-
Categories
-
Pharmaceutical Intermediates
-
Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients
-
Food Additives
- Industrial Coatings
- Agrochemicals
- Dyes and Pigments
- Surfactant
- Flavors and Fragrances
- Chemical Reagents
- Catalyst and Auxiliary
- Natural Products
- Inorganic Chemistry
-
Organic Chemistry
-
Biochemical Engineering
- Analytical Chemistry
- Cosmetic Ingredient
-
Pharmaceutical Intermediates
Promotion
ECHEMI Mall
Wholesale
Weekly Price
Exhibition
News
-
Trade Service
In the past two years, China's photovoltaic industry has repeatedly encountered adversity in overseas markets
.
After successively suffering from the EU, the United States and Canada against China "double anti" (anti-dumping, anti-subsidy), China almost suffered from the Australian Anti-dumping Commission on China's photovoltaic products "double anti" ruling, fortunately, the Australian Anti-dumping Commission announced on April 7 that it is recommended to terminate the investigation of anti-dumping duties on Chinese imported photovoltaic panels, and will make a final ruling
on whether to impose anti-dumping duties on May 19.
This has undoubtedly relieved the Chinese photovoltaic industry, which has suffered setbacks, and relieved the pressure
on overseas markets in the past two years.
According to reports, photovoltaic panels imported from China account for 80% of the Australian panel market, and the Australian photovoltaic industry brings about 500 million Australian dollars (US$393 million)
to Chinese manufacturers every year.
In 2014, TindoSolar, Australia's only PV panel maker, accused Chinese PV companies of selling products below cost in order to grab customers, and then in May Australia launched an anti-dumping investigation
into Chinese solar panel manufacturers.
After an 11-month investigation, the Australian Anti-Dumping Commission released the preliminary ruling results on its official website, recommending the termination of the anti-dumping investigation
of photovoltaic panels imported from China.
The reason is that "although the relevant products were exported at dumped prices between January 2012 and December 2013, the impact on the relevant industry in Australia was minimal"
.
Previously, China's photovoltaic industry has been successively hit by the "double-reverse" stick
of the European Union, the United States and Canada.
On May 15, 2014, the EU imposed anti-dumping and countervailing "double-reverse" punitive tariffs on solar glass imports from China, up to 36.
1%, for a period of five years
.
The EU imposes anti-dumping duties on Chinese solar glass exporters ranging from 0.
4% to 36.
1%, and countervailing duties ranging from 3.
2% to 17.
1%, depending on the degree of damage caused by individual exporters to the EU market
.
In the same year, the U.
S.
Department of Commerce launched a "double-reverse" investigation
into crystalline silicon photovoltaic products imported from China.
Different from the first "double reverse" launched in November 2011, it has expanded the scope of investigation products not only for crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, but also to almost all crystalline silicon photovoltaic products such as ingots, silicon wafers, cells, and modules, and China's Ministry of Commerce has a countervailing duty rate of 0% to 2.
1% and an anti-dumping duty rate of 53.
3% to 57%
for solar-grade polysilicon imported from the United States.
Moreover, from a regional point of view, not only Chinese mainland, but also Taiwan
, China.
On February 3, 2015, the Canadian International Trade Court issued an announcement to conduct anti-dumping and countervailing duty investigations on crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and laminate products originating in or exported from China to determine whether the products involved caused substantial injury or threatened
substantial injury to the Canadian domestic industry.
On March 5, the Canadian side made a preliminary ruling on the investigation of photovoltaic formation and chip "double-reverse" imported from China, respectively imposing "double-reverse" tariffs ranging from 9% to 286% on a number of Chinese companies such as Trina Solar, JinkoSolar and Wuxi Suntech, and will arbitrate
before June 30 this year.
Previously, the industry has been worried that once Australia decides to tax, it will become the fourth region after the European Union, the United States, and Canada to raise the "double-reverse" stick, which may trigger a follow-up effect and form a siege of China's photovoltaic companies
.
Today, Australia intends to put down the "double-reverse" stick of photovoltaic in China, because Australia is now also focusing on the development of emerging energy such as photovoltaics, but its own production enterprises are less and its dependence on China is high
.
