normal value, provided it is adequately justified.
Po mnenju EBB sistem diferenciranih izvoznih davkov izkrivlja trg za surovine v smislu, da običajni pogoji ponudbe in povpraševanja niso več odločilni dejavniki za transakcijo, kar dejansko privede do tržno neutemeljenega prenosa vrednosti s proizvajalcev surovin na proizvajalce biodizla.
It claimed that given the dramatic impact on the Union market of the Differential Export Tax (DET) mechanism and the various legal possibilities contemplated by these reports as a basis for such an adjustment, the measures against Argentina should be kept at their current level, albeit based on a different reasoning.
To je po mnenju EBB podobno kot v primerih transakcij, ki niso opravljene po tržni ceni, in/ali„drugih praks“, ki lahko vplivajo na zanesljivost stroškov v evidencah proizvajalca izvoznika in ki so utemeljeni razlogi za neupoštevanje takih stroškov, čeprav dejansko nastanejo.
In particular EBB referred to the statement in the report of the Appellate Body that ‘the EU authorities’ determination that domestic prices of soybeans in Argentina were lower than international prices due to the Argentine export tax system was not, in itself, a sufficient basis for concluding that the producers' records did not reasonably reflect the costs of soybeans' (paragraph 6.55 of the Appellate Body report) and claimed that the WTO reports retained the possibility of disregarding raw material costs and adjusting these costs if such costs are found to be unreliable.
EBB se je v podporo svoji trditvi, da sistem diferenciranih izvoznih davkov izkrivlja trg za surovine, zanašal predvsem na analizo, ki so jo opravili njegovi lastni strokovnjaki, in študijo o meritvi izkrivljanja stroškov biodizla v Argentini zaradi diferenciranih izvoznih davkov na sojine izdelke („Heffleyjeva študija“), ki jo je sam naročil, pri čemer naj bi obe kazali na to, da sistem diferenciranih izvoznih davkov umetno in znatno znižuje domače cene zadevnih surovin, ki zato niso zanesljive.
According to EBB, the DET system distorts the market for raw materials to the extent that normal conditions of supply and demand are no longer determinant factors for a transaction and effectively causes a transfer of value from raw material producers to biodiesel producers that is deprived of market justifications.
V okviru Heffleyjeve študije so se v obdobju 2010–2016 zbirali podatki o stroških proizvodnje biodizla v Argentini in Združenih državah.
This is, according to EBB, similar to situations of non-arms-length transactions, and/or ‘other practices’ that could affect the reliability of the costs in the records of an exporting producer and which are justified reasons for disregarding such costs, albeit they are actually incurred.
Glede na študijo je razlog za to razliko v višini 27 % mogoče v celoti pripisati diferenciranim izvoznim davkom.
In support of its claim that the DET distorts the raw material market, EBB relies in particular on an analysis provided by its own experts as well as a study commissioned by them entitled ‘Measuring the Distortion to Biodiesel Costs in Argentina Caused by Differential Export Taxes on Soybean Products’ (the ‘Heffley study’), which allegedly both demonstrate that the differential export tax system artificially and significantly depresses domestic prices of the raw material in question and are thus not reliable.
Druga faza študije je vključevala primerjavo izvozne cene biodizla iz soje iz Argentine (brez določitve namembnega kraja) in povprečne tržne cene tega izdelka v Združenih državah.
It also provided a specific market analysis for October 2011 to September 2012.
To bi ustvarilo močno spodbudo za uvoz argentinskega biodizla.
It found that the cost of production for soybean biodiesel (SME) in Argentina was lower than the cost of production of the same product in the United States.
V okviru študije je bilo ugotovljeno, da to izkrivljanje izhaja neposredno iz diferenciranih izvoznih davkov.
This difference of 27 % was, in view of the study, ‘entirely due to the DET’.
EBB je poleg tega poudaril, da bi bilo popravljanje takih izkrivljanj očitno v skladu z logiko protidampinškega procesa.
In a second step, the study compared the export price of SME from Argentina (without specifying the destination) to the average market price for SME in the United States.
Trdil je, da bi bilo treba taka izkrivljanja popraviti z ustreznimi prilagoditvami stroškov, zlasti stroškov surovin, tako da bi bili na stopnji, na kateri bi bili, če izkrivljanj ne bi bilo.
