神马作文网翻译一段文章（拒绝机翻）,汉译英
来源：学生作业帮 编辑：神马作文网作业帮 分类：英语作业 时间：2024/11/12 01:05:35
翻译一段文章（拒绝机翻）,汉译英
（不必一字一句的翻译,不过越全愈好）专家小组的结论和建议：
1．专家小组的结论是：
①巴西对国产飞机出口给予的PROEX利率平衡补贴是《反补贴协议》第1条里所内涵的补贴,补贴视该协议第3条第1款（a）里所规定的出口实绩而定.
②巴西PROEX对国产飞机出口给予的利率平衡补贴不是《反补贴协议》附录一出口补贴说明一览表K项第一段里所内涵的“许可”补贴.
③巴西没有遵循《反补贴协议》第27条第4款行事,因此该协议第3条第1款（a）关于“被禁止的补贴”适用于巴西.
专家小组因此认为,巴西根据PROEX计划对国产飞机出口给予利率平衡补贴是一种出口补贴,这与《反补贴协议》第3条是不一致的.
按照《谅解》第3条第8款,上述PROEX利率平衡补贴损害了加拿大的利益,对此,巴西没有驳回.
2．专家小组的建议：
加拿大要求专家小组就调查结果的落实作出具体的建议.然而专家小组认为要根据《反补贴协议》第4条第7款作出建议,而不是其他.因此专家小组建议巴西立即撤销上面提及的补贴.
《反补贴协议》第4条第7款规定“专家小组在其建议中应指定一个必须撤销补贴的时间期限,如果该补贴被认定是一种被禁止的补贴”.在专家小组指定“立即”撤销补贴的时间期限时,可能会考虑补贴的性质以及执行建议的困难.然而专家小组在实际指定“撤销”补贴采取步骤方面缺乏经验,专家小组不会考虑去命令巴西在执行专家小组的建议时要采取什么步骤.因此,专家小组一方面考虑到补贴的性质以及对于巴西在执行建议时会采取什么程序；另一方面要求巴西“立即”撤销补贴,最后断定巴西应在90日内撤销.
（不必一字一句的翻译,不过越全愈好）专家小组的结论和建议：
1．专家小组的结论是：
①巴西对国产飞机出口给予的PROEX利率平衡补贴是《反补贴协议》第1条里所内涵的补贴,补贴视该协议第3条第1款（a）里所规定的出口实绩而定.
②巴西PROEX对国产飞机出口给予的利率平衡补贴不是《反补贴协议》附录一出口补贴说明一览表K项第一段里所内涵的“许可”补贴.
③巴西没有遵循《反补贴协议》第27条第4款行事,因此该协议第3条第1款（a）关于“被禁止的补贴”适用于巴西.
专家小组因此认为,巴西根据PROEX计划对国产飞机出口给予利率平衡补贴是一种出口补贴,这与《反补贴协议》第3条是不一致的.
按照《谅解》第3条第8款,上述PROEX利率平衡补贴损害了加拿大的利益,对此,巴西没有驳回.
2．专家小组的建议：
加拿大要求专家小组就调查结果的落实作出具体的建议.然而专家小组认为要根据《反补贴协议》第4条第7款作出建议,而不是其他.因此专家小组建议巴西立即撤销上面提及的补贴.
《反补贴协议》第4条第7款规定“专家小组在其建议中应指定一个必须撤销补贴的时间期限,如果该补贴被认定是一种被禁止的补贴”.在专家小组指定“立即”撤销补贴的时间期限时,可能会考虑补贴的性质以及执行建议的困难.然而专家小组在实际指定“撤销”补贴采取步骤方面缺乏经验,专家小组不会考虑去命令巴西在执行专家小组的建议时要采取什么步骤.因此,专家小组一方面考虑到补贴的性质以及对于巴西在执行建议时会采取什么程序；另一方面要求巴西“立即”撤销补贴,最后断定巴西应在90日内撤销.
A.The Conclusions of the Panel of Experts are:
1.The PROEX equilibrium rate of interest subsidy provided by Brazil to the export of local manufactured airplanes is similar to the subsidy referred to in Article 1 of the ‘Anti-subsidy Agreement’; the rate of subsidy is based on the actual export amount specified in Article 3 Clause 1(a) of the said Agreement.
