In Egypt. (i) in respect of tax withheld at source, on amounts paid or credited on or after the first day of January in the calendar year next following that in which the Agreement enters into force; and
In Egypt. (i) in respect of tax withheld at source, on amounts paid or credited on or after the first day of January in the calendar year following that in which the notice has been given; and
In Egypt. Each scholarship holder is entitled to receive German language and intercultural training in Egypt up to two months before the candidates’ travel to Germany. • Distribution among language centers will be defined by the DAAD Cairo office. • After the elapse of language course a unified final exam will be conducted at Goethe Institute Cairo/ Alexandria. • For the candidates who didn’t pass the final exam the DAAD may offer the possibility to attend the second crash course at the Goethe Institute and therefore a second test. • In that case, the decision will be taken by the DAAD. The test fees should be covered by the candidate whereas the crash course fees will be covered by DAAD. • A per diem will be provided to the scholarship holders according to the distance between the scholars’ home University/Institute and language course center. • Scholarship holders are expected to arrange for their own health and liability insurance for these courses.
In Egypt. (i) in respect of tax withheld at source, on amounts paid or credited on or after the first day of January in the calendar year next following that in which the period specified in the said notice of termination expires; and
In Egypt. (i) the tax on income derived from immovable property (including the agriculture land tax and the building tax);
In Egypt. Steel Rebar, the Panel did not find on the plain text of Article 3.2 any requirement that the price undercutting analysis must be conducted at any particular level of trade. See paragraph 107 below.
In Egypt. 8.1: Provide details relating to the prevention of your rights of access to your child(ren).
In Egypt. Steel Rebar, Türkiye claimed that because the period of investigation for dumping ended on 31 December 1998, and most of the injury found by the investigating authorities occurred in the first quarter of 1999, the investigating authorities had failed to demonstrate that dumping and injury occurred at the same point in time and that there was a link between the imports that were specifically found to be dumped and the injury found, violating Articles 3.5 and 3.1.6 The Panel disagreed: "[N]either of the articles cited in this claim [Articles 3.1 and 3.5], nor any other provision of the AD Agreement, contains any specific rule as to the time periods to be covered by the injury or dumping investigations, or any overlap of those time periods.7 In fact, the only provisions that provide guidance as to how the price effects and effects on the domestic industry of the dumped imports are to be gauged are (as 2 Panel Report, Egypt – Steel Rebar, para. 7.102. 3 Panel Report, Morocco – Hot-Rolled Steel (Turkey), para. 7.147. 4 Panel Report, Morocco - Hot-Rolled Steel (Turkey), para. 7.151. 5 Panel Report, Morocco – Definitive AD Measures on Exercise Books (Tunisia), para. 7.257. 6 Panel Report, Egypt – Steel Rebar, para. 7.127. 7 (footnote original) See Recommendation Concerning the Periods of Data Collection for Anti-Dumping Investigations, G/ADP/6, adopted 5 May 2000 by the Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices.
In Egypt. Steel Rebar, the Panel considered whether the mere presentation of tables of data, without more, constituted an "evaluation" in the sense of Article 3.4. Egypt had gathered data on all of the listed factors but could not adduce sufficient evidence of its authorities' evaluation of all those factors. The Panel considered that "the 'evaluation' to which Article 3.4 refers is the process of analysis and interpretation of the facts established in relation to each listed factor". Since, in spite of having gathered data on all of the factors listed in Article 3.4, the Egyptian investigating authority had failed to evaluate a number of listed factors, the Panel found 297 Panel Report, Egypt – Steel Xxxxx, xxxxx. 7.62-7.64. 298 Appellate Body Report, Russia – Commercial Vehicles, para. 5.155. 299 Panel Report, Thailand – H-Beams, para. 7.236. that Egypt acted inconsistently with Article 3.4.300 After listing three dictionary definitions of "evaluation", the Panel analysed: "We find significant that all of these definitions and synonyms connote, particularly in the context of 'evaluation' of evidence, the act of analysis, judgement, or assessment. That is, the first definition recited above refers to 'estimating the force of' evidence, evoking a process of weighing evidence and reaching conclusions thereon. The second definition recited above -- to determine the significance, worth, or condition of, usually by careful appraisal or study -- confirms this meaning. Thus, for an investigating authority to 'evaluate evidence concerning a given factor in the sense of Article 3.4, it must not only gather data, but it must analyse and interpret those data.
In Egypt the tax on income derived from immovable property (including the agriculture land tax and the building tax), - the unified tax on income of individuals, - the tax on corporation profits, - the duty for the development of the financial resources of the State, - supplementary taxes imposed as percentage of taxes mentioned above or otherwise, (hereinafter referred to as “Egyptian tax”).
