The US Department of Commerce has reviewed its final anti-dumping (AD) and anti-subsidy (AS) rates on Chinese solar firms with most tier-one firms having their rates cut.
The first review of the final tariffs set in December 2012 has ultimately offered mixed results for Chinese manufacturers.
Try Premium for just $1
- Full premium access for the first month at only $1
- Converts to an annual rate after 30 days unless cancelled
- Cancel anytime during the trial period
Premium Benefits
- Expert industry analysis and interviews
- Digital access to PV Tech Power journal
- Exclusive event discounts
Or get the full Premium subscription right away
Or continue reading this article for free
Yingli Green has had its AD rate reduced from 24.48% to 0.79%. Wuxi Suntech has had its rate increased from 29.14% to 33.08%. A swathe of companies including Canadian Solar, ReneSola, Trina Solar and JinkoSolar have been cut to 9.67% in the AD case from rates between ~18-24% announced in December 2012.
Anti-subsidy rates have increased roughly 5% across the board.
The AD rate for firms not named on the list of companies has decreased, but not substantially, from 249.96% to 238.95%.
SolarWorld Americas, the complainant in both cases, welcomed the results of the review, despite the fact that most of its tier-one rivals have had their rates cut.
“This is another strong victory for US solar manufacturers and workers as Commerce’s trade investigators once again found that China’s improper trade practices violate US trade law,” said Mukesh Dulani, US president of SolarWorld. “When the first solar trade cases were filed in 2011, many in the industry said that the sky was going to fall and US demand would plummet. That clearly did not happen. US demand is at an all-time high, and US manufacturers are rebuilding US production and jobs. SolarWorld and other US manufacturers believe that dumped pricing and subsidisation must continue to be addressed.”
The new case also covers products from Taiwan in an effort to prevent Chinese firms from circumventing duties. By importing modules with Taiwanese cells, and so classified as Taiwanese modules, Chinese firms were able to avoid the 2012 duties. Dulani said the company would add further countries to its complaints if manufacturing was moved to other destinations in order to gain what SolarWorld deemed an unfair advantage.
“We will continue to work with US authorities to closely monitor the US market for additional evidence of illegal or unfair trade practices by China, Taiwan and other countries and, when appropriate, take action,” he added.
Selected AD and AS rates on Chinese firms:
| Old AD Case | Old Subsidy case | New Case (AD) | New Case (AS) | |||
| Company | July 2015 review rate | December 2012 rate | July 2015 review rate | October 2012 final rate | December 2014 rate | December 2014 rate |
| Yingli | 0.79% | 24.48% | 20.94% | 52.13% | 38.72% | |
| Suntech | 33.08% | 29.14% | “ | 14.78% | 52.13% | 27.64% |
| Trina | 9.67% | 18.32% | “ | 15.97% | 26.71% | 49.79% |
| Jinko | 9.67% | 24.48% | “ | 78.42% | 38.72% | |
| ReneSola | 9.67% | – | “ | 78.42% | 38.72% | |
| Canadian Solar | 9.67% | 24.48% | “ | 52.13% | 38.72% | |
| Named list companies | 9.67% | 24.48% | 20.94% | 15.24% | 52.13% | 38.72% |
| Rest of PRC | 238.95% | 249.96% | 165.04% | 38.72% | ||
