natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Interested parties were given the opportunity to make their views known in writing and to request a hearing within the time limit set out in the Notice of Initiation.
Po mnenju ene od strani, in sicer danskega združenja za akvakulturo (ki predstavlja pritožnika v prvotni preiskavi), niso bili izpolnjeni pogoji iz člena 19 osnovne uredbe.
Two interested parties made a submission to defend the necessity to maintain the measures in force.
Združenje je trdilo, da informacije v zahtevku niso bile popolne in niso točno prikazale subvencioniranja proizvajalcev postrvi v Turčiji ter da ni mogoče trditi, da so bile spremembe, ki jih je uvedla Turčija, „trajne“.
One of the parties, the Danish Aquaculture Association (representing the complainant in the original investigation) was of a view that the conditions of Article 19 of the basic Regulation were not fulfilled.
Tudi druga stran, in sicer špansko združenje za akvakulturo, se je zavzemala za ohranitev izravnalnih ukrepov, pri čemer je trdila, da so cene turškega uvoza nižje od cen proizvajalcev postrvi iz Unije.
It claimed that the information contained in the request was incomplete and provided an inaccurate picture of the subsidisation to trout producers in Turkey and that the changes introduced by Turkey could not be considered as having ‘a lasting nature’.
Vzorčenje proizvajalcev izvoznikov iz Turčije
The second party, a Spanish aquaculture association, also argued that the countervailing measures had to maintained, and argued that the prices of Turkish imports are below the prices of the Union trout producers.
Glede na veliko število proizvajalcev izvoznikov je Komisija v obvestilu o začetku navedla, da se bo morda odločila za vzorčenje proizvajalcev izvoznikov v skladu s členom 27 osnovne uredbe.
Sampling of exporting producers in Turkey
Da bi se Komisija lahko odločila, ali je vzorčenje potrebno, in da bi v tem primeru lahko izbrala vzorec, je vse znane proizvajalce izvoznike iz Turčije pozvala, naj zagotovijo informacije, določene v obvestilu o začetku.
In view of the large number of exporting producers, the Commission stated, in the Notice of Initiation, that it might sample exporting producers, in accordance with Article 27 of the basic Regulation.
Poleg tega je misijo Republike Turčije pri Evropski uniji pozvala, naj opredeli morebitne preostale proizvajalce izvoznike, ki bi bili zainteresirani za sodelovanje v preiskavi, in/ali vzpostavi stik z njimi.
In order to decide whether sampling was necessary and, if so, to select a sample, the Commission asked all known exporting producers in Turkey to provide the information specified in the Notice of Initiation.
Informacije, določene v obvestilu o začetku, so bile poslane skupaj več kot 70 družbam v Turčiji.
In addition, it asked the mission of the Republic of Turkey to the European Union to identify and/or contact other exporting producers, if any, that could be interested in participating in the investigation.
Od tega je 27 proizvajalcev izvoznikov predložilo zahtevane informacije in se strinjalo z vključitvijo v vzorec.
In total, the information specified in the Notice of Initiation was sent to more than seventy companies in Turkey.
Komisija je v skladu s členom 27(1) osnovne uredbe začasno izbrala vzorec petih proizvajalcev izvoznikov/skupin proizvajalcev, ki je vključeval tri proizvajalce izvoznike/skupine proizvajalcev z največjim obsegom izvoza v Unijo in dva manjša proizvajalca izvoznika/skupini proizvajalcev.
Twenty-seven exporting producers provided the requested information and agreed to be included in the sample.
Predlagani vzorec je štela za reprezentativnega.
In accordance with Article 27(1) of the basic Regulation, the Commission provisionally selected a sample of five exporting producers/groups of producers, which included three exporting producers/groups of producers with the largest volume of exports to the Union and two smaller exporting producers/groups of producers.
Komisija je zainteresirane strani pozvala, naj predložijo pripombe glede začasnega vzorca.
The Commission deemed the proposed sample representative.
Vključitev v vzorec sta zahtevali dve skupini proizvajalcev izvoznikov, tj. skupina KLC in skupina Sagun.