The average Argentinian export price of 875 USD/MT was lower than the US domestic market price of 1198 USD/MT.
S tem bi naj Komisija ponovno ugotovila, kakšni bi bili na izvoznikovem trgu dejanski stroški proizvodnje in prodaje zadevnega izdelka v običajnih tržnih razmerah.
This would create a strong incentive for the importation of Argentine biodiesel.
Več proizvajalcev biodizla je nasprotovalo predlogu EBB, da Komisija ne bi smela upoštevati evidentiranih stroškov surovin, ker so bili ti stroški zaradi sistema diferenciranih izvoznih davkov nezanesljivi.
The study concludes that this distortion ‘stems directly’ from the DET.
Ponovno so poudarili, da sta odbor in pritožbeni organ izrecno zavrnila trditev, da je lahko sistem diferenciranih izvoznih davkov sam po sebi podlaga za neupoštevanje evidentiranih stroškov, ter da preiskovalni organ v nobenem primeru ne more zavrniti evidentiranih stroškov, če slednji točno in zanesljivo izražajo dejansko nastale stroške.
EBB further stressed that correcting such distortions would clearly be within the logic of the anti-dumping process.
Komisija je priznala, da pritožbeni organ ni izrecno izključil možnosti, da lahko preiskovalni organ v nekaterih posebnih okoliščinah odstopa od evidentiranih stroškov, če preiskava pokaže, da so bili stroški na primer ocenjeni previsoko ali prenizko ali da so transakcije, ki niso opravljene po tržni ceni, ali druge prakse vplivale na zanesljivost sporočenih stroškov (odstavek 6.41 poročila pritožbenega organa).
It claimed that such distortions should be corrected by making appropriate cost adjustments, in particular to raw material costs, so that they were at the level at which they would have been incurred if there had been no distortions.
Vendar je pritožbeni organ navedel tudi, da argentinski sistem izvoznih davkov sam po sebi ne pomeni zadostne podlage za sklep, da evidence proizvajalcev ne izražajo ustrezno stroškov surovin, povezanih s proizvodnjo in prodajo biodizla, ali za neupoštevanje ustreznih stroškov iz navedenih evidenc pri konstruiranju normalne vrednosti biodizla (odstavek 6.55 poročila pritožbenega organa).
In doing so, allegedly the Commission would be re-establishing what the real costs would actually be on the exporter's market for the production and sale of the relevant product under normal market conditions.
Trditve EBB temeljijo na predpostavki, da so stroški zadevnih surovin zaradi domnevnega izkrivljajočega učinka sistema diferenciranih izvoznih davkov nezanesljivi in se zato ne bi smeli upoštevati.
Several biodiesel producers contested EBB's proposition that the Commission should disregard the recorded costs for raw material on the basis that the DET system rendered those costs unreliable.
EBB vztraja pri tem, da so bile domače cene soje v Argentini nižje od mednarodnih cen zaradi argentinskega sistema izvoznih davkov.
They reiterated that the Panel and the Appellate Body specifically rejected the argument that the DET, in itself, could be a basis to disregard the recorded costs and that, in any event, an investigating authority cannot reject recorded costs when the records accurately and faithfully reflect the costs actually incurred.
Vendar bi bilo sprejetje te trditve enako priznanju, da je v nasprotju z ugotovitvami pritožbenega organa sistem diferenciranih izvoznih davkov sam po sebi povzročil take učinke, da se dejansko nastali in sporočeni stroški ne bi smeli upoštevati samo zato, ker so bili nižji od mednarodnih cen.
The Commission acknowledged that the Appellate Body did not preclude, per se, the possibility that an investigating authority could, in certain specific circumstances depart from recorded costs if the investigation would demonstrate that costs had been, e.g. over- or understated or whether non-arm length transactions or other practices had affected the reliability of the reported costs (para.
V zvezi s tem Komisija opozarja tudi na to, da je prvotna preiskava potrdila, da so dejansko nastali stroški surovin ustrezno in zanesljivo izraženi v evidencah družb.
6.41 of the Appellate Body report).
