natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
making imports of electric bicycles originating in the People's Republic of China subject to registration
o obvezni registraciji uvoza električnih koles s poreklom iz Ljudske republike Kitajske
Having regard to Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Union (‘the basic anti-dumping Regulation’), and in particular Article 14(5) thereof,
ob upoštevanju Uredbe (EU) 2016/1036 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 8. junija 2016 o zaščiti proti dampinškemu uvozu iz držav, ki niso članice Evropske unije (v nadaljnjem besedilu: osnovna protidampinška uredba), in zlasti člena 14(5) Uredbe,
Having regard to Regulation (EU) 2016/1037 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on protection against subsidised imports from countries not members of the European Union (‘the basic anti-subsidy Regulation’), and in particular Article 24(5) thereof,
ob upoštevanju Uredbe (EU) 2016/1037 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 8. junija 2016 o zaščiti proti subvencioniranemu uvozu iz držav, ki niso članice Evropske unije (v nadaljnjem besedilu: osnovna protisubvencijska uredba), in zlasti člena 24(5) Uredbe,
On 20 October 2017, the European Commission (‘the Commission’) announced, by a notice published in the Official Journal of the European Union (‘the AD notice of initiation’), the initiation of an anti-dumping proceeding (‘the anti-dumping proceeding’) with regard to imports into the Union of electric bicycles originating in the People's Republic of China (‘PRC’) following a complaint lodged on 8 September 2017 by the European Bicycle Manufacturers Association (‘the complainant’ or ‘EBMA’) on behalf of producers representing more than 25 % of the total Union production of electric bicycles.
Evropska komisija (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Komisija) je po pritožbi, ki jo je 8. septembra 2017 vložilo Združenje evropskih proizvajalcev koles (v nadaljnjem besedilu: pritožnik ali EBMA) v imenu proizvajalcev, ki predstavljajo več kot 25 % celotne proizvodnje električnih koles v Uniji, 20. oktobra 2017 z obvestilom, objavljenim v Uradnem listu Evropske unije (v nadaljnjem besedilu: obvestilo o začetku protidampinškega postopka), napovedala začetek protidampinškega postopka (v nadaljnjem besedilu: protidampinški postopek) v zvezi z uvozom električnih koles s poreklom iz Ljudske republike Kitajske (v nadaljnjem besedilu: LRK) v Unijo.
On 21 December 2017, the Commission announced, by a notice published in the Official Journal of the European Union (‘the AS notice of initiation’), the initiation of an anti-subsidy proceeding (‘the anti-subsidy proceeding’) with regard to imports into the Union of electric bicycles originating in the PRC following a complaint lodged on 8 November 2017 by the complainant on behalf of producers representing more than 25 % of the total Union production of electric bicycles.
Komisija je po pritožbi, ki jo je 8. novembra 2017 vložil pritožnik v imenu proizvajalcev, ki predstavljajo več kot 25 % celotne proizvodnje električnih koles v Uniji, 21. decembra 2017 z obvestilom, objavljenim v Uradnem listu Evropske unije (v nadaljnjem besedilu: obvestilo o začetku protisubvencijskega postopka), napovedala začetek protisubvencijskega postopka (v nadaljnjem besedilu: protisubvencijski postopek) v zvezi z uvozom električnih koles s poreklom iz LRK v Unijo.
The product subject to registration (‘the product concerned’) for both proceedings is cycles, with pedal assistance, with an auxiliary electric motor, originating in the PRC, currently falling within CN codes 87116010 and ex87116090 (TARIC code 8711609010).
Izdelek, za katerega velja obvezna registracija (v nadaljnjem besedilu: zadevni izdelek) za oba postopka, so kolesa s pedali, s pomožnim električnim motorjem, s poreklom iz LRK, ki se trenutno uvrščajo pod oznaki KN 87116010 in ex87116090 (oznaka TARIC 8711609010).
These CN and TARIC codes are given for information only.
