USA Rule Against Chinese Imports Creating Uncertainty
The U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC) has announced its
preliminary findings on the case against Chinese solar imports that was
initiated by German solar company SolarWorld. DOC has determined that there is
a case to answer and suggest that Chinese companies have received subsidy of
crystalline silicon PV cells from the government of China to such an extent as
to negatively impact US manufacturers' ability to fairly compete in the market.
The announcement included plans to impose countervailing duties on Chinese
solar panel imports into the USA ranging from 2.90% to 4.73%.
Two Chinese solar manufacturers, Suntech and Trina, were
giving individual punitive tariff increases
of 2.90% and 4.73% respectively. All
other manufacturers exporting into the USA can expect an extra 3.61% cost to
their products. The case has divided the USA solar and PV community with both
for and against camps being very vocal in their support or condemnation of the
process. A big issue of concern for the naysayers was that a German company was
able to bring such a case so easily in the USA courts despite the local
opposition. All tariffs are retrospectively added for 90 days before the
decision.
The DOC did choose to change the scope of the
investigation to additionally add modules, laminates and panels produced in a
third country where the cells were produced in China. The Chinese government
has initiated its own investigation of price setting by the USA polysilicon
manufacturers. There is no evidence that this decision will influence that on
going case. Despite the apparent win for German based SolarWorld and their
supporters, the punitive tariffs are a great deal less than they were
anticipating and analysts expect the impact on solar costs in the USA to only
increase up to 5% thanks to the court case. Some analysts are predicting some
Chinese manufacturers will just move operations to another country to avoid the
tariffs but this is only speculation on their behalf.
The responses from the opposing USA coalitions on the
subject have been revealing.
The Coalition for American Solar Manufacturing (CASM)
reacted as expected by claiming a huge win and hinted that other investigations
in areas such as glass could add to the Chinese manufacturers woes.
"If we address unfair trade practices in the U.S.
solar market, we can get back to our business of expanding American
manufacturing and jobs in the renewable energy sector," said Carlo
Santoro, director of business development at MX Solar USA in Somerset, N.J., a
founding manufacturing member of CASM. "We look forward to getting back to
the fair and legal competition that serves everyone best."
The Coalition for Affordable Solar Energy (CASE)
unsurprisingly had the opposite opinion in response to the decision stating
that the preliminary determination by the Department of Commerce imposing low
tariffs on imported solar cells and modules is a relatively positive outcome
for the U.S. solar industry and its 100,000 employees. However, tariffs large
or small will hurt American jobs and prolong our world's reliance on fossil
fuels. The group went on to suggest that this decision will not significantly
raise solar prices in the United States as SolarWorld has sought.
CASE President Jigar Shah stated, "˜This decision clearly
demonstrates that the Commerce Department did not find the Chinese government
engaged in massive subsidization, as SolarWorld and CASM claim. There is more
work to be done to protect the future of solar industry and power in America.
There will be another decision in May when the Commerce Department announces
anti-dumping duties. A recent study by the Brattle Group confirmed that placing
artificially high tariffs on solar panels would severely undermine the US solar
industry, resulting in the loss of up to 60,000 US jobs by 2014.'