To launch a "double reverse" is bound to raise the export price of Chinese photovoltaic companies, which will affect Australia's own installation.
Therefore, canceling the "double-reverse" policy towards China is a win-win decision
for the two countries.
Statistics show that in the first five months of 2014, the total export of silicon wafers, cells and modules reached 7 billion US dollars, an increase of 16%
year-on-year.
From the perspective of export area, the largest export value is Japan, reaching 2.
01 billion US dollars, accounting for about 35.
7% of exports, and the export volume is about 2.
8GW, followed by the United States, with an export value of about 1.
21 billion US dollars, accounting for about 21% of exports, and an export volume of about 1.
7GWW
.
As a major manufacturer of photovoltaic products, China's domestic market cannot absorb excess capacity, so the export market will still occupy an important position
.
At present, exports are mainly driven by the United States, Japan and the European Union market, and the rigid demand of emerging markets has not yet grown significantly, and frequent trade disputes may make it difficult for leading enterprises to achieve
their sales targets.
Chen Kangping, president of JinkoSolar Co.
, Ltd.
, said that China has most of the world's solar module production capacity, and the continuous trade frictions in Europe and the United States have brought a certain degree of difficulties
to the international development of Chinese photovoltaic companies.
In 2015, the "One Belt, One Road" strategy was implemented, opening up a new direction
for China's photovoltaic industry to "go global".
The terrible thing is that after paying many tuition fees, the government and enterprises have not "brushed up their experience and practiced skills", and have not improved their adaptability and counterattack awareness
in dealing with international trade disputes.
In today's economic globalization, "cooperation leads to win-win results, and fighting leads to damage" has become the consensus
of people of insight in all countries.
The "reconciliation" of the China-EU photovoltaic trade dispute also provides a model specimen for the settlement of trade disputes
.
To fundamentally eliminate the trade disputes with European, American and Austrian photovoltaic products, in addition to actively responding to and summarizing experience, China itself also has a lot of work to do
.
For example, adjust the industrial support policy that overly protects the export industry, so that enterprises can grow freely in the storm of the market; Rationalize the relationship between the government and enterprises, urge enterprises to govern and operate in compliance, etc.
, and create a fair domestic competition environment
.
The "double-reverse" policy provoked by overseas Chinese photovoltaic products is pressure, and it is also the driving force
for China to accelerate market-oriented reforms.
Recognizing this and putting it into practice is not a bad thing
for China.
In the past two years, China's photovoltaic industry has repeatedly encountered adversity in overseas markets
.
After successively suffering from the EU, the United States and Canada against China "double anti" (anti-dumping, anti-subsidy), China almost suffered from the Australian Anti-dumping Commission on China's photovoltaic products "double anti" ruling, fortunately, the Australian Anti-dumping Commission announced on April 7 that it is recommended to terminate the investigation of anti-dumping duties on Chinese imported photovoltaic panels, and will make a final ruling
on whether to impose anti-dumping duties on May 19.
This has undoubtedly relieved the Chinese photovoltaic industry, which has suffered setbacks, and relieved the pressure
on overseas markets in the past two years.
According to reports, photovoltaic panels imported from China account for 80% of the Australian panel market, and the Australian photovoltaic industry brings about 500 million Australian dollars (US$393 million)
to Chinese manufacturers every year.
In 2014, TindoSolar, Australia's only PV panel maker, accused Chinese PV companies of selling products below cost in order to grab customers, and then in May Australia launched an anti-dumping investigation
into Chinese solar panel manufacturers.
After an 11-month investigation, the Australian Anti-Dumping Commission released the preliminary ruling results on its official website, recommending the termination of the anti-dumping investigation
of photovoltaic panels imported from China.
The reason is that "although the relevant products were exported at dumped prices between January 2012 and December 2013, the impact on the relevant industry in Australia was minimal"
.
Previously, China's photovoltaic industry has been successively hit by the "double-reverse" stick
of the European Union, the United States and Canada.
On May 15, 2014, the EU imposed anti-dumping and countervailing "double-reverse" punitive tariffs on solar glass imports from China, up to 36.
1%, for a period of five years
.
The EU imposes anti-dumping duties on Chinese solar glass exporters ranging from 0.
