April 24, 2014

International Trade Actions Complicate Global Market for Renewable Energy Businesses, Particularly in the Solar Sector

Industry and the governments of the United States, the European Union and China have recently taken a number of legal actions involving renewable energy, particularly the solar sector.  Actions pending before authorities in these regions and before the World Trade Organization (WTO) in Geneva raise a number of significant international law issues and greatly complicate the business landscape for solar industry companies domestically and globally.  Developers of solar energy projects may face increased costs as a result of these actions.  Coincidentally, decreased prices for various alternative sources of energy, such as natural gas and coal, pose further difficulties for the renewable energy sector. 

In the WTO, two cases are challenging domestic content requirements of solar sector feed-in-tariff (FIT) programs that provide solar energy producers with long-term guaranteed revenue contracts.  The challenges could result in the elimination of the domestic content requirements that favor domestic producers, or possibly a dismantling of the FIT programs themselves.

  • In November 2012, China, joined by Japan and Australia, challenged the domestic content requirements of EU and EU Member State FIT programs.  Greece and Italy are specifically named as two European countries with offending FIT programs. 
  • Last year, the European Union and Japan challenged similar domestic content requirements contained in an Ontario, Canada, FIT program.  Although the WTO panel ruling will not be public until December 2012, unofficial reports indicate that the panel has found that Ontario’s domestic content requirements violate international trade rules. 

Under domestic trade remedy laws, China, the European Union and the United States have initiated actions that could result in additional duties at the border on imports of solar industry goods alleged or found to be subsidized and/or unfairly priced in countervailing duty (CVD) and anti-dumping (AD) actions, respectively. 

  • The United States recently concluded AD/CVD investigations on imports of Chinese solar cells and modules.  The findings mean that importers into the United States of these products must now deposit AD/CVD duties ranging from 24 percent to more than 250 percent, depending on the Chinese producers/exporters. 
  • In December 2012, the United States will conclude AD/CVD investigations on wind towers (the bases for wind turbines in wind energy production) imported from China and Vietnam.
  • The European Union now also has AD and CVD investigations pending on imports of solar cells and modules from China into the European Union.
  • China has initiated AD and CVD investigations—widely reported as retaliatory in response to the U.S. and EU actions—on polysilicon, a key element in the production of solar cells, from the United States and from the European Union, as well as from South Korea.
© 2014 McDermott Will & Emery

About the Author


David J. Levine is a partner in the International Trade Practice of the law firm McDermott Will & Emery LLP and is based in the Firm’s Washington, D.C., office.  David practices before international trade organizations, federal agencies and courts regarding international trade and related regulatory matters. 


About the Author


Pamela D. Walther is a partner in the law firm of McDermott Will & Emery LLP and is based in the Firm's Washington, D.C., office.  She focuses her practice in the international trade area with particular emphasis on trade relief and market access for food and agricultural products.


Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is  intended to be  a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.

The National Law Review - National Law Forum LLC 4700 Gilbert Ave. Suite 47 #230 Western Springs, IL 60558  Telephone  (708) 357-3317 If you would ike to contact us via email please click here.