The Commission invited interested parties to comment on the provisional sample.
Glede na velik obseg izvoza skupine KLC se je Komisija odločila, da jo vključi v vzorec, da bi ustrezno proučila učinke spremenjene sheme na sektor.
Two groups of exporting producers, the KLC Group and the Sagun Group, requested to be included in the sample.
Vendar se je glede na omejen čas, ki je bil na voljo za preiskavo, odločila, da zavrne zahtevek skupine Sagun za vključitev v vzorec.
Given the large size of its exports, the Commission decided to add the KLC Group to the sample in order to duly examine the effects of the modified scheme on the sector.
Končni vzorec je bil tako sestavljen iz naslednjih proizvajalcev izvoznikov/skupin proizvajalcev izvoznikov in z njimi povezanih družb:
However, in view of the limited time available for the investigation, the Commission decided to refuse the request for the inclusion into the sample by the Group Sagun.
skupina ADA SU,
The final sample thus consisted of the following exporting producers/groups of exporting producers and their related companies:
skupina ALIMA,
ADA SU Group;
skupina GMS,
ALIMA Group;
skupina KLC,
KLC Group;
Končni vzorec je zajemal približno 71 % obsega uvoza izdelka, ki se pregleduje in ki se je v obdobju preiskave v zvezi s pregledom izvažal v Unijo.
Mittos Su Ürünleri;
Komisija je menila, da je vzorec reprezentativen in bi ji omogočil ustrezno analizo učinkov sprememb, ki jih je uvedla Turčija, na vse družbe v navedenem sektorju.
The final sample accounted for approximately 71 % of the volume of imports of the product under review exported to the Union during the review investigation period.
Vprašalniki in preveritveni obiski
The Commission considered that it was representative and would enable it to properly analyse effects of the changes by Turkey on all companies in that sector.
Komisija je zbrala in preverila vse informacije, ki so bile po njenem mnenju potrebne za oceno učinka spremembe izvajanja sheme neposrednih subvencij, ki jih je uvedla Turčija.
Questionnaires and verification visits
Vprašalnike je poslala šestim vzorčenim proizvajalcem izvoznikom/skupinam proizvajalcem in Turčiji.
The Commission sought and verified all the information deemed necessary to evaluate the impact of the change in the implementation of the direct subsidies scheme introduced by Turkey.
Izpolnjene vprašalnike je prejela od vseh teh strani.
The Commission sent questionnaires to the six sampled exporting producers/groups of producers, and to Turkey.
Komisija je izvedla preveritvene obiske v prostorih ene od vzorčenih skupin proizvajalcev izvoznikov, in sicer v skupini Alima.
Complete questionnaire replies were received from all those parties.
Preveritveni obisk je opravila tudi v prostorih turških organov.
The Commission carried out verifications at the premises of one of the sampled groups of exporting producers, namely the Alima Group.
Na podlagi sklepov v poglavju 4.3.4 se je Komisija odločila, da preostalih vzorčenih družb ne obišče.
The Commission also carried out a verification visit at the premises of the Turkish authorities.
Razkritje
In view of the conclusions reached in Chapter 4.3.4, the Commission decided not to visit the remaining sampled companies.
Komisija je 21. februarja 2018 vsem zainteresiranim stranem razkrila bistvena dejstva in premisleke preiskave ter jih povabila, da do 18. marca 2018 predložijo pisne pripombe in/ali zahtevajo zaslišanje s Komisijo in/ali pooblaščencem za zaslišanje v trgovskih postopkih.
Disclosure
Turčija, vložnik, štirje vzorčeni proizvajalci izvozniki in dansko združenje za akvakulturo so pripombe predložili po razkritju.
On 21 February 2018, the Commission disclosed to all interested parties the essential facts and considerations of the investigation and invited them to submit written comments, and/or to request a hearing with the Commission and/or the Hearing Officer in trade proceedings by 18 March 2018.
Zaslišanje med Komisijo, Turčijo in vložnikom je potekalo 23. marca 2018.
Turkey, the applicant, the four sampled exporting producers and the Danish Aquaculture Association submitted comments after disclosure.