Komisija je zato zavrnila trditev EBB, saj njeno sprejetje ne bi bilo v skladu z ugotovitvami poročil.
However, the Appellate Body also stated that the Argentine export tax system was not, in itself, a sufficient basis for concluding that the producers' records did not reasonably reflect the costs of raw material associated with the production and sale of biodiesel, or for disregarding the relevant costs in those records when constructing the normal value of biodiesel (paragraph 6.55 of the Appellate Body report).
Zato je Komisija menila, da je treba za uskladitev ukrepov s poročiloma in STO konstruirati normalno vrednost na podlagi dejansko nastalih stroškov, kot so izraženi v evidencah zadevnih družb.
EBB's arguments rely on the premise that the alleged distortive effect of the DET system would make the cost for the raw material in question unreliable and should therefore be disregarded.
Po razkritju je EBB ponovil, da je sklep STO Komisiji omogočil, da v zadevnem primeru uporabi prilagoditev stroškov.
EBB sustains that the domestic prices of soybeans in Argentina were lower than international prices due to the Argentine export tax system.
Trdil je, da si je Komisija napačno razlagala sklep STO in trditev EBB.
However, accepting this argument would be tantamount to admit, contrary to Appellate Body findings, that the DET system, in itself, produced such effects that the costs actually incurred and reported in the company records should be disregarded, just because they were lower than international prices.
Po mnenju EBB Komisija ni upoštevala navedb iz poročil, da so bile domače cene soje v Argentini nižje od mednarodnih cen zaradi argentinskega sistema izvoznih davkov.
In this respect, the Commission further recalls that the original investigation confirmed that the actual costs incurred for raw materials were adequately and faithfully reflected in the companies' records.
EBB je trdil, da v sklepu v nasprotju s trditvijo Komisije ni navedeno, da bi bili izkrivljajoči učinki diferenciranih izvoznih davkov samo po sebi zadostna podlaga za prilagoditev stroškov.
The Commission therefore rejected EBB's claim since accepting it would not be in line with the findings of the Reports.
EBB je ponovil in poudaril tudi, da je dejstvo, da so bile cene na domačem trgu zaradi diferenciranih izvoznih davkov nezanesljive, zadostna podlaga za sklep, da evidence proizvajalcev niso ustrezno izražale stroškov soje, povezanih s proizvodnjo in prodajo biodizla.
Therefore, in order to bring the measures into conformity with the Reports and WTO consistent, the Commission found it necessary to construct the normal value on the basis of the actual costs incurred as reflected in the respective company's records.
Nezanesljivost domačih cen je omogočila, da se evidentirani stroški niso upoštevali, pri čemer je EBB Komisiji zagotovil vse potrebne informacije za prilagoditev stroškov.
Following disclosure, EBB repeated that the WTO ruling allowed the Commission to resort to a cost adjustment in the present case.
EBB je vztrajal pri tem, da sta odbor in pritožbeni organ trdila, da preiskovalni organi lahko preverijo zanesljivost stroškov, registriranih v evidencah proizvajalcev/izvoznikov, zlasti ali so bili zajeti vsi nastali stroški, ali so bili nastali stroški ocenjeni previsoko ali prenizko ter ali so transakcije, ki niso opravljene po tržni ceni, ali druge prakse vplivale na zanesljivost sporočenih stroškov.
It claimed that the Commission had misinterpreted the WTO ruling and EBB's argument.
Po mnenju EBB je bil učinek sistema diferenciranih izvoznih davkov podoben transakcijam, ki niso opravljene po tržni ceni, in/ali je pomenil drugo prakso, ki bi lahko vplivala na zanesljivost sporočenih stroškov [10].
In EBB's view, the Commission ignored the statements of the Reports that ‘domestic prices of soybeans in Argentina were lower than international prices due to the Argentine export tax system’.
Komisija je ponovno ocenila to trditev tudi glede na zaslišanje pred pooblaščencem za zaslišanje z dne 20. julija 2017.
EBB claimed that the ruling did not state, as claimed by the Commission, that the distorting effects of the DET would not, in itself, be a sufficient basis for making a cost adjustment.
