Home > News

News

US Dept. of Commerce announces long-awaited AD and CVD rulings

Date£º2012/10/11

The long and winding road to this final determination imposing anti-dumping and countervailing duties against Chinese manufacturers has finally been reached. The US Department of Commerce (DoC) has announced that Chinese producers/exporters have sold solar cells in the United States at dumping margins ranging from 18.32% to 249.96%. The DoC also determined that Chinese producers/exporters have received countervailable subsidies of 14.78% to 15.97%.

In the AD investigation, Suntech was determined to have a final dumping margin of 31.73%. Trina Solar Energy was determined to have a final dumping margin of 18.32%.

Fifty-nine other exporters qualified for a separate dumping rate of 25.96%. All remaining Chinese exporters received a final dumping rate of 249.96%.

Furthermore, in the CVD investigation, Suntech and 10 of its affiliates were determined to have a final net subsidy rate of 14.78%, while Trina Solar was determined to have a final net subsidy rate of 15.97%. 

All other Chinese producers/exporters received a final net subsidy rate of 15.24%.

Last week the International Trade Commission sat through testimonies from executives from American solar manufacturers, distributors and installers including SolarWorld¡¯s Gordon Brinser, US president of manufacturing and Kevin Kilkelly, president of sales in the Americas, accompanied by Steven Ostrenga, chief executive officer of Milwaukee-based Helios USA.

Oregon-based SolarWorld stood centre-stage at Solar Power International 2011 to announce that it, alongside seven other US manufacturers, had lodged grievances against Chinese solar cell manufacturers with both the DoC and the International Trade Commission (ITC). Although most of the members of the SolarWorld-led Coalition for American Solar Manufacturing (CASM) have remained anonymous, Helios Solar Works and New Jersey-based MX Solar came out of the woodwork in March.

A survey published by the Solar Energy Industries Association implies that 82% of the American public agreed with CASM this time last year, but this did not stop the stampede of companies who rose against SolarWorld¡¯s petition.

Regarding today¡¯s decision, E.L ¡°Mick¡± McDaniel, managing director of Suntech America, told PV-Tech that, ¡°We are pleased with the DoC¡¯s final decision to remove the 90-day retroactivity of tariffs on Suntech products. It was apparent to everyone within the solar industry that abnormal market demand in Q4 2011 was driven by the expiry of the 1603 cash grant program and this ruling reflects the reality that Suntech did not stockpile products to avoid potential tariffs.¡±
 
McDaniel concluded, ¡°The growth of destructive trade barriers represents a significant, long-term challenge to the health of the solar industry in the US and globally. Nobody benefits from a global solar trade war except for those who want a less competitive solar industry.¡±

Suntech will be exempt from the collection of provisional duty deposits normally collected as of the date of publication of the DoC¡¯s preliminary determination. Instead, anti-dumping duties applied to Suntech will be collected as of the date of publication of the DoC¡¯s preliminary determination.

Barry Broome, president & CEO Greater Phoenix Council, who had previously filed a letter contesting tariffs on Chinese manufacturers with the DoC and ITC, had this to say to PV-Tech:

¡°I hope the International Trade Commission will see the light behind this complaint and not scale-back the significant opportunities that China represents in terms of US jobs and investment, especially in states like Tennessee and Michigan.

¡°This decision smacks more of politics than intelligent economic sense and is further proof that the Department of Commerce is in sore need of business people who understand the value of industry and free trade.¡±

Rhone Resch, president and CEO of the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA), continues with his call for diplomacy:

¡°As we near the end of these investigations, it¡¯s not too soon to take stock of what has been achieved, consider whether opportunities were missed, and, most importantly, start thinking about how to move forward.

¡°While today¡¯s decision rightly shows that the US will protect its rights in the global trading system, we¡¯re also learning that trade litigation alone is not enough to solve the complex challenges that exist between the US and China. What is immediately clear is that the future must begin with diplomacy.

¡°If the opposing parties come to the table, even at this late date, and work together to help grow this global industry, the possibilities are endless.¡±

In November 2011, the battle of the acronyms began. CASM¡¯s shrill outcry brought 25 organizations together to form The Coalition for Affordable Solar Energy (CASE). Aimed as a response to the action SolarWorld was petitioning, CASE argued that the progression of such a petition would inhibit the growth and sustainability of the US solar market.

Preliminary anti-dumping margins were announced in May by the DoC, having been postponed twice already, ranging from 31.14% to 249.96%. However, SolarWorld¡¯s smile of satisfaction was swiftly wiped off its face when the Chinese Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) launched its own investigations into various US renewable energy programs in retaliation.

In July, allegations of dumping by US and South Korean enterprises were brought to MOFCOM, on behalf of the Chinese solar industry, by Jiangsu Silicon Technology Development, LDK Solar, Luoyan Sino-Silicon high-tech and New Energy.

IHS¡¯s iSuppli released its PV Perspectives report in May which considered how the US government¡¯s antidumping penalties on imports of PV cells from China would affect the US solar market. IHS noted that the DoC¡¯s May 17 preliminary ruling could suspend Chinese imports by nearly half this year, which would impact pricing, inventories and project timelines. IHS previously estimated that 2GW of solar modules were to be shipped to North America in 2012 from Chinese manufacturers, representing almost 60% of the market for North American use.

The report details how the high tariffs proposed by the Commerce Department will more than likely halt shipments to North America from China while companies look to modify business plans in order to account for the tariff. IHS estimated that this would represent the temporary removal of up to 1.5GW, or 45% of the total market in 2012.

CASM corroborated this report in August stating that Chinese solar imports were down by 60% since June 2011, totalling US$99.6 million from US$241.5 million.

Gordon Brinser, SolarWorld president defended his position when testifying in front of the ITC last week, ¡°While demand has clearly increased over the period, shutdowns, lost sales and revenues, production declines and layoffs of American workers have become all too common for SolarWorld and the rest of the domestic industry.

¡°China¡¯s massive, government-funded solar capacity has caused this material injury.¡±

Notwithstanding, it is important to note that while the top companies in China continue to gain market shares, the lesser-known Chinese solar manufacturers have been subjected to the same shutdowns that have recently affected companies such as centrotherm and Abound Solar, however, unless they are publicly traded, most do not announce their closures or other big operational changes.

According to Steven Han, an analyst at NPD Solarbuzz, ¡°The agricultural PV market segment in China was previously overlooked by downstream PV suppliers and installers. However, with the threat of anti-dumping actions from the United States and Europe potentially restricting their available sales channels, creating additional demand locally is now essential for both module and balance-of-systems suppliers.¡±

Sources close to PV-Tech have expressed concern that the DoC¡¯s determination today has been influenced by the fast approaching US elections.

The ITC is scheduled to make its final determination on or before November 23, 2012. If the ITC makes an affirmative final determination that imports of solar cells from China materially injure, or threaten material injury to, the domestic industry, DoC will issue AD and CVD orders on November 30. If the ITC makes a negative determination of injury, the investigations will be terminated.

We now wait to see how the outcome of this determination could affect both the EU Commission and India¡¯s investigations against Chinese solar manufacturers.

 

Company | Download Center |Recruitment | Contact

Copyright 2009-2012 NewSun PV technology Co.,LTD.|ÔÁICP±¸15011510ºÅ