Zaslišanje med Komisijo in danskim združenjem za akvakulturo je potekalo 16. aprila 2018.
A hearing between the Commission, Turkey and the applicant took place on 23 March 2018.
IZDELEK, KI SE PREGLEDUJE, IN PODOBNI IZDELEK
A hearing between the Commission and the Danish Aquaculture Association took place on 16 April 2018.
Izdelek, ki se pregleduje, je šarenka (Oncorhynchus mykiss):
PRODUCT UNDER REVIEW AND THE LIKE PRODUCT
žive mase 1,2 kg ali manj posamezno ali
The product under review is rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss):
sveža, ohlajena, zamrznjena in/ali dimljena:
live weighing 1,2 kg or less each, or
v obliki cele ribe (z glavo), s škrgami ali brez njih, z drobovjem ali brez njega, mase 1,2 kg ali manj posamezno, ali
fresh, chilled, frozen and/or smoked:
brez glave, s škrgami ali brez njih, z drobovjem ali brez njega, mase 1 kg ali manj posamezno, ali
in the form of whole fish (with heads on), whether or not gilled, whether or not gutted, weighing 1,2 kg or less each, or
v obliki filetov mase 400 g ali manj posamezno,
with heads off, whether or not gilled, whether or not gutted, weighing 1 kg or less each, or
s poreklom iz Turčije in trenutno uvrščena pod oznake KN ex03019190, ex03021180, ex03031490, ex03044290, ex03048290 in ex03054300 (oznake TARIC 0301919011, 0302118011, 0303149011, 0304429010, 0304829010 in 0305430011) (v nadaljnjem besedilu: izdelek, ki se pregleduje).
in the form of fillets weighing 400 g or less each,
Komisija je v prvotni preiskavi sklenila, da so izdelki, proizvedeni v Uniji, in izdelki, proizvedeni v Turčiji, podobni izdelki v smislu člena 2(c) osnovne uredbe.
originating in Turkey and currently falling within CN codes ex03019190, ex03021180, ex03031490, ex03044290, ex03048290 and ex03054300 (TARIC codes 0301919011, 0302118011, 0303149011, 0304429010, 0304829010 and 0305430011) (‘the product under review’).
SUBVENCIJE, PROTI KATERIM SO BILI V PRVOTNI PREISKAVI UVEDENI IZRAVNALNI UKREPI
The Commission concluded in the original investigation that the products produced in the Union and the products produced in Turkey are like products within the meaning of Article 2(c) of the basic Regulation.
Komisija je v prvotni preiskavi proučila številne ukrepe, od katerih so ali bi lahko imeli turški proizvajalci izvozniki postrvi koristi v obdobju prvotne preiskave (2013) (glej uvodno izjavo 37 Izvedbene uredbe Komisije (EU) št. 1195/2014 o uvedbi začasne izravnalne dajatve).
SUBSIDIES COUNTERVAILED IN THE ORIGINAL INVESTIGATION
Glavne subvencije, od katerih so v obdobju prvotne preiskave imeli koristi turški proizvajalci postrvi, so bile neposredne subvencije na kilogram, dodeljene vsem proizvajalcem postrvi, in sicer v višini od 7 % do 9,6 %.
In the original investigation, the Commission examined a number of measures from which the Turkish exporting producers of trout benefited or might have benefitted during the original investigation period (the year 2013) (see recital 37 of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1195/2014 imposing provisional countervailing duties).
Dve od družb, vzorčenih v prvotni preiskavi, sta imeli koristi tudi od subvencioniranih posojil.
The main subsidies from which the Turkish producers of trout benefited during the original investigation period were direct subsidies granted to all trout producers on a per kg basis, and ranging from 7 % to 9,6 %.
Subvencije v obliki subvencioniranih posojil so po ugotovitvah Komisije znašale 0,1 % za eno (Kilic) in 0,3 % za drugo družbo (Özpekler).
In addition, two of the companies sampled in the original investigation benefited from subsidised loans.
Komisija je ugotovila, da so bile v obdobju prvotne preiskave ugodnosti vseh drugih subvencijskih ukrepov v preiskavi zanemarljive ali jih sploh ni bilo.