Komisija je v uvodnih izjavah 51 do 55 navedla, da so bili dejansko nastali stroški surovin ustrezno in zanesljivo izraženi v evidencah argentinskih družb ter da se je predhodna prilagoditev stroškov izkazala za nezdružljivo z obveznostmi EU do STO.
EBB further repeated and stressed the fact that the prices on the domestic market were unreliable due to the DET was a sufficient basis for concluding that the producers' records did not reasonably reflect the costs of soybeans associated with the production and sale of biodiesel.
Komisija se ni strinjala z razlago EBB glede ugotovitev odbora in pritožbenega organa.
The unreliability of the domestic prices allowed to disregard the recorded costs and EBB had provided the Commission with all information necessary to adjust the costs.
Opomba 400 poročila odbora je na primer bolj podrobna v primerjavi s tem, kar je navedel EBB.
EBB insisted that the Panel and the Appellate Body had held that investigating authorities were free to examine the reliability of the costs registered in the records of the producers/exporters, in particular, whether all costs incurred were captured; whether the costs incurred had been over- or understated; and whether non-arms-length transactions or other practices affected the reliability of the reported costs.
Odbor je ugotovil, da pregled evidenc, ki izhaja iz „ustrezne izraženosti“ v členu 2.2.1.1, ne vključuje pregleda „ustreznosti“ samih sporočenih stroškov, če se ugotovi, da so dejanski stroški v evidencah proizvajalca ali izvoznika v sprejemljivih mejah točni in zanesljivi.
According to EBB, the effect of the DET system was similar to transactions that were not at arm's length and/or amounted to another practice that could affect ‘the reliability of the reported costs’ [10].
Vendar je EBB s trditvijo, da je bil učinek sistema diferenciranih izvoznih davkov podoben transakcijam, ki niso opravljene po tržni ceni, in/ali je pomenil drugo prakso, izpostavil prav tak pregled ustreznosti teh sporočenih stroškov.
The Commission reassessed this claim also in light of the hearing with the Hearing Officer of 20 July 2017.
Poleg tega učinki sistema diferenciranih izvoznih davkov niso bili (i) niti podobni transakcijam, ki niso opravljene po tržni ceni, (ii) niti niso pomenili druge prakse, ki bi lahko vplivala na zanesljivost stroškov v evidencah proizvajalca izvoznika.
The Commission put forward in recitals 51 to 55 that the actual costs incurred for raw materials were adequately and faithfully reflected in the Argentinian companies' records and that the previous cost adjustment made had been found incompatible with the EU's WTO obligations.
Ne glede na natančen obseg teh pojmov sta odbor in pritožbeni organ izrecno zavrnila osnovne trditve Komisije, da je bilo izkrivljanje cen, ki ga je povzročil argentinski sistem izvoznih davkov (DET), samo po sebi zadostna podlaga za zavrnitev stroškov v evidencah proizvajalca izvoznika [11].
The Commission did not share EBB's interpretation of the Panel and Appellate Body's findings.
EBB je po revidiranem razkritju vztrajal pri svojem stališču, da je Komisija napačno razlagala izjavo pritožbenega organa v odstavku 6.55 poročila in spregledala možnost iz odstavka 6.41 istega poročila glede preverjanja zanesljivosti evidentiranih stroškov surovin in neupoštevanja stroškov, če se ti izkažejo za nezanesljive, pri čemer je EBB v podporo svojemu stališču zagotovil nekatere dodatne argumente.
For example, footnote 400 of the Panel Report is more nuanced than what EBB's submission suggests.
Glede prve trditve je EBB izjavil, da pri izjavi pritožbenega organa v odstavku 6.55 „[…] ugotovitev organov EU, da so bile domače cene soje v Argentini nižje od mednarodnih cen zaradi argentinskega sistema izvoznih dajatev, sama po sebi ni pomenila zadostne podlage za sklep, da evidence proizvajalcev ne izražajo ustrezno stroškov soje, povezanih s proizvodnjo in prodajo biodizla, ali za neupoštevanje ustreznih stroškov iz navedenih evidenc pri konstruiranju normalne vrednosti biodizla“ ne gre za pravno presojo pritožbenega organa, kot trdi Komisija, temveč zgolj za navajanje ugotovitev Komisije v dokončni uredbi.