Te oznake KN in TARIC so zgolj informativne.
The complainant indicated in its complaints its intention to request registration.
Pritožnik je v svojih pritožbah navedel, da namerava zahtevati registracijo.
On 31 January 2018, the complainant submitted registration requests pursuant to Article 14(5) of the basic anti-dumping Regulation and Article 24(5) of the basic anti-subsidy Regulation.
31. januarja 2018 je vložil zahtevo za registracijo v skladu s členom 14(5) osnovne protidampinške uredbe in zahtevo v skladu s členom 24(5) osnovne protisubvencijske uredbe.
The complainant requested that imports of the product concerned be made subject to registration so that measures may subsequently be applied against those imports from the date of such registration, provided all conditions set out in the basic Regulations are met.
Pritožnik je za uvoz zadevnega izdelka zahteval uvedbo registracije, da se od datuma take registracije proti navedenemu uvozu lahko uporabijo ukrepi, pod pogojem, da so izpolnjeni vsi pogoji iz osnovnih uredb.
According to Article 14(5) of the basic anti-dumping Regulation and Article 24(5) of the basic anti-subsidy Regulation, the Commission may direct the customs authorities to take the appropriate steps to register imports, so that measures may subsequently be applied against those imports from the date of such registration, provided all conditions set out in the basic Regulations are met.
Komisija lahko v skladu s členom 14(5) osnovne protidampinške uredbe in členom 24(5) osnovne protisubvencijske uredbe carinskim organom odredi, naj sprejmejo ustrezne ukrepe za registracijo uvoza, da se od datuma take registracije proti navedenemu uvozu lahko uporabijo ukrepi, pod pogojem, da so izpolnjeni vsi pogoji iz osnovnih uredb.
Imports may be made subject to registration following a request from the Union industry, which contains sufficient evidence to justify such action.
Obvezna registracija uvoza se lahko uvede na podlagi zahteve industrije Unije, ki vsebuje zadostne dokaze, ki upravičujejo tak ukrep.
According to the complainant, registration is justified as the product concerned is being dumped and subsidised.
Po mnenju pritožnika je registracija upravičena, ker se zadevni izdelek uvaža po dampinških cenah in je subvencioniran.
Significant injury to the Union industry, is being caused by an acceleration of low-priced imports which will undermine the remedial effect of potential definitive duties by allowing stockpiling ahead of the 2018 selling season.
Industriji Unije povzroča znatno škodo povečanje uvoza po nizkih cenah, ki bo ogrozilo popravljalni učinek potencialnih dokončnih dajatev, ker bo dopuščalo kopičenje zalog pred prodajno sezono v letu 2018.
The Commission examined the request in the light of Article 10(4) of the basic anti-dumping Regulation and Article 16(4) of the basic anti-subsidy Regulation.
Komisija je proučila zahtevo v skladu s členom 10(4) osnovne protidampinške uredbe in členom 16(4) osnovne protisubvencijske uredbe.
With respect to the subsidy part of the request, the Commission verified whether there are critical circumstances where, for the subsidised product in question, injury which is difficult to repair is caused by massive imports in a relatively short period of a product benefitting from countervailable subsidies and whether it is deemed necessary to assess countervailing duties retroactively on those imports in order to preclude the recurrence of such injury.
V zvezi s subvencijo v zahtevi je Komisija preverila, ali obstajajo kritične okoliščine, v katerih se zadevnemu subvencioniranemu izdelku povzroča škoda, ki jo je težko odpraviti, zaradi velike količine v sorazmerno kratkem času uvoženega izdelka, ki ima korist od subvencij, proti katerim se lahko uvedejo izravnalni ukrepi, in ali je treba retroaktivno obračunati izravnalne dajatve za tak uvoz, da se prepreči ponovitev takšne škode.
As regards dumping, at this stage, the Commission has at its disposal sufficient evidence that imports of the product concerned from the PRC are being dumped.
