HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"EN
5.6.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
152/5
COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 513/2013
of 4 June 2013
imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules
and key components (i.e. cells and wafers) originating in or consigned from the People’s Republic of
China and amending Regulation (EU) No 182/2013 making these imports originating in or
consigned from the People’s Republic of China subject to registration
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
producers, the PRC authorities and known importers of
the initiation of the investigation. The Commission also
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European
advised producers in the USA, which was envisaged as a
Union,
possible analogue country.
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 of
30 November 2009 on protection against dumped imports
(5) Interested
parties
were
given
the
opportunity
to
make
from countries not members of the European Community (
their views known in writing and to request a hearing

1 )
(‘the basic Regulation’), and in particular Article 7 and
within the time limit set in the Notice of Initiation. All
Article 14(5) thereof,
interested parties, who so requested and showed that
there were particular reasons why they should be
heard, were granted a hearing.
After consulting the Advisory Committee,
Whereas:
(6) In
view
of
the
large
number
of
exporting
producers
in
the country concerned, unrelated importers and Union
A. PROCEDURE
producers involved in the investigation, and in order to
complete the investigation within the statutory time
1. Initiation
limits, the Commission announced in the Notice of
Initiation that it had decided to limit to a reasonable
(1) On
6
September
2012,
the
European
Commission
(‘the
number the exporting producers in the country
Commission’) announced, by a notice published in the
concerned, unrelated importers and Union producers
Official Journal of the European Union ( 2 ) (‘Notice of Initi
that would be investigated by selecting a sample in
ation’), the initiation of an anti-dumping proceeding with
accordance with Article 17 of the basic Regulation (this
regard to imports into the European Union (‘the Union’)
process is also referred to as ‘sampling’).
of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key
components (i.e. cells and wafers) originating in the
People’s Republic of China (‘the PRC’ or the ‘country
(a) Sampling of Union producers
concerned’).
(7) The
Commission
announced
in
the
Notice
of
Initiation
(2) The
investigation
was
initiated
following
a
complaint
that it had provisionally selected a sample of Union
lodged on 25 July 2012 by EU ProSun (‘the
producers. All known Union producers and known
complainant’) on behalf of producers representing more
producers’ association were informed about the
than 25 % of the total Union production of crystalline
selection of the provisional sample of Union producers.
silicon photovoltaic (‘PV’) modules and key components.
This provisional sample consisted of 9 Union producers
The complaint contained prima facie evidence of
out of the around 220 Union producers that were
dumping of the said product and of material injury
known prior to the initiation of the investigation to
resulting therefrom, which was considered sufficient to
produce the like product (see recital 26 below), selected
justify the initiation of an investigation.
on the basis of the largest representative volume of
production, taking into account the sales volume and
2. Registration
the geographical location that could reasonably be inves

tigated within the time available. It was ensured that the
(3)
Following a request by the complainant supported by the
sample covers both vertically integrated and non-inte
required evidence the Commission adopted on 1 March
grated Union producers. Interested parties were also
2013 Regulation (EU) No 182/2013 (
invited to make their views known on the provisional

3 ) making imports
of crystalline silicon PV modules and key components
sample. A number of interested parties commented on
(i.e. cells and wafers) originating in or consigned from
the provisional sample and one party requested a hearing
the PRC subject to registration as of 6 March 2013.
with the Hearing Officer.
3. Parties concerned by the proceeding
(8) Several
interested
parties
raised
the
following
objections
(4) The
Commission
officially
advised
the
complainant,
other
concerning the provisional sample of Union producers:
known Union producers, the known exporting
(i) Some parties submitted that the limited information
( 1 ) OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 51.
( 2 ) OJ C 269, 6.9.2012, p. 5.
provided with regard to the provisionally selected
( 3 ) OJ L 61, 5.3.2013, p. 2.
sample was insufficient and prevented them from