The amount of subsidisation through subsidised loans found by the Commission was of 0,1 % for one of the companies (Kilic) and of 0,3 % for the second company (Özpekler).
Zato so ukrepi, uvedeni za proizvajalce postrvi, večinoma izravnali neposredne subvencije.
The Commission found that benefits of all the other investigated subsidy measures in the original investigation period were none or negligible.
V skladu z odlokom iz leta 2013 so bile subvencije dodeljene vsem proizvajalcem postrvi, ki so imeli veljavno dovoljenje za proizvodnjo, vezano na enoto za ribogojstvo.
In the original investigation period (the year 2013), direct subsidies to producers of trout were granted based on Decree No 2013/4463 of 7 March 2013 on agricultural subsidies in 2013 (‘decree of 2013’).
Proizvajalec postrvi ima lahko več dovoljenj za proizvodnjo (enot za ribogojstvo) v istem jezu ali istem morskem območju.
This decree related to trout produced in 2013.
V skladu z odlokom iz leta 2013 je bila proizvodnja v okviru vseh teh dovoljenj upravičena do subvencij v naslednjih omejenih vrednostih: proizvajalci postrvi so za vsako dovoljenje za proizvodnjo prejeli 0,65 turške lire (v nadaljnjem besedilu: TRL) na kg postrvi za proizvodnjo do 250 ton na leto, za proizvodnjo v obsegu od 251 do 500 ton so prejeli polovico tega zneska (tj. 0,325 TRL/kg), za proizvodnjo nad 500 ton pa niso prejeli nobene subvencije.
Under the decree of 2013, subsidies were granted to all producers of trout possessing a valid production licence relating to a fish farming unit.
REZULTATI PREISKAVE
A production licence could relate to a production in the sea, in a dam, or to a production situated inland.
Splošne informacije
A trout producer could have several production licences (fish farming units) situated in the same dam or in the same area in the sea.
Subvencije za proizvodnjo postrvi so urejene z odlokom, ki ga turška vlada sprejme vsako leto.
Under the decree of 2013, production under each of these licences was eligible for subsidies up to the following limits: for each of its production licence, the producers of trout received 0,65 Turkish Lira (‘TL’) per kg of trout for the production up to 250 tonnes a year; for the production from 251 to 500 tonnes, trout producers received half of the amount (0,325 TL/kg); and no subsidy was received for the production above 500 tonnes.
V tem odloku so navedeni osnovni pogoji in zneski subvencij za proizvodnjo akvakulture v Turčiji.
THE RESULTS OF THE INVESTIGATION
Postopki in načela v zvezi z izvajanjem odloka se nato dodatno določijo s sporočili, ki jih vsako leto izda turško ministrstvo za prehrano, kmetijstvo in živinorejo.
General information
Ker je obdobje preiskave v zvezi s pregledom zajemalo drugo polovico leta 2016 in prvo polovico leta 2017, je Komisija najprej proučila zneske in pogoje subvencij, ki so bile ali naj bi bile dodeljene proizvajalcem postrvi v letih 2016 in 2017 (glej poglavje 4.2).
Subsidies to trout production are regulated by a decree adopted by the Turkish Government on an annual basis.
Analizirala je tudi splošno gibanje zneskov subvencij, ki jih je Turčija dodelila od prvotne preiskave do zadevnega dne (glej poglavje 4.3).
The decree provides for basic conditions and subsidy amounts to aquaculture production in Turkey.
Nato je proučila, ali se je raven subvencioniranja znatno spremenila in ali je mogoče trditi, da je bila sprememba trajna (glej poglavje 4.4).
The procedures and principles regarding the implementation of the decree are then further determined by communiqués issued by the Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock every year.
Subvencije, dodeljene za proizvodnjo postrvi v letih 2016 in 2017
Since the review investigation period covered the second half of 2016 and the first half of 2017, the Commission first looked at the amounts and conditions of subsidies given or to be given to trout producers in 2016 and 2017 (see Chapter 4.2).