Kar zadeva damping, so Komisiji na tej stopnji na voljo zadostni dokazi, da se zadevni izdelek iz LRK uvaža po dampinških cenah.
In particular, the complainant provided evidence on the normal value based on domestic prices and based on the choice of Switzerland according to Article 2(7) of the basic anti-dumping Regulation.
Pritožnik je zlasti predložil dokazila o normalni vrednosti, ki temelji na domačih cenah in na izbiri Švice v skladu s členom 2(7) osnovne protidampinške uredbe.
The evidence of dumping is based on a comparison of the normal value thus established with the export price (at ex-works level) of the product concerned when sold for export to the Union.
Dokaz o dampingu temelji na primerjavi tako izračunane normalne vrednosti z izvoznimi cenami (na ravni franko tovarna) zadevnega izdelka, ko je prodan za izvoz v Unijo.
As a whole, and given the extent of the alleged dumping margins ranging from 193 % to 430 %, this evidence provides sufficient support at this stage that the exporting producers practice dumping.
Skupaj in glede na domnevne stopnje dampinga v višini med 193 % in 430 % ta dokaz na tej stopnji zadostno kaže na to, da proizvajalci izvozniki izvajajo damping.
That information was contained in the notice of initiation for this proceeding published on 20 October 2017.
Te informacije so bile vključene v obvestilu o začetku tega postopka, objavljenem 20. oktobra 2017.
Giant, an exporting producer with a related importer, claimed that the initiation of an anti-dumping investigation was not sufficient to establish awareness of dumping.
Proizvajalec izvoznik Giant je skupaj s povezanim uvoznikom trdil, da začetek protidampinške preiskave ne zadostuje, da bi se ugotovilo zavedanje dampinga.
By its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union, the notice of initiation is a public document accessible to all importers.
To obvestilo o začetku postopka je z objavo v Uradnem listu Evropske unije postalo javni dokument, ki je dostopen vsem uvoznikom.
Furthermore, as interested parties in the investigation, importers have access to the non-confidential version of the complaint.
Poleg tega imajo uvozniki kot zainteresirane strani v preiskavi dostop do nezaupne različice pritožbe.
Therefore, the Commission considered that the importers were aware, or should have been aware, of the alleged dumping practices, the extent thereof and the alleged injury at the latest at that moment.
Zato je Komisija menila, da so bili uvozniki najpozneje v trenutku njegove objave seznanjeni ali bi morali biti seznanjeni z domnevnimi dampinškimi praksami, njihovim obsegom in domnevno škodo.
The same interested party claimed that an importer could not be expected to be aware of the application of Article 2(7) of the basic anti-dumping Regulation and even less able to anticipate the normal value against which Chinese export prices into the Union should be assessed.
Ista zainteresirana stran je trdila, da od uvoznika ni mogoče pričakovati, da bo seznanjen z uporabo člena 2(7) osnovne protidampinške uredbe, in še manj, da bo lahko predvidel normalno vrednost, s katero bi bilo treba primerjati kitajske izvoznih cene v Unijo.
The Commission noted that the application of Article 2(7) of the basic anti-dumping Regulation was mentioned in the complaint and also referred to it in the notice of initiation.
Komisija je navedla, da je bila uporaba člena 2(7) osnovne protidampinške uredbe omenjena v pritožbi in se je nanjo sklicevala tudi v obvestilu o začetku postopka.
The complaint also provided sufficient evidence of alledged injury showing a steep decline of the market share of the Union Industry from 42,5 % in 2014 to 28,6 % in the period used for the complaint, depressed and declining levels of profitability from 3,4 % of turnover in 2014 to 2,1 % in the period used for the complaint as well as underselling calculations ranging from 153 % to 206 %.