---

L 152/6
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
5.6.2013
making any meaningful comments on the proposed
(i) The Union producers requested that their names be
sample. In particular, they criticised that the identity
kept confidential due to the risk of retaliation. There
of the Union producers was kept confidential and
were indeed real threats against Union producers to
requested that the Member States where the
harm their business both in the Union and outside.
sampled Union producers were located should be
The Commission considered that these requests were
disclosed, as well as the selected Union producers’
sufficiently substantiated to be granted. The
share of production in the total production volume
disclosure of the location or share in production
of PV modules, cells and wafers and the percentage
and sales of individual Union producers selected in
of production and sales represented by the sampled
the sample could easily reveal the identity of the
companies individually and by the sample as a
producer concerned and the requests in this regard
whole.
had to be rejected.
(ii) The method used for selection of the sample was
contested on the grounds that it ‘confuses three
(ii) The Commission did not ‘confuse’ the determination
different steps’, namely the support for the initiation
of the support for the initiation of the investigation,
of the investigation, definition of the Union industry
the determination of the Union industry and the
and sampling. Therefore, it was claimed that it was
selection of provisional sample as these steps
unclear whether the Union industry was already
remained independent from each other and were
defined at the time of the selection of the sample,
decided upon separately. It was not demonstrated
and therefore whether the sample could be
to what extent the use of production and sales
considered as representative. Without defining the
data provided by the Union producers in the
Union industry at sampling stage, interested parties
context of the examination of the support for the
were prevented from verifying whether the
initiation of the investigation had affected the repre
provisional sample was representative, and thus
sentativity of the sample. At initiation the Union
whether on the basis of the sample, the situation
industry had indeed been provisionally defined. All
of the Union industry during the investigation
available information concerning the Union
period as defined in recital 19 below could be
producers, including information provided in the
correctly assessed. Furthermore, it was claimed that
complaint and data collected from Union
it was inappropriate to select the provisional sample
producers and other parties before the initiation of
on the basis of the replies of the Union producers to
the investigation, was used in order to provisionally
the examination of the support for the initiation of
establish the total Union production for the investi
the investigation.
gation period, as defined in recital 19 below.
(iii) It was also claimed that the provisional sample was
selected merely on the basis of companies which
(iii) All Union producers that replied to questions related
have expressed their support to the present investi
to the support for the initiation of the investigation
gation.
were considered for the sample, regardless of
whether they supported, opposed or expressed no
opinion on the investigation; this claim was
therefore rejected.
(iv) One party claimed that since vertically integrated
companies are included in the provisional sample,
the production volume of wafers and cells may be
double or triple counted which casts doubts on the
(iv) The question of double/triple counting has been
overall representativity of the sample. It was
considered when the provisional sample was
requested that for vertically integrated producers
selected. It appeared that excluding production and
only the production volume of modules should be
sales of wafers and cells of the vertically integrated
counted, but not the volume of cells and wafers.
Union producers would not take into consideration
the part of the production of wafers and cells sold
on the free market. It was therefore considered that
(v) The same party alleged that the data on which the
excluding sales of wafers and cells from the total
selection of the sample was based were at least partly
production volume would not necessarily lead to a
unreliable which could have an impact on the repre
more representative sample. Furthermore, the repre
sentativity of the provisional sample as a whole.
sentativity of the sample was established not only on
the basis of the production volume but also on the
basis of the geographical spread and a balanced
(vi) One party provided a list containing allegedly around
representation of vertically integrated and non-inte
150 additional Union producers of the like product,
grated producers. The relative representativeness of
claiming that they should have been taken into
the production volume was calculated at the level of
consideration for the purposes of selecting a
each type of the like product. On this basis, it was
sample of Union producers.
considered that the methodology to select the
provisional sample was reasonable and the sample
is therefore considered representative for the Union
(9) The
arguments
raised
by
the
parties
were
addressed
as
industry of the product under investigation as a
follows:
whole. Therefore, this claim was rejected.

