This group brings together the best thinkers on energy and climate. Join us for smart, insightful posts and conversations about where the energy industry is and where it is going.


SolarWorld Wins Again: Big Anti-Dumping Tariffs in US-China Solar Panel Trade Case

Eric Wesoff's picture
, Greentech Media

Prior to joining Greentech Media, Eric Wesoff founded Sage Marketing Partners in 2000 to provide sales and marketing-consulting services to venture-capital firms and their portfolio companies in...

  • Member since 2018
  • 90 items added with 74,378 views
  • Jul 28, 2014

solar panel tariffs

The Department of Commerce has again found for the petitioner, SolarWorld, in its Chinese solar module trade case. The preliminary decision imposes significant tariffs on Chinese solar modules in the anti-dumping portion of this case.

The decision also closes what SolarWorld called a “loophole” that allowed Chinese module manufacturers to use Taiwanese cells in their modules and circumvent U.S. trade duties.

SolarWorld has prevailed at pretty much every step of this case despite the debatable efforts from CASE and other trade organizations.

Here is the’s preliminary decision:

  • Trina Solar and Renesola/Jinko received preliminary dumping margins of 26.33 percent and 58.87 percent, respectively.
  • Forty-two other exporters get hit by a rate of 42.33 percent
  • In the Taiwan investigation, “mandatory respondents Gintech and Motech received preliminary dumping margins of 27.59 percent and 44.18 percent, respectively. All other producers/exporters in Taiwan received a preliminary dumping margin of 35.89 percent.”

In June, Commerce found for SolarWorld as well, and levied substantial tariffs in its preliminary finding in the subsidy piece of the Chinese solar module trade investigation. Commerce imposed preliminary duties of 35.21 percent on imports of solar panels made by Suntech, 18.56 percent on imports of Trina Solar, and 26.89 percent on imports of most other Chinese producers.

SolarWorld commended the U.S. Department of Commerce’s determination and noted that most of the firms will pay combined duties of about 47 percent, effective immediately.  

Here’s a statement from the winner of the case:

“We and our workers are very gratified to hear that the U.S. government once again has moved to block foreign government interference in our economy and clear the way for the domestic production industry to be able to compete on a level playing field,” said Mukesh Dulani, president of SolarWorld Industries America. “We should not have to compete with dumped imports or the Chinese government. Today’s actions should help the U.S. solar manufacturing industry to expand and innovate.”

At the time of the subsidy decision, The Coalition for Affordable Solar Energy pleaded for a settlement:

The best path forward continues to be a negotiated settlement between the U.S. and Chinese governments to end this dispute and create the conditions for growth. But to achieve this, SolarWorld must come to the table and work with the industry to find a settlement that benefits the entire global supply chain. We ask the White House to help by convening the parties for true negotiations, and we urge SolarWorld to make its conditions known and join the rest of the U.S. industry in support of the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) proposal.”

The Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) also called for a negotiated settlement, suggesting, “It’s time to end this needless litigation with a negotiated solution that addresses SolarWorld’s trade allegations while ensuring the continued growth of the U.S. solar market.”

SEIA called today’s action “a further escalation of the solar trade war with China,” and again called for a negotiated settlement.

“If there’s a silver lining to today’s announcement,” SEIA head Rhone Resch suggested, “it’s the fact that the U.S. and Chinese governments, SolarWorld, and Chinese manufacturers now have a brief window of opportunity to move forward on settlement discussions.

In 2013, imports of certain crystalline silicon photovoltaic products from China and Taiwan were valued at an estimated $1.5 billion and $656.8 million, respectively.

What’s the impact of the decision on the U.S. market?

“The current scope of the 2014 case will likely result in a variety of strategies adopted by Chinese module vendors to continue serving the U.S. solar market,” said Shyam Mehta, Lead Upstream Analyst at GTM Research and co-author of a recent report on the topic. “While the strategies vary, one constant remains across all scenarios: pricing for Chinese modules shipped to the U.S. is highly likely to increase starting in July 2014. Consequently, the primary competitive advantage of Chinese suppliers in the U.S. market — lower pricing by as much as 25 percent historically — could be greatly diminished.” 

Chinese companies supplied 31 percent of the modules installed in the U.S. in 2013, and more than 50 percent in the distributed solar market, according to GTM Research. The report finds that non-Chinese suppliers are likely to gain share as a result of the erosion of Chinese price advantage in the U.S. market. Likely beneficiaries include REC, SolarWorld, Suniva and LG Solar in the distributed solar market, and First Solar in the utility market.

REC Group’s Senior VP in the U.S., Arndt Lutz stated, “Although REC strongly believes in open and fair competition, and that solar “trade wars” are not in the interests of the solar manufacturers, project developers and installers, or end consumers, we are not surprised by the Department of Commerce’s latest rulings. I would say that the level of the preliminary dumping margins levied against the Chinese and Taiwanese companies is on the high end of my expectations.”

While a 7 percent to 20 percent increase in module prices from Chinese suppliers will have reverberating effects throughout the U.S. solar market, it will be most disruptive in the highly cost-sensitive utility solar market. GTM Research expects some projects to seek alternate module suppliers, while others may fail entirely.

“Unless the Department of Commerce revises the scope prior to its final determination, there is no question that tariffs imposed in this case will have a larger impact than those already in place from the 2012 ruling,” said Shayle Kann, Senior Vice President at GTM Research and the report’s co-author. “SolarCity, for example, has already announced a 100-megawatt supply deal with REC Group, while RGS Energy has done the same with SolarWorld. This portends a broader shift in the pricing and competitive landscape for U.S. solar module. For more information about this report, visit

Regarding the’s decision, Credit Suisse Equity Research analysts claim, “SolarCity is relatively immune as solar module supply has been secured at reasonable rates and modules are available for late 2014 and into 2015 at comparable price (~$0.75 per watt) without exposure to trade outcomes.”

Commerce is scheduled to announce its final decision on or about December 16, 2014.

greentech mediaGreentech Media (GTM) produces industry-leading news, research, and conferences in the business-to-business greentech market. Our coverage areas include solar, smart grid, energy efficiency, wind, and other non-incumbent energy markets. For more information, visit: , follow us on twitter: @greentechmedia, or like us on Facebook:

Jim Stack's picture
Jim Stack on Jul 28, 2014

What is the price of US made cells compared to China and Taiwan made? This should help the 100% US makers and buyers in the long run.

Robert Bernal's picture
Robert Bernal on Jul 30, 2014

They should put tariffs on everything else IF they would put tariffs on somrthing that can make Americans money (on installs). Oh well, any excuse to make solar more expensive!

Eric Wesoff's picture
Thank Eric for the Post!
Energy Central contributors share their experience and insights for the benefit of other Members (like you). Please show them your appreciation by leaving a comment, 'liking' this post, or following this Member.
More posts from this member

Get Published - Build a Following

The Energy Central Power Industry Network is based on one core idea - power industry professionals helping each other and advancing the industry by sharing and learning from each other.

If you have an experience or insight to share or have learned something from a conference or seminar, your peers and colleagues on Energy Central want to hear about it. It's also easy to share a link to an article you've liked or an industry resource that you think would be helpful.

                 Learn more about posting on Energy Central »