Pritožba je vsebovala tudi zadostne dokaze o domnevni škodi, ki kažejo strm upad tržnega deleža industrije Unije z 42,5 % leta 2014 na 28,6 % v obdobju, zajetem v pritožbi, ter znižano stopnjo dobičkonosnosti, ki je upadla z 3,4 % prihodka leta 2014 na 2,1 % v obdobju, zajetem v pritožbi, pa tudi izračune nelojalnega nižanja ciljnih cen v razponu od 153 % do 206 %.
The Commission thus concluded that the first criterion for registration was met with respect to the dumping part of the request.
Zato je Komisija je sklenila, da je prvi pogoj za registracijo v zvezi z dampinškim delom zahteve izpolnjen.
Eurostat data do not allow a full analysis of the evolution of imports of electric bicycles into the Union.
Podatki Eurostata ne omogočajo celovite analize razvoja uvoza električnih koles v Unijo.
Indeed, while the investigation period starts in October 2016, an estimated 99 % of imports of electric bicycles were classified until January 2017 under a CN code which covered other products.
Čeprav se obdobje preiskave začne oktobra 2016, je bilo po ocenah 99 % uvoza električnih koles do januarja 2017 uvrščenih pod oznako KN, ki zajema druge izdelke.
Based on submissions from interested parties and a reconciliation of statistics, the Commission considered that there is a delay of two months between exports from the PRC and imports into the Union.
Da bi določila količino uvoza med obdobjem preiskave (tj. med 1. oktobrom 2016 in 30. septembrom 2017), je torej uporabila kitajske podatke o izvozu za obdobje med avgustom 2016 in julijem 2017.
In its analysis, the Commission therefore considered that the Chinese customs' export data provided sufficient prima facie evidence of imports into the Union with a two-month delay for shipment.
Komisija je menila, da ti podatki zagotavljajo dokaze o znatnem povečanju uvoza.
The volume of exports from the PRC to the Union increased by 82 % in the period from November 2017 to February 2018 when compared to the period from November 2016 to February 2017.
Uvozniki trdijo, da uporabljene oznake KN niso bile navedene in bi lahko vključevale druge izdelke.
In addition, the average monthly volume of exports from the PRC to the Union in the period from November 2017 to February 2018 was 64 % higher than the average monthly volume of imports to the Union during the investigation period.
Pritožnik je Komisiji dal na voljo podrobne statistične podatke, ki jih je uporabil za utemeljitev svoje zahteve.
The Commission considered that these figures provided evidence of a substantial increase in imports.
Razkritje teh podatkov bi pomenilo kršitev avtorskih pravic.
Some unrelated importers and Giant claimed that the raw Chinese export data relied upon by the complainant to support its request for registration should be disclosed in the non-confidential file in order to ensure the reliability of the source and of the data supplied.
Vendar je pritožnik v nezaupni različici zahteve razkril zbirne podatke o izvozu po mesecih in po letih.
Importers claim that the codes used were not mentioned and could include other products.
Pritožnik je poleg tega navedel, da so bili vir kitajski carinski organi, navedel je uporabljene kode in pojasnil svojo metodologijo za izključitev drugih izdelkov, ki niso zadevni izdelek.
The complainant made available to the Commission the detailed statistics used to support its request.
Vir kot tak je bil znan in ob plačilu javno dostopen.
The disclosure of these data would breach copyrights.
Poleg tega je Eurostat v grobem potrdil te podatke za obdobje, za katero so na voljo.
However, the complainant made available in the non-confidential version of the request the aggregated export figures per month and per year.
Nobena druga zainteresirana stran ni predlagala alternativnih podatkov ali alternativne metodologije.
The complainant also indicated that the source was the Chinese customs, mentioned the codes used and explained its methodology to exclude other products than the product concerned.
V teh okoliščinah ter glede na raven razkritja zbirnih podatkov in metodologije v nezaupni dokumentaciji Komisija meni, da zadevna stran za uveljavljanje svojih pravic do obrambe ne potrebuje vhodnih podatkov.
As such, the source was known and public against payment.
Ta argument je bilo zato treba zavrniti.
