News

Solar panel import surge alleged ahead of a key decision

Solar panel import surge alleged ahead of a key decision
(A container ship at the Port of Los Angeles. Credit: Flickr/Corey Seeman)

The company at the heart of a high-profile complaint that is sending shockwaves through the solar energy industry alleges that solar cells and module imports are surging ahead of a key Commerce Department decision.

In its filing, lawyers for Auxin Solar told Commerce Department officials that “an enormous volume” of imported CSPV cells and modules is “surging into the United States” in the days before a March 25 deadline for Commerce to initiate circumvention inquiries.

In February, Auxin Solar—which described itself as a minority and woman-owned domestic producer of solar modules based in San Jose, California–asked Commerce in a 105-page petition to determine that solar cells and modules assembled in Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam, and Cambodia are circumventing and undermining the effectiveness of U.S. trade remedy laws.

Auxin called recent import levels a “flood” and represented “a naked attempt by these exporters to double-down on their circumventing behavior and to stockpile solar cells and modules in an effort to continue avoiding anti-dumping and anti-circumvention (AD/CVD) liability.

It cited a recent Commodity Status Report from U.S. Customs and Border Protection that showed imports so far this year totaled 1.8 GW of capacity, including 1.6 GW imported in a single week. The filing said that imports didn’t reach similar levels in 2021 until 38 weeks into the year.

The filing said the surge corresponds with Auxin’s initial filing of its petition in early February. It also said that imports from Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam, and Cambodia made up an “enormous volume” of imports during the period.

“Commerce should not tolerate such blatant attempts to evade duty liability,” the filing said.

A surge in imports might not be surprising. If Commerce takes up the case, then any duties it may impose would be retroactive to the date when it opened its investigation. That means modules brought into the U.S. prior to that date would be exempt, including those in the alleged “surge.”

The Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) responded by continuing its attack on Auxin for its antidumping petition with Commerce.

John Smirnow, SEIA’s vice president of market strategy, said that if the case is initiated “you will see imports from Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam, and Cambodia slow to a trickle, killing solar deployment” and progress on climate change. He warned that Commerce’s initiation of the case could start the clock on tariffs “between 50% and 250%,” which he said would create “massive uncertainty about costs going forward.”

The Factor This! podcast broke down all angles of the Auxin Solar tariff petition in a four-part series, which included an exclusive interview with Auxin Solar CEO Mamun Rashid. Subscribe today wherever you get your podcasts.

Pt. 1: Who is Auxin Solar? An exclusive interview with the CEO behind the bitter solar tariff fight

Pt. 2: Inside the solar industry’s $5 million fight against new tariffs

Pt. 3: Rebuilding domestic solar supply chains will hinge on incentives, not tariffs, experts say

Pt. 4: How the solar industry swayed Biden on import tariffs

Update: Commerce Department issues a preliminary determination in the Auxin Solar case

The Auxin petition named 15 module manufacturers that it alleged are circumventing U.S. anti-dumping laws. The companies are LONGi Malaysia and Vietnam, Jinko Solar, JA Solar, Trina Solar, Canadian Solar, Talesun, Light & Hope, GCL, Boviet Solar, Green Wing Solar, HT Solar, New East Solar, Enalex, Shenglong PV-Tech, and Jintek.

Last November, Commerce rejected a similar petition by an anonymous group of solar companies that sought tariffs on a handful of companies that import modules from Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam.

The request had been made by American Solar Manufacturers Against Chinese Circumvention (A-SMACC) and sought anti-dumping and anti-circumvention (AD-CVD) tariffs. In a November 10 decision, Abdelali Elouaradia, director of the Commerce Department’s AD-CVD office, said that A-SMACC’s bid to keep the names of its member companies from the public prevented Commerce from gathering needed information for any inquiry.

Elouaradia wrote that “not disclosing A-SMACC members’ names publicly hampers interested parties from fully commenting on the requests for circumvention inquiries and may hamper them from commenting on certain issues that could arise if Commerce were to initiate circumvention inquiries.”

Now that Auxin Solar has attached its name to a similar petition, Commerce may have less of a reason to decline opening an investigation.

Tags