2.The equilibrium rate of interest subsidy provided by Brazil PROEX to the export of local manufactured airplanes is not the ‘permissible’ subsidy referred to in the first paragraph of item K on the Description of Export Subsidy Schedule,an Appendix of the ‘Anti-subsidy Agreement’
3.Brazil did not act in accordance with Article 27 Clause 4 of the ‘Anti-subsidy Agreement’,consequently,Article 3 Clause1(a) of the said Agreement concerning ‘Prohibited Subsidy’ can be applied to Brazil.
Therefore,it is the opinion of the Panel that the equilibrium rate of interest subsidy provided by Brazil to the export of local manufactured airplanes according to the PROEX plan is a form of export subsidy,which is in contradiction to Article 3 of the ‘Anti-subsidy Agreement’.
In accordance with Article 3 Clause 8 of the “MOU”,the PROEX equilibrium rate of interest subsidy has damaged the interests of Canada.Brazil did not rebut the conclusion.
B.Proposal by the Panel of Experts
Canada has requested the Panel to present a specific proposal based on the conclusions of the investigation.However,the Panel feels that the proposal should be made in accordance with none other than Article 4 Clause 7 of the ‘Anti-subsidy Agreement’.Therefore,the Panel recommends that Brazil immediately withdraws the above-mentioned subsidy.
Article 4 Clause 7 of the ‘Anti-subsidy Agreement’ states:‘The proposal of the Panel shall stipulate a time limit for the withdrawal of a subsidy which has been found to be a prohibited subsidy’.When the Panel sets the time limit for the ‘immediate’ withdrawal of the subsidy,it may consider the nature of the subsidy and the difficulties in executing the proposal.However,the Panel of Experts lacks the relevant experience in the actual implementing procedures,so the Panel will not consider including any specific procedures in the proposal to Brazil.Therefore,in consideration of the nature of the subsidy and the procedures adopted by Brazil in the execution of the proposal on one hand,and the demand for Brazil to ‘immediately’ withdraw the subsidy on the other hand,the time limit of the withdrawal is subsequently fixed at within 90 days.
1.The PROEX equilibrium rate of interest subsidy provided by Brazil to the export of local manufactured airplanes is similar to the subsidy referred to in Article 1 of the ‘Anti-subsidy Agreement’; the rate of subsidy is based on the actual export amount specified in Article 3 Clause 1(a) of the said Agreement.
2.The equilibrium rate of interest subsidy provided by Brazil PROEX to the export of local manufactured airplanes is not the ‘permissible’ subsidy referred to in the first paragraph of item K on the Description of Export Subsidy Schedule,an Appendix of the ‘Anti-subsidy Agreement’
3.Brazil did not act in accordance with Article 27 Clause 4 of the ‘Anti-subsidy Agreement’,consequently,Article 3 Clause1(a) of the said Agreement concerning ‘Prohibited Subsidy’ can be applied to Brazil.
Therefore,it is the opinion of the Panel that the equilibrium rate of interest subsidy provided by Brazil to the export of local manufactured airplanes according to the PROEX plan is a form of export subsidy,which is in contradiction to Article 3 of the ‘Anti-subsidy Agreement’.
In accordance with Article 3 Clause 8 of the “MOU”,the PROEX equilibrium rate of interest subsidy has damaged the interests of Canada.Brazil did not rebut the conclusion.
B.Proposal by the Panel of Experts
Canada has requested the Panel to present a specific proposal based on the conclusions of the investigation.However,the Panel feels that the proposal should be made in accordance with none other than Article 4 Clause 7 of the ‘Anti-subsidy Agreement’.Therefore,the Panel recommends that Brazil immediately withdraws the above-mentioned subsidy.
Article 4 Clause 7 of the ‘Anti-subsidy Agreement’ states:‘The proposal of the Panel shall stipulate a time limit for the withdrawal of a subsidy which has been found to be a prohibited subsidy’.When the Panel sets the time limit for the ‘immediate’ withdrawal of the subsidy,it may consider the nature of the subsidy and the difficulties in executing the proposal.However,the Panel of Experts lacks the relevant experience in the actual implementing procedures,so the Panel will not consider including any specific procedures in the proposal to Brazil.Therefore,in consideration of the nature of the subsidy and the procedures adopted by Brazil in the execution of the proposal on one hand,and the demand for Brazil to ‘immediately’ withdraw the subsidy on the other hand,the time limit of the withdrawal is subsequently fixed at within 90 days.