To date, all of the analysis of the potential impacts of the Section 201 case advanced by Suniva and SolarWorld have centered on a proposal that would impose prohibitive tariffs on imported cells and a steep minimum import price on modules, per Suniva’s initial proposal.
However, briefs by both companies in advance next Tuesday’s hearing indicate that both Suniva and SolarWorld, which joined its petition, are now asking for less severe remedies. Both companies are now asking for a $0.25 per watt tariff on imported cells in 2018, and a $0.32 per watt tariff on imported modules. These tariffs would decrease over the following three years.
However, here the two proposal diverge. Despite the history of no minimum import prices ever having been enacted under a Section 201 process, Suniva is still holding out for a minimum price on modules of $0.74 per watt in 2018 – four cents per watt less than its previous proposal, and still roughly double the current market price.
SolarWorld, meanwhile, is not asking for a minimum import price, but instead import quotas, with a quota of 220 MW of cells and 5700 MW of modules in 2018. This would be “liberalized” over the following three years.
According to a Suniva press release, both companies have made it clear that their idea of effective trade action includes both the tariffs on cells and modules and either quotas or a minimum import price.
Even if SolarWorld’s quotas are rejected, a partial survey of manufacturers in both the United States and nations where the ITC is not recommending trade action indicate that cells will be the bottleneck for tariff-free supply, given that Mission Solar Energy and Canadian Solar are dependent upon imported cells.
These proposals and the case for them will be discussed next Tuesday at the International Trade Commission, and pv magazine USA staff will be reporting from this event.
Update: This article was updated at 10:50 AM EST on Friday September 29 to clarify that SolarWorld and Suniva are looking for tariffs and either a quota or a minimum import price.
This content is protected by copyright and may not be reused. If you want to cooperate with us and would like to reuse some of our content, please contact: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Huh? In one paragraph, you state that “both companies are now asking for a $0.25 per watt tariff on imported cells in 2018, and a $0.32 per watt tariff on imported modules,” but in the next, you say, “Suniva is still holding out for a minimum price on modules of $0.74 per watt in 2018.”
Which is it?
Suniva is asking for both the tariffs and the minimum import price.
Ah. I missed the distinction between “tarriff” and “minimum import price.”
CSUN of China will be a game changer with a newly built 400MW module production facility in Sacramento, CA.
By submitting this form you agree to pv magazine using your data for the purposes of publishing your comment.
Your personal data will only be disclosed or otherwise transmitted to third parties for the purposes of spam filtering or if this is necessary for technical maintenance of the website. Any other transfer to third parties will not take place unless this is justified on the basis of applicable data protection regulations or if pv magazine is legally obliged to do so.
You may revoke this consent at any time with effect for the future, in which case your personal data will be deleted immediately. Otherwise, your data will be deleted if pv magazine has processed your request or the purpose of data storage is fulfilled.
Further information on data privacy can be found in our Data Protection Policy.