On Friday, September 11, the US Department of Commerce determined that solar panels and modules from India, Indonesia, and Laos are being sold at low prices in the US market and benefit from unfair government subsidies. As a result, the department decided to impose high anti-dumping and countervailing duties exceeding 170% on these three countries to protect domestic industries.
This decision marks the latest development in a solar trade dispute that has spanned over a decade. Since 2012, the US has imposed anti-dumping and countervailing duties on Chinese solar products, leading many Chinese manufacturers to relocate their supply chains and assembly lines to other Asian countries. This shift in production base and the practice of tariff avoidance through transshipment have triggered a series of trade litigations by US domestic manufacturers.
The “Solar III” tariffs, which came into effect in June 2025, have severely impacted Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam’s exports to the US. The current “Solar IV” tariffs target India, Indonesia, and Laos.
According to data released by the US International Trade Administration (ITA), the anti-dumping duties for Indian manufacturers stand at 123.04%, Indonesian manufacturers at 94.36%, and Laotian manufacturers at 65.43%. Additionally, the countervailing duties range from 126.09% for Indian manufacturers to 73.2%-173.7% for Indonesian manufacturers, and 82.03%-153.67% for Laotian manufacturers.
These trade retaliation measures are issued under the Tariff Act of 1930 for specific cases, different from broad reciprocal tariffs or Section 232 national security tariffs. The final double-counter duties will be directly stacked on top of existing administrative tariffs rather than replacing them.
Next, the US International Trade Commission (USITC) is scheduled to make a final injury determination vote on October 14 to assess whether these imported goods cause or threaten substantial harm to US manufacturers.
If the commission’s vote passes, the US Department of Commerce plans to issue formal tariff orders on November 2, implementing the final cash deposit rates. If no substantial harm is found, the process will be terminated, and all previously collected cash deposits will be fully refunded by US Customs.
This decision marks the conclusion of the Solar IV trade litigations initiated by the Alliance for American Solar Manufacturing and Trade. The alliance’s members include US solar manufacturers First Solar, Hanwha Qcells, and Mission Solar Energy.
On September 11, Tim Brightbill, the chief lawyer of the alliance, stated in a press release, “The US solar manufacturing industry is experiencing a historic revival. Since 2022, domestic module capacity has grown by over 750%, and battery production continues to expand.”
He pointed out, “However, dumping and subsidizing imports from India, Indonesia, and Laos are undermining this progress, depriving US manufacturers of fair competition opportunities. Today’s ruling enforces trade regulations and is an important step towards rebuilding a fair competitive environment for American workers.”
In response to the frequent phenomenon of multinational supply chains evading sanctions through relocation and transshipment, Brightbill emphasized, “We will continue to monitor import data, and no matter where these companies shift their production capacity, we will hold them accountable.”
While the Solar IV litigations have concluded, a new shift is occurring in the market’s supply chain. Currently, most of the US domestic module assembly’s battery procurement requirements have been diverted away from the three target countries towards South Korea, the Philippines, and emerging manufacturing centers in Africa including Kenya, Nigeria, and Ethiopia.
However, due to another trade litigation filed by the American Manufacturers for Energy Resilience, Korean battery suppliers may also face new trade restrictions in the future.
Additionally, the US recently established the “Minimum Import Price” for the entire supply chain under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. This includes $21 per kilogram for unprocessed polysilicon, $100 per kilogram for silicon ingots and wafers, $0.22 per watt for solar cells, and $0.38 per watt for modules.
According to pv magazine USA’s analysis, the new framework of setting import bottom prices by the US government has directly locked in the cost baseline for overseas products entering the US. This means that in the future, it will become more challenging for US domestic manufacturers to prove “unfair price pressure” or demonstrate “substantial harm” when citing traditional trade regulations against overseas solar products.