China’s Chamber of Commerce Import and Export of Machinery and Electronic Products (CCCME) has released details on why the US Department of Commerce’s preliminary determination is false and unwarranted.
The United States’ Department of Commerce (DoC) issued the preliminary determination on anti-dumping of crystal silicon PV cells made in China last week, declaring that anti-dumping rate for Chinese enterprises between 31.14%-249.96%. Although USDOC accepted some materials submitted by Chinese enterprises, the China-based PV industry believes that the determination distorts its manufacturing and exporting status.
The report states, “Chinese enterprises have no intention, haven’t and will not resort to low price competition, including dumping, to share the market.”
Therefore, CCCME, on behalf of the China-based PV industry makes the following statements.
Chinese competitive advantage does not equal dumping
The CCCME claims the competitive advantage of Chinese PV cells, due to the government’s developmental strategy, has encouraged the increase in export volumes to satisfied American consumers. “Chinese PV enterprises are committed to quality and technical innovation, which assures the Chinese industry possesses state-of-the-art technologies such as silicon ingot manufacturing technology, metallurgical polysilicon, high-efficiency solar cell, SE, ESE, MWT and so on.”
The group contends that the ruling by the US DoC highlights the American way as being protectionist and that China’s industry principles are inconsistent with the preliminary determination, because Chinese companies operate following the rule of market economy.
The rights and interests of Chinese responding enterprises were not fully guaranteed.
The US DoC has adopted what the CCCME has dubbed a “discriminatory policy”, where it has designated a surrogate country arbitrarily and determined the comparable price on the foregoing ground. When designating the surrogate country, US DoC has not taken full consideration of industry size, grade of maturity and industrial comparability. By ignoring the status quo of the Chinese economy and PV industry, it has distorted the production cost severely, was result-oriental and arbitrary, which determines the preliminary duty unacceptably high. Therefore, Chinese enterprises express strong opposition.
We hold that if USDOC addressed the status quo of Chinese PV, determined the normal value of Chinese products fairly and reasonably, Chinese companies would prove no signs of dumping practices with unshakably evidence.
Chinese export of PV products to the US does not cause injury to US domestic industry
The CCCME claims it is overcapacity in the global market that is a cause of the falling value of US PV cells and modules. In addition, competition of thin-film PV cells, incentive policies and financial aids of the federal and state governments in the US, consumer’s demand, competition of other alternative energies have also contributed to the drop of crystalline silicon PV cell and module prices.
Furthermore, the CCCME states Solarworld cannot represent the entire US PV industry with only 1,000 jobs. As far as CCCME knows, the leading US PV manufacturers and Solar Energy Industries Association represents approximately 100,000 jobs. These parties regard this determination as short-sighted and a serious setback for the promotion of clean and renewable energy policy by Obama Administration. Chinese PV products have made great contribution to the popularization and promotion of such products in the US market.
CCCME insists SolarWorld’s petition is opposed by US companies from upstream raw material and equipment suppliers to downstream distributors, installators and users. Similarly, consumers looking forward to affordable solar products, environmental organization and climate experts have apparently expressed opposition.
CCCME has organized 14 Chinese enterprises to respond to this investigation. “We are committed to unite together and to demonstrate that China-based PV industry causes no injury to the US domestic industry with strong facts and evidences.”
The preliminary determination of levying anti-dumping tax is adverse for both the US and China.
As claimed by Chinese PV enterprises, the Chinese PV industry has greatly contributed to the development of the global PV market. To produce crystal silicon photovoltaic cells, China imports more than USD$2 billion of polysilicon, EVA, sizing agent and other raw materials from the US every year. The PV industry equipment imported from the US to China and the technology licensing costs paid by Chinese companies cost approximately USD$3 billion in 2010. The export of Chinese PV cells and components stimulates the development of American downstream industries (especially the PV generating installation industry). Therefore if the American government imposes trade restriction measures on Chinese crystal silicon photovoltaic cells, it will have adverse impact to global PV energy market, especially the US industry, CCCME states.
In conclusion, the CCCME document said, “China-based PV enterprises wish that USDOC will adjust its incorrect and unfair practices in the ongoing investigation, treat Chinese companies and their responses objectively and impartially and avoid the infringement of legitimate rights and interests of Chinese responding enterprises. Meanwhile, China-based PV enterprises will unite together, respond actively and strongly in the anti-dumping and countervailing investigation, exhaust all efforts to protect legitimate rights. In addition, Chinese PV enterprises are fully committed to create a favourable trade order and push the global PV industry forward to a better future together with PV enterprises all around the world.”