Jiangsu Hongde technology development co., LTD

Sweep to view the mobile version

Copyright © Jiangsu hongde technology development co., LTD All Rights Reserved
Technical support by
苏ICP备16035908号-1 |


Better components - gain more sunshine



China's photovoltaic "repairing internal strength" is not afraid of "double-reverse" barriers

Page view
Recently, the US "201" investigation made a ruling. At the same time, the Indian Anti-Dumping and Customs Administration (DGAD) announced an open letter to announce the solar energy manufacturing in China, Taiwan and Malaysia that needs to be sampled in its ongoing anti-dumping investigation. Business and importers.
Recently, the US "201" investigation made a ruling. At the same time, the Indian Anti-Dumping and Customs Administration (DGAD) announced an open letter to announce the solar energy manufacturing in China, Taiwan and Malaysia that needs to be sampled in its ongoing anti-dumping investigation. Business and importers.
It is worth noting that since the publication of relevant information, governments and related companies have expressed strong opposition. In an interview with the reporter of China Business News, Lv Jinbiao, vice president of GCL-Poly Energy Holdings Co., Ltd., said that these actions by the United States and India are mostly from their own perspective, forcing their manufacturing backflow and solving their social problems such as employment. . For Chinese PV companies, the most important thing is to improve their own competitiveness and to cope with the risks of international trade.
Trade barriers
The "201" survey initiated by the United States began in May this year and lasted for nearly four months. The US International Trade Commission made a damage ruling on the investigation of global safeguard measures for photovoltaic cells and components ("201" investigation) last month. Imported products have caused serious damage to the US domestic industry and will be studied to impose restrictions on imported products.
The so-called "201" survey is a global safeguards survey conducted by the US International Trade Commission (USITC) on products imported into the United States, and a ruling on whether the increase in product imports has caused serious damage or serious damage to the US domestic industry. After the USITC completes the investigation, it submits a report to the president and proposes measures. The US President makes the final decision. This part of the content is specified under Section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974 and is therefore referred to as the “201” clause.
Earlier, at the beginning of the investigation, a number of Chinese PV companies, including Artes, Trina Solar, and Jingke Energy, issued a solemn statement on the investigation to protest against US companies’ violation of market competition rules and abuse of local laws. The opposition in the United States is also on the rise.
According to the Wall Street Journal, the US Solar Energy Industry Association (SEIA) estimates that taxing imported solar cells will not only lead to an increase in the cost of solar equipment, but will also generate a large number of unemployed people. Its chief executive, Abigail Ross Hopper, said the taxation was a blunt instrument and should not be used. The American Legislative Exchange Council, which embraces the free market, and other conservative policy organizations, including the Heritage Foundation, also support the alliance's efforts to oppose new tariffs.
But this did not prevent the US International Trade Commission from making a ruling. Once the ruling was made, Wang Hejun, director of the Trade Relief and Investigation Bureau of the Ministry of Commerce of the People's Republic of China, pointed out that the US investigation authorities disregarded the strong opposition of other countries, domestic state governments and many PV downstream enterprises, and also ignored the trade remedy measures taken for PV products in recent years. The objective fact of providing sufficient protection for its domestic industry, insisting that imported photovoltaic products seriously damage the domestic industry, not only increases the uncertainty of the global normal trade of photovoltaic products, but also does not help the overall healthy and balanced development of the domestic PV industry.
According to industry insiders, this is the baton after the United States' two "double opposition" against China's photovoltaics.
However, Feng Haicheng, a new energy analyst at Zhuochuang Information, told reporters that at present, the survey cannot be determined as a behavior against Chinese PV companies, because the investigation is not only for Chinese companies, but for all countries. It can be said that the US "Article 201" is more arbitrary and more lethal.
Lu Jinbiao said that in the face of the previous two double-reverse actions of the United States, Chinese companies chose to set up factories in Thailand and Vietnam, which to some extent circumvented the adverse effects brought about by the double-reverse, and certain products could still be exported. However, the US "201" survey is a one-size-fits-all approach, and companies other than the United States have little to do.