The Panel found that ‘the examination of the records that flows from the term ‘reasonably reflect’ in Article 2.2.1.1 does not involve an examination of the ‘reasonableness’ of the reported costs themselves, when the actual costs recorded in the records of the producer or exporter are otherwise found, within acceptable limits, to be accurate and faithful’.
EBB je nadalje trdil, da besedna zveza „sama po sebi ni pomenila zadostne podlage“ implicitno pomeni, da bi argentinski sistem izvoznih davkov lahko zagotovil zadostno osnovo za neupoštevanje stroškov, vendar da Komisija ni izvedla ustrezne analize.
Yet, by claiming that the effect of the DET system was similar to non-arms-length transactions and/or amounted to another practice, EBB precisely pointed in the direction for such examination of the reasonableness of these reported costs.
Poleg tega naj Komisija v svoji razlagi odstavka 6.55 prav tako ne bi upoštevala dejstva, da je pritožbeni organ menil, da je treba obravnavati tudi naknadno določitev referenčne vrednosti.
Moreover, the effects of the DET system were (i) neither similar to a non-arms-length transaction; (ii) nor amounted to such ‘other practice’ that could affect the reliability of the costs in the records of an exporting producer.
To ne bi bilo potrebno, če bi pritožbeni organ kategorično izključil možnost, da bi argentinski sistem izvoznih davkov lahko služil kot podlaga za prilagoditve stroškov.
Whatever the precise scope of these concepts, the Panel and the Appellate Body specifically rejected the Commission's basic arguments that the price distortion caused by the Argentine export tax system (DET) was, in itself, a sufficient basis to reject costs in the records of an exporting producer [11].
Komisija ni sprejela razlage, ki jo je predlagal EBB.
Following the revised disclosure, EBB maintained its position that the Commission had misinterpreted the Appellate Body's statement in paragraph 6.55 of its report and overlooked the possibility provided for in paragraph 6.41 of the same report to examine the reliability of the recorded raw material costs and disregard such costs if found unreliable and provided some additional arguments in support.
Prvič, pri izjavi pritožbenega organa v zgoraj navedenem odstavku 6.55 ne gre zgolj za navajanje ugotovitev Komisije.
With regard to the first claim EBB contended that the AB statement in paragraph 6.55 ‘…the EU authorities' determination that domestic prices of soybeans in Argentina were lower than international prices due to the Argentine export tax system was not, in itself, a sufficient basis for concluding that the producers' records did not reasonably reflect the costs of soybeans associated with the production and sale of biodiesel, or for disregarding those costs when constructing the normal value of biodiesel’ is not a legal assessment by the Appellate Body, as claimed by the Commission, but a mere quotation of the Commission's own conclusion in the definitive Regulation.
Nasprotno, izjava tvori sestavni del razlage člena 2.2.1.1 protidampinškega sporazuma STO, ki jo je pritožbeni organ podal v odstavku 6.56.
EBB further claimed that the wording ‘was not, in itself a sufficient basis’ implies that the Argentine export tax system could have provided a sufficient basis to disregard the costs but the Commission failed to carry out the necessary analysis.
Pritožbeni organ se je izrecno strinjal z odborom, da ta določba ni pomenila zadostne podlage za ugotovitev Komisije, da ne upošteva evidentiranih stroškov argentinskih proizvajalcev biodizla, saj so bile domače cene soje v Argentini zaradi argentinskega sistema izvoznih davkov nižje od mednarodnih cen.
Finally, the Commission's reading of paragraph 6.55 also disregarded the fact that the Appellate Body had found it necessary to also address the subsequent issue of a benchmark.
Pritožbeni organ je to oceno dobesedno ponovil v naslednjem odstavku 6.56 pod naslovom „Sklepi“.
This would not have been necessary if the Appellate Body had categorically ruled out that Argentine export tax system could form the basis for a cost adjustment.
Drugič, besedna zveza „sama po sebi ni pomenila zadostne podlage“ po razumevanju Komisije pomeni, da zgolj obstoj sistema izvoznih davkov ni bil zadostna podlaga za utemeljitev prilagoditve stroškov, kot je bilo to narejeno v prvotni preiskavi.