Furthermore, these data were broadly corroborated by Eurostat for the period available.
Nekateri nepovezani uvozniki so poleg tega trdili, da kopičenje zalog ni bilo mogoče zaradi dolgih časovnih zamikov med izdelavo in dobavo.
No other interested party proposed alternative data or methodology.
V zvezi s tem je Komisija menila, da časovni zamik od izdelave električnega kolesa do njegove dejanske dobave ni preprečil možnosti kopičenja zalog že izdelanih električnih koles, zlasti ob upoštevanju informacij iz pritožbe glede neizkoriščenih zmogljivosti v LRK.
In these circumstances and given the level of disclosure of aggregated data and methodology on the non-confidential file, the Commission considers that the input data is not necessary for the party concerned to exercise their rights of defence.
Poleg tega so razpoložljivi statistični dokazi podprli trditev, da je prišlo do znatne porasti uvoza.
This argument had therefore to be rejected.
Argument je bil zato zavrnjen.
Some unrelated importers further argued that stockpiling was not possible due to long lead times between design and delivery.
Nekateri nepovezani uvozniki in Giant so zanikali, da je bilo povečanje kitajskega izvoza dokaz za nadaljnjo znatno rast uvoza, temveč so trdili, da je bilo odraz sezonske naravnanosti prodaje električnih koles.
In this regard, the Commission considered that the lead-time from designing an electric bicycle to actual delivery did not prevent the possibility of stockpiling an already designed electric bicycle, especially considering the information contained in the complaint concerning spare capacities in the PRC.
Komisija je menila, da na medletno primerjavo niso vplivali učinki sezonske naravnanosti in da je bila ta primerjava dokaz 82-odstotnega povečanja obsega uvoza po začetku postopka.
Furthermore, the available statistical evidence supported the claim that there was a substantial rise in imports.
Giant je zanikal, da je bilo povečanje uvoza znatno, in je trdil, da je bilo nižje od splošne rasti povpraševanja v Uniji po električnih kolesih ali v skladu z njo.
The argument was therefore rejected.
Na podlagi Eurostatovih podatkov o uvozu je izračunal, da se je mesečni uvoz električnih koles povečal za 8,7 % v obdobju med oktobrom 2017 in januarjem 2018.
Some unrelated importers and Giant denied that the increase in Chinese exports provided evidence of a further substantial rise in imports and claimed that it reflected the seasonality of the sales of electric bicycles.
Komisija ugotavlja, da je Giant trdil, da je bil čas pošiljanja med izvozom iz LRK in uvozom v Unijo „najmanj en ali dva meseca“.
Giant denied that the rise of imports was substantial and claimed that it was below or in line with the overall growth in Union demand for electric bicycles.
Poleg tega je bil povprečni mesečni obseg izvoza iz LRK v Unijo v obdobju med avgustom 2017 in februarjem 2018 za 36 % višji od povprečnega mesečnega obsega uvoza v Unijo v obdobju preiskave.
Giant quoted the publications of the Confederation of the European Bicycle Industry (‘CONEBI’) which estimated this growth to be 22,2 % in 2016 in comparison with 2015, and of EBMA, the complainant, which estimated the growth rate for 2017 at 23 % in comparison with 2016.
Ta stopnja rasti ne upošteva zelo obsežnega povečanja uvoza, do katerega je že prišlo v obdobju preiskave, in je vendarle precej nad stopnjo rasti povpraševanja na trgu Unije v letih 2016 in 2017.
Giant claimed that October 2017 was the proper starting point to assess the increase in imports.
Zato je Komisija sklenila, da je bil izpolnjen tudi drugi pogoj za registracijo v zvezi z dampinškim delom zahteve.
Giant calculated that based on Eurostat import data, monthly imports of electric bicycles had increased by 8,7 % between October 2017 and January 2018.
Ogrožanje popravljalnega učinka dajatve
The Commission notes that Giant submitted that the shipment time between exports from the PRC and imports into the Union was ‘at least one or two months’.