Subvencije za proizvodnjo postrvi leta 2016
Second, the Commission analysed the overall evolution of the amounts of subsidies granted by Turkey since the original investigation till to date (see Chapter 4.3).
Leta 2016 so bile proizvajalcem postrvi dodeljene subvencije na podlagi odloka št. 2016/8791 o podpornih ukrepih za kmetijstvo leta 2016 (v nadaljnjem besedilu: odlok iz leta 2016).
Third, the Commission assessed whether there was a substantial change in the level of the subsidisation and whether the change could be considered as being of a lasting nature (see Chapter 4.4).
Poleg tega so bili v sporočilu št. 2016/33 o podpori akvakulturi podrobneje opredeljeni pogoji za dodelitev subvencij.
Subsidies granted to trout production in 2016 and in 2017
Znesek subvencij v TRL/kg je ostal na ravneh iz leta 2013, z novim členom 4.16 pa so bile iz subvencij izključene ribogojnice z dovoljenji „v istem potencialnem območju, ki ga določi ministrstvo, istem jezu zbiralniku ali regionaliziranem jezu zbiralniku v isti coni“.
Subsidies to trout production in 2016
V skladu z navedenim členom in v nasprotju z razmerami v obdobju prvotne preiskave je veljalo, da če je imel proizvajalec postrvi več kot eno dovoljenje za proizvodnjo (ali enoto za ribogojstvo) v isti potencialni morski coni, ki jo je določilo ministrstvo, istem zbiralniku (jezu) ali istih zbiralnikih v istih regijah, ki so pripadali isti osebi ali istemu podjetju/družbi, so se ta dovoljenja ali enote za ribogojstvo obravnavale kot eno dovoljenje ali enota, ki pripada zadevni družbi, neposredne subvencije pa so se morale izplačevati v skladu s to razlago.
In 2016, subsidies to producers of trout were granted on the basis of Decree No 2016/8791 regarding the agricultural supports to be provided in 2016 (‘decree of 2016’).
Vložnik je trdil, da se je zaradi tega člena zmanjšal obseg proizvodnje, za katerega je bilo mogoče pridobiti subvencije, zaradi tega pa so se močno znižale subvencije, ki so jih prejeli proizvajalci postrvi.
Furthermore, Communiqué No 2016/33 regarding aquaculture support detailed conditions of the subsidies to be granted.
Vendar je Komisija ugotovila, da je imel ta pogoj dve omejitvi.
Whilst the amount of subsidisation per TL/kg remained at the 2013 levels, a new Article 4.16 excluded from the subsidy farms with licences that were ‘situated in the same potential area determined by the Ministry, in the same dam reservoir or in the regionalised dam reservoir located in the same zone’.
Prvič, preiskava je pokazala, da se je v skladu z informacijami, ki jih je predložila Turčija, omejitev iz člena 4.16 odloka iz leta 2016 nanašala le na proizvodnjo postrvi v jezovih zbiralnikih ali morju, ne pa na proizvodnjo na kopnem, ki je po informacijah Turčije zajemala približno 20 % celotne proizvodnje postrvi.
Pursuant to that Article and contrary to the situation during the original investigation period, in the case where a trout producer had more than one production licence (or ‘fish farming unit’) in the same potential zone in the sea, as defined by the Ministry, in the same reservoir (dam), or in the same reservoirs located in the same regions, which belonged to the same person or the same enterprise/company, those licences or fish farming units were regarded as one single licence or unit belonging to that company, and the direct subsidy was to be paid according to that interpretation.
Turčija je po razkritju tudi potrdila, da na kopnem (ribogojnice) poteka 65 % celotne proizvodnje, medtem ko v jezovih zbiralnikih ali morju poteka le 35 % proizvodnje.
The applicant argued that because of this Article, the volume of production eligible for the subsidies decreased and resulted in a significant decrease of subsidies received by trout producers.
Glede na to omejitev iz člena 4.16 odloka iz leta 2016 ni vplivala niti na 20 % celotne proizvodnje postrvi niti na 65 % proizvodnje v ribogojnicah.
However, the Commission observed that this condition had two limitations.
