German Jamison: Solar Tariff Case Advances as ITC Finds ‘Injury’

The threat of solar tariffs moved one step closer to reality on Friday when U.S. trade commissioners unanimously agreed that imported solar equipment has caused "serious injury" to domestic manufacturers.

The vote handed a small victory to Suniva and SolarWorld, which filed a rare petition under Section 201 of the 1974 Trade Act, arguing that cheap solar imports have made it impossible for them to compete.

With the injury finding confirmed, the International Trade Commission will hold a hearing on October 3 in Washington, D.C., to consider possible trade remedies. The ultimate decision will be left up to President Trump, who has reportedly been pushing for more tariffs on imported goods.

Suniva and SolarWorld are calling for duties of 40 cents per watt on imported cells and a floor price of 78 cents per watt on modules. If the commission approves the request, it could destroy 88,000 jobs in installation, sales and construction, according to estimates by the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA). Numbers from GTM Research were similarly bleak, showing that tens of gigawatts of solar installations could be wiped out compared to business as usual.

“If we’re talking about a 40 cent per watt increase … it would take out a lot of projects,” said Morten Lund, a solar industry attorney for Stoel Rives, which currently represents SolarWorld in matters unrelated to the trade case.

“I’m not worried about California. I’m not worried about the Northeast,” said Lund, noting that large solar projects will move forward in states with renewable energy mandates, regardless of price. But in states like Texas, tariffs could “completely obliterate the utility market.”

Suniva and SolarWorld have refuted SEIA’s job predictions, pointing to an economic analysis by the law firm Mayer Brown that found new tariffs on solar products would result in a net increase of at least 114,800 jobs across all segments of the U.S. solar industry.

The vast majority of the U.S. solar industry is opposed to the request for trade penalties. Dozens of industry executives and government officials spoke out against the petition during a 10-hour hearing at the ITC last month, saying Suniva and SolarWorld brought their financial troubles upon themselves. Presidents and CEOs took turns describing their dealings with the two companies, recounting late deliveries, subpar panel efficiency and recalls on faulty panels.

SEIA and its allies have launched an aggressive lobbying campaign against the import penalties. Earlier this week, the group filed a letter with the ITC criticizing Sunvia and SolarWorld for not submitting a plan for how they'll function as viable U.S. solar cell and panel manufacturers if they are granted trade relief.

With Friday’s vote, the commissioners denied requests from 27 solar equipment manufacturers, 16 senators and 53 members of the House of Representatives who sent letters asking for the petition to be thrown out.

Yesterday, governors from Nevada, Colorado, Massachusetts and North Carolina also sent a letter voicing their opposition, saying tariffs “could inflict a devastating blow on our states’ solar industries and lead to unprecedented job loss, at steep cost to our states’ economies.”

During the remedy hearing the ITC will hear more testimony as it considers what trade penalties to recommend to the President. Under a Section 201 case, the commissioners can suggest tariffs, minimum prices or quotas on solar products from anywhere in the world.

“The range of remedies is as broad as you can imagine and includes doing nothing,” said Elliott Williams, trade advisor for Stoel Rives’ solar initiative. “You could have a remedy, like a tariff, in effect for a limited time … while you give producers breathing room to figure out where they’re going next.”

This is a developing story.