Komisija ima na voljo zadostne dokaze, da bi nadaljnje povečevanje uvoza iz LRK ob še naprej padajočih cenah povzročilo dodatno škodo.
As a result, the imports in October 2017 corresponded to the exports from the PRC made in August 2017, before the initiation of the investigation.
Kot je navedeno v uvodnih izjavah od (19) do (29), je dovolj dokazov o znatnem povečanju uvoza zadevnega izdelka.
In addition, the average monthly volume of exports from the PRC to the Union in the period from August 2017 to February 2018 was 36 % higher than the average monthly volume of imports to the Union during the investigation period.
Poleg tega obstajajo dokazi o trendu zniževanja uvoznih cen zadevnega izdelka.
This growth rate does not take into account the very significant increase of imports which had already occurred during the investigation period and is nevertheless well above the 2016 and 2017 growth rates in the Union market demand.
Povprečna cena v EUR za uvoz iz LRK v Unijo je bila dejansko za 8 % nižja v obdobju med novembrom 2017 in februarjem 2018 kot v obdobju med novembrom 2016 in februarjem 2017 ter za 7 % nižja v primerjavi z obdobjem preiskave.
Therefore, the Commission concluded that the second criterion for registration for the dumping part of the request was also met.
Dodatne okoliščine kažejo, da bi nadaljnja znatna rast uvoza verjetno resno ogrozila popravljalni učinek dajatev, ki bi se uporabile.
Undermining of the remedial effect of the duty
Dejansko je smiselno domnevati, da bi se lahko uvoz zadevnega izdelka še povečal pred uvedbo morebitnih začasnih ukrepov, saj bi ti nastopili najpozneje okrog 20. julija, kar bi sovpadalo s koncem prodajne sezone električnih koles v letu 2018.
The Commission has at its disposal sufficient evidence that additional injury would be caused by a continued rise in imports from the PRC at further decreasing prices.
Takšno nadaljnje povečanje uvoza po začetku postopka bo torej glede na časovni okvir, obseg in druge okoliščine (kot sta presežna zmogljivost v LRK in oblikovanje cen s strani kitajskih proizvajalcev izvoznikov) verjetno resno ogrozilo popravljalni učinek kakršne koli dokončne dajatve, razen če bi se taka dajatev uporabila retroaktivno.
As established in recitals (19) to (29), there is sufficient evidence of a substantial rise in imports of the product concerned.
Komisija je zato sklenila, da je bil izpolnjen tudi tretji pogoj za registracijo v zvezi z dampinškim delom zahteve.
In addition, there is evidence of a decreasing trend in the import prices of the product concerned.
Škoda, ki jo je težko odpraviti, je posledica velike količine v sorazmerno kratkem času uvoženega subvencioniranega izdelka
The average price in euros of imports from the PRC into the Union was indeed 8 % lower in the period from November 2017 to February 2018 than in the period from November 2016 to February 2017 and 7 % lower when compared to the investigation period.
Kar zadeva subvencioniranje, so Komisiji na voljo zadostni dokazi, da se zadevni izdelek iz LRK uvaža po subvencioniranih cenah.
Additional circumstances show that the further substantial rise in imports is likely to seriously undermine the remedial effect of the duties to be applied.
Domnevne subvencije med drugim zajemajo (i) neposredni prenos sredstev in obveznosti, kot so nepovratna sredstva, preferenčna posojila in usmerjeni krediti bank v državni lasti ter zasebnih bank, pa tudi izvozni krediti, jamstva in izvozna zavarovanja; (ii) opustitev ali neizterjavo prihodka vlade, kot je zmanjšanje in oprostitev davka na dohodek, znižanje uvoznih tarif, znižanje davčnega odtegljaja in oprostitev plačila ali povračilo DDV; in (iii) vladno zagotavljanje vhodnih materialov ter zemljišč in energije za nadomestilo, ki je nižje od primernega.