California solar panel manufacturer files petition to extend 201 tariffs on imported solar cells and modules

The Auxin Solar facility in San Jose, California.

“Extending this safeguard is essential for America to reclaim its lead in solar energy manufacturing and development, and it represents a critical step to achieve the broader goal of American renewable energy independence,” said Mamun Rashid, co-founder and chief executive officer at Auxin Solar. “This is about national security and realizing the promise of green energy independence. We believe the Commission should recommend extending the safeguard remedy for another four years to strengthen the domestic solar industry. Auxin Solar is committed to re-shoring the solar supply chain and filed this petition in the hope that policymakers are committed to the promise of green energy independence and the good-paying manufacturing jobs that will result.”

The safeguard tariffs were set on a four-year drop-down schedule beginning in 2018, with full expiration expected in February 2022. Imported bifacial solar panels were excluded from the import tariffs for a short time but are today taxed the same as traditional solar panels. All types of imported crystalline silicon solar panels (except for a few minor exemptions) have faced an 18% tax since February 2021.

See Solar Power World’s archived tariff coverage here.

Auxin Solar is joined by defunct Suniva on today’s extension petition. The ITC is now prompted to determine whether the safeguard remedy continues to be necessary to prevent or remedy serious injury, and whether there is evidence that the industry is making a positive adjustment to import competition.  The ITC will report its determination to President Joe Biden by December 8, 2021, and at that time the President may choose to extend the safeguard remedy for an additional four years.

Auxin says that the extension of the safeguard remedy is necessary because neither Auxin Solar nor Suniva have been able to complete their plans to positively adjust to import competition.

“Auxin Solar and Suniva’s investment plans were negatively impacted by stockpiling prior to the establishment of the safeguard, economic headwinds caused by COVID-19, China’s predatory pricing, and a loophole in the remedy that allowed excluded modules to be imported in high volumes and at cut-rate prices. These combined challenges meant that the safeguard did not have the desired effect to allow companies like Auxin Solar and Suniva to recover from the serious injury caused by imports,” said Auxin in a press release.