It is worth noting that in addition to the United States, some countries in the European Union have also initiated anti-dumping investigations against Chinese PV companies.
However, affected by the shrinking domestic PV industry, the European Commission has decided to change the form of double-reaction measures, replacing the original price commitment method with the minimum price during the implementation period of the remaining one-year period. This move is considered to be an important step in the return of the Central European PV market to normal track.
Lu Jinbiao said that leading enterprises should actively respond, and the government and industry organizations should strive to argue in the scope of laws and trade rules. Although it is difficult, it must be actively pursued.
Move to emerging markets
Regarding the impact of the survey, Feng Haicheng said that before the results have been released, foreign importers will use the time difference to concentrate on importing goods, which will lead to a short-term import tide. China's PV companies will benefit from this and orders will increase. There is great possibility.
China Photovoltaic Industry Association also said that the US International Trade Commission's measures will not only trigger a new round of demand for goods and rushing in the short term, but also more likely to impact the long-term installed capacity of photovoltaics in the United States.
In this regard, Lu Jinbiao is calm and self-sufficient. He said that because the United States has already implemented two double-reverses before this, Chinese PV companies have certain experience and will not be as confused as before.
Due to the investigation, the goods will happen, but the company will choose a small amount of goods, basically do not dare to bulk, because the price of components will be variable every quarter, a large number of goods may cause losses .
Lu Jinbiao said that at present, China's photovoltaic manufacturing industry is leading in silicon manufacturing technology and is in the forefront of the world. The degree of dependence on the US market is not as big as the outside world thinks. Instead, the US photovoltaic products manufacturing end has to rely on Chinese silicon wafers. The US silicon wafers are actually derived from the Chinese market. In the past trade remedies, European and American countries, including India, did not dare to impose any restrictions on Chinese silicon wafers. Take GCL-Poly as an example, its silicon wafer production is 20 GW/year, and the market share is over 30%. Based on this calculation, one out of every four components in the global installation is provided by GCL-Poly. At present, the global market share of China's silicon wafers is close to 90%, and it continues to improve.
According to data released by China Photovoltaic Industry Association, in 2016, the total export value of China's photovoltaic products was US$14 billion, down 10.4% year-on-year. Among them, the export value of silicon wafers and the export volume of battery chips have all increased; while the export volume of components has decreased. It is worth noting that the proportion of exports from traditional export markets such as Europe, the United States and Japan has declined in different degrees. For example, exports to the United States fell by 24.8% year-on-year; exports to Japan fell by 28.4% year-on-year; however, exports to Malaysia increased by 132.3% year-on-year; exports to Brazil increased by 832.1% year-on-year.
In 2017, according to relevant statistics, in the first half of 2017, China's exports of photovoltaic modules to the United States decreased by 96.6% year-on-year; exports to Europe also fell sharply, such as Germany's year-on-year decline of 96.3%; and the Netherlands's year-on-year decline of 73.7%. Correspondingly, exports to India increased by 67.3% year-on-year; exports to Brazil, Mexico and other South American countries increased sharply, up 117.9% and 284.7% year-on-year.
In this regard, Feng Haicheng believes that due to the frequent “double-reverse” investigations in Europe and the United States in recent years, China's PV companies are particularly concerned about other markets, such as South America, Africa, the Middle East and other emerging markets, which are potential markets. In the future, Chinese companies will face fierce competition in these markets.
At the same time, Feng Haicheng reminded that on the one hand, export-oriented enterprises must be familiar with WTO rules in order to be proficient in using trade rules and familiar with coping strategies; on the other hand, qualified enterprises can take into account the investment and construction of exporting countries and directly build overseas. Factory, the export of production capacity is not affected by trade barriers, so it can avoid double-risk risks.
For the domestic market's ability to absorb, Lu Jinbiao is optimistic. He believes that the capacity of the Chinese market depends on the decline in corporate costs, and the cost is reduced to no longer need government subsidies, so the market will be infinite. Appropriate overcapacity in enterprises is conducive to market progress and the survival of the fittest.