4% to 36.
1%, and countervailing duties ranging from 3.
2% to 17.
1%, depending on the degree of damage caused by individual exporters to the EU market
.
In the same year, the U.
S.
Department of Commerce launched a "double-reverse" investigation
into crystalline silicon photovoltaic products imported from China.
Different from the first "double reverse" launched in November 2011, it has expanded the scope of investigation products not only for crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, but also to almost all crystalline silicon photovoltaic products such as ingots, silicon wafers, cells, and modules, and China's Ministry of Commerce has a countervailing duty rate of 0% to 2.
1% and an anti-dumping duty rate of 53.
3% to 57%
for solar-grade polysilicon imported from the United States.
Moreover, from a regional point of view, not only Chinese mainland, but also Taiwan
, China.
On February 3, 2015, the Canadian International Trade Court issued an announcement to conduct anti-dumping and countervailing duty investigations on crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and laminate products originating in or exported from China to determine whether the products involved caused substantial injury or threatened
substantial injury to the Canadian domestic industry.
On March 5, the Canadian side made a preliminary ruling on the investigation of photovoltaic formation and chip "double-reverse" imported from China, respectively imposing "double-reverse" tariffs ranging from 9% to 286% on a number of Chinese companies such as Trina Solar, JinkoSolar and Wuxi Suntech, and will arbitrate
before June 30 this year.
Previously, the industry has been worried that once Australia decides to tax, it will become the fourth region after the European Union, the United States, and Canada to raise the "double-reverse" stick, which may trigger a follow-up effect and form a siege of China's photovoltaic companies
.
Today, Australia intends to put down the "double-reverse" stick of photovoltaic in China, because Australia is now also focusing on the development of emerging energy such as photovoltaics, but its own production enterprises are less and its dependence on China is high
.
To launch a "double reverse" is bound to raise the export price of Chinese photovoltaic companies, which will affect Australia's own installation.
Therefore, canceling the "double-reverse" policy towards China is a win-win decision
for the two countries.
Statistics show that in the first five months of 2014, the total export of silicon wafers, cells and modules reached 7 billion US dollars, an increase of 16%
year-on-year.
From the perspective of export area, the largest export value is Japan, reaching 2.
01 billion US dollars, accounting for about 35.
7% of exports, and the export volume is about 2.
8GW, followed by the United States, with an export value of about 1.
21 billion US dollars, accounting for about 21% of exports, and an export volume of about 1.
7GWW
.
As a major manufacturer of photovoltaic products, China's domestic market cannot absorb excess capacity, so the export market will still occupy an important position
.
At present, exports are mainly driven by the United States, Japan and the European Union market, and the rigid demand of emerging markets has not yet grown significantly, and frequent trade disputes may make it difficult for leading enterprises to achieve
their sales targets.
Chen Kangping, president of JinkoSolar Co.
, Ltd.
, said that China has most of the world's solar module production capacity, and the continuous trade frictions in Europe and the United States have brought a certain degree of difficulties
to the international development of Chinese photovoltaic companies.
In 2015, the "One Belt, One Road" strategy was implemented, opening up a new direction
for China's photovoltaic industry to "go global".
The terrible thing is that after paying many tuition fees, the government and enterprises have not "brushed up their experience and practiced skills", and have not improved their adaptability and counterattack awareness
in dealing with international trade disputes.
In today's economic globalization, "cooperation leads to win-win results, and fighting leads to damage" has become the consensus
of people of insight in all countries.
The "reconciliation" of the China-EU photovoltaic trade dispute also provides a model specimen for the settlement of trade disputes
.
To fundamentally eliminate the trade disputes with European, American and Austrian photovoltaic products, in addition to actively responding to and summarizing experience, China itself also has a lot of work to do
.
For example, adjust the industrial support policy that overly protects the export industry, so that enterprises can grow freely in the storm of the market; Rationalize the relationship between the government and enterprises, urge enterprises to govern and operate in compliance, etc.
, and create a fair domestic competition environment
.
The "double-reverse" policy provoked by overseas Chinese photovoltaic products is pressure, and it is also the driving force
for China to accelerate market-oriented reforms.
Recognizing this and putting it into practice is not a bad thing
for China.