To je na primer veljalo za eno od vzorčenih družb, tj. družbo Mittos, ki je na kopnem imela lastno ribogojnico.
First, the investigation showed that, according to the information provided by Turkey, the limitation provided for in Article 4.16 of the decree of 2016 only related trout production situated in dam reservoirs or in the sea, but not to the land production, which represented according to the information provided by Turkey around 20 % of all the trout production.
Poleg tega je ena od vzorčenih skupin družb, tj. skupina Özpekler, imela ribogojnice v različnih jezovih zbiralnikih.
After disclosure, Turkey also confirmed that 65 % of the total production facilities (farms) are situated inland and only 35 % of production facilities (farms) are situated in dam reservoirs or in the sea.
Posledično so bile te družbe/skupine družb na podlagi informacij, ki so jih predložile, upravičene do subvencij za isto število dovoljenj za proizvodnjo (šest v prvem primeru in tri v drugem primeru) tako v letu 2015 (pred zakonodajno spremembo) kot tudi v letu 2016 (ko je nova zakonodaja že veljala).
Accordingly, the limitation provided for in Article 4.16 of the decree of 2016 did not have any impact on 20 % of the trout production, nor on 65 % of production facilities or farms.
Zato sprememba zakonodaje ni znatno vplivala na navedeni družbi.
This was for instance the case for one of the sampled companies, Mittos, which had its own trout farm situated inland.
Drugič, omejitev se je uporabljala za posamezni pravni subjekt, kar je pomenilo, da bi lahko v primeru skupine, sestavljene iz povezanih družb, vsaka družba zaprosila za subvencije v okviru omejitev, določenih v odloku.
Also, another sampled group of companies, the Özpekler group, had farms situated in different dam reservoirs.
To je pomenilo, da če je bila skupina družb sestavljena iz različnih pravnih subjektov, ki imajo ribogojnice (dovoljenja) v isti coni, bi lahko bila do ločenih subvencij upravičena vsaka družba v skupini, tudi če bi imela ribogojnice v isti coni kot druga povezana družba.
Consequently, according to the information provided by these companies/groups of companies (and verified at Government level), both were eligible to receive subsidies for the same number of production licences (six in one case, and three in the other case) in 2015 (before the legislative change) and in 2016 (when the new legislation was already in force).
Turčija je potrdila, da je to veljalo za eno od vzorčenih skupin, tj. skupino Alima.
Therefore, the legislative change did not have any significant impact on those companies.
Do subvencij sta bili upravičeni obe povezani družbi v tej skupini, čeprav sta bili njuni ribogojnici v isti coni.
Second, the limitation applied per legal entity that is in the case of a group composed of related companies, each of the company could apply for subsidies up to the limits set in the decree.
Zaradi teh posebnosti skupni učinek omejitve ni znatno zmanjšal števila prejemnikov.
This meant that if a group of companies was composed of different legal entities having their production farms (licences) in the same zone, each company of the group could benefit from the subsidies on a separate basis even if it had farms in the same zone with its other related company.
Poleg zakonodajne spremembe, uvedene s členom 4.16 odloka iz leta 2016, je Turčija z istim odlokom 1. januarja 2016 uvedla tudi novo neposredno subvencijo za proizvodnjo v zaprtih sistemih.
Turkey confirmed that this was the case of one of the sampled group, Alima Group.
V členu 4.16 odloka je bilo določeno, da je cilj „čim bolj izkoristiti vodne vire, ki so na voljo v državi, da bi se zagotovilo gojenje proizvodov akvakulture in različnih vrst na lokacijah z omejenim dostopom do vode“.
Because of these features, the overall impact of the limitation did not reduce the number of recipients significantly.
Subvencija je znašala 0,5 TRL na kg rib, proizvedenih v tem sistemu, ne glede na vrsto proizvedenih rib.
According to the information provided by Turkey, the number of farm licences eligible for the direct subsidy decreased from 947 farm licences in 2015 to 837 farm licences in 2016, and to 817 in 2017.
Subvencije, ki naj bi se dodelile za proizvodnjo postrvi leta 2017