---

EN
5.6.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
152/7
(v) As far as the reliability of data is concerned, the
as specified in the Notice of Initiation, basic information
sample was selected on the basis of the information
on their activities related to the product under investi
available at the time of the selection of the sample as
gation during the investigation period, as defined in
provided for in Article 17(1) of the basic Regulation.
recital 19 below.
Concerning the reliability of data used in the support
of the initiation of the investigation, the investigation
found no evidence that the data collected prior to
the initiation was significantly deficient. Therefore, it
(12) Of
the
around
250
unrelated
importers
put
forward
by
can be reasonably assumed that the basis on which
the complainant, that the Commission contacted, 36
the provisional sample was selected was sufficiently
parties replied to the sampling form attached to the
reliable. Therefore, this claim was rejected.
Notice of Initiation, 35 for modules, only 1 reply for
cells and no reply for wafers. The sample was selected
in accordance with Article 17 of the basic Regulation to
cover the largest representative volume of imports which
(vi) Concerning the list of around 150 additional Union
can reasonably be investigated within the time available.
producers, it should be noted that this information
On this basis, the Commission selected a sample of three
was submitted far outside the deadline set for
unrelated importers for modules and one for cells.
interested parties to comment on the selection of
Further to the comments received, the Commission
the provisional sample and for Union producers to
decided to include one more unrelated importer for
come forward and to request to be selected in the
modules in the sample. This company came forward
sample. Moreover, about 30 of the Union producers
and argued that its level of activity would justify the
contained in this list were in fact known to the
inclusion in the sample. Their initial submission was
Commission at the time of the selection of the
therefore re-examined and it became apparent that a
sample. Furthermore, all Union producers that
clerical error occurred in relation to the volume of
made themselves known after the publication of
imports reported by the importer concerned. On these
the Notice of Initiation were considered when
grounds, the company in question was included in the
selecting the sample. On this basis, the representa
sample of unrelated importers. Moreover, two companies
tivity of the sample has not been affected. Therefore,
that were initially selected in the sample did not reply to
this claim was rejected.
the questionnaires and were therefore considered as non-
cooperating with the investigation and excluded from the
sample of unrelated importers. Therefore, the sample of
the unrelated importers consisted of two importers for
modules and one importer for cells, representing around
(10) Following receipt of comments, the composition of the
2-5 % of the total imports from the country concerned.
sample was revised on the ground that there were indi
After the receipt of the questionnaire reply, it became,
cations that one of the selected companies would not
however, apparent that the core activity of two out of
have been in the position to fully cooperate. In order
three importers was in fact solar installations and not
to maintain the level of representativity of the sample
trading of the product concerned. The investigation
an additional Union producer was selected. This revised
revealed that a majority of imports of the product
sample consisted thus of 10 companies, selected on the
concerned enter the Union market through companies
basis of the largest representative volume for each level
related to the exporting producers in the PRC or
of production, taking into account sales volume on the
through installers or project developers. In the circum
EU market and geographical location that could
stances, the sample was provisionally considered to be
reasonably be investigated within the time available. As
representative. The Commission will, however, in the
a result, the revised sample of Union producers
course of the further investigation contact additional
accounted, expressed as a percentage of out of the total
cooperating unrelated importers in order to verify
Union production, between 18 and 21 % for modules,
whether they qualify as importers and to see whether
between 17 and 24 % for cells and between 28 and 35 %
the size of the sample can be increased.
for wafers and covered vertically integrated and non-inte
grated producers. Given that a precise percentage would
allow calculating the production volume of the above
mentioned additional Union producer and thus its
identity could be determined, no such precise percentages
(c) Sampling of exporting producers
could be disclosed.
(13) In view of the apparently high number of exporting
producers, sampling was envisaged in the Notice of
Initiation for the determination of dumping, in
accordance with Article 17 of the basic Regulation. In
(b) Sampling of unrelated importers
order to enable the Commission to decide whether
sampling would be necessary and, if so, to select a
(11) In
view
of
the
potentially
high
number
of
unrelated
sample, all exporting producers were asked to make
importers, sampling was envisaged in the Notice of
themselves known to the Commission and to provide,
Initiation in accordance with Article 17 of the basic
as specified in the Notice of Initiation, basic information
Regulation. In order to enable the Commission to
on their activities related to the product under investi
decide whether sampling would be necessary and, if so,
gation during the investigation period, as defined in
to select a sample, all importers were asked to make
recital 19 below. The authorities of the country
themselves known to the Commission and to provide,
concerned were also consulted.

---

L 152/8
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
5.6.2013
(14) As
many
as
135
exporting
Chinese
producers
(often
— Delta Energy Systems S.r.l., Rome, Italy
groups of several companies) made themselves known
in the sampling exercise. The cooperating companies
— Sunways AG, Konstanz, Germany
represent 80 % of the total Chinese export value. The
selected sample of seven groups of companies consists
of the three cooperating exporters with the largest
— JA Solar GmbH, Munich, Germany
volume of exports of modules, the two cooperating
exporters with the largest volume of exports of cells
(d) Related traders/importers outside the Union
and the two cooperating exporters with the largest
volume of exports of wafers.
— Delsolar Co. Ltd, Zhunan City, Taiwan
(d) Questionnaire replies and verifications
— JA Solar Hong Kong Ltd, Hong Kong SAR
(15) The Commission sent questionnaires
to all sampled
Chinese exporting producers as well as to the sampled
— Wealthy Rise International Ltd, Hong Kong SAR
Union producers, the sampled unrelated importers and
upstream and downstream operators and their associ
— Suntech Power International Ltd, Schaffhausen,
ations that made themselves known within the time
Switzerland
limits set out in the Notice of Initiation. The Commission
also contacted a representative consumer association.
— Trina Solar (Schweiz) AG, Wallisellen, Swit
zerland
(16) Questionnaire
replies
were
received
from
all
sampled
Chinese exporting producers, from all sampled Union
(e) Unrelated importer in the Union
producers, 3 sampled unrelated Union importers and
21 upstream and downstream operators and 3 of their
associations.
— IBC AG, Bad Staffelstein, Germany

(f) Upstream Operators
(17) The
Commission
sought
and
verified
all
the
information
deemed necessary for the purpose of a provisional deter
mination of dumping, resulting injury and Union
— Roth & Rau AG, Hohenstein-Ernsthal, Germany
interest. Verification visits were carried out at the
premises of the following (groups of) companies.
— WACKER Chemie AG, Burghausen, Germany
(a) Union producers
(g) Downstream Operators
— Verifications visits were carried out at the
— Juwi Solar GmbH, Worrstadt, Germany
premises of the 10 sampled Union producers
— ValSolar SL, Badajoz, Spain
(b) Exporting producers in the PRC
(h) Associations
— Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co. Ltd, PRC
— EPIA, Brussels, Belgium
— Delsolar (Wujiang) Co. Ltd, PRC
(18) In
view
of
the
need
to
establish
a
normal
value
for
the
— Jiangxi LDK Solar Hi-Tech Co. Ltd, PRC
exporting producers in the PRC in case MET is not
granted to them, a verification to establish normal
value on the basis of data from India as analogue
— JingAo Group, PRC
country took place at the premises of the following
companies:
— Jinzhou Yangguang Energy, PRC
— EMMVEE Photovoltaic Power Private Limited,
— Wuxi Suntech Power Co. Ltd, PRC
Bengaluru, India
— Yingli Green Energy Holding Company, PRC
— Tata Power Solar Systems Limited, Bengaluru, India
(c) Related importers in the Union
4. Investigation period and period considered
(19) The
investigation
of
dumping
and
injury
covered
the
— Yingli Green Energy Greece Sales GmbH, Munich,
period from 1 July 2011 to 30 June 2012 (‘the investi
Germany
gation period’ or ‘IP’). The examination of trends relevant
for the assessment of injury covered the period from
— LDK Solar Italia S.r.l., San Zenone degli Ezzelini
2009 to the end of the investigation period (‘the
(TV), Italy
period considered’).

---

EN
5.6.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
152/9
B. PRODUCT CONCERNED AND LIKE PRODUCT
2. Like product
1. Product concerned
(26) The
investigation
has
shown
that
the
product
concerned
and the product produced and sold in the domestic
(20) The
product
concerned
is
crystalline
silicon
PV
modules
market of India, which served as an analogue country
or panels and cells and wafers of the type used in
for the purpose of establishing the normal value, as
crystalline silicon PV modules or panels, originating in
well as the product produced and sold in the Union by
or consigned from the PRC. The cells and wafers have a
the Union industry have the same basic physical,
thickness not exceeding 400 micrometres. This product
chemical and technical characteristics as well as the
is currently falling within CN codes ex 3818 00 10,
same basic end uses. They are therefore provisionally
ex 8501 31 00,
ex 8501 32 00,
ex 8501 33 00,
considered as alike within the meaning of Article 1(4)
ex 8501 34 00,
ex 8501 61 20,
ex 8501 61 80,
of the basic Regulation.
ex 8501 62 00, ex 8501 63 00, ex 8501 64 00 and
ex 8541 40 90 (‘the product concerned’).
3. Claims regarding product scope
(21) The
following
product
types
are
excluded
from
the
defi
(i) Physical, chemical and technical characteristics and
nition of the product concerned:
end uses
(27) Several
interested
parties
claimed
that
the
investigation
— solar chargers that consist of less than six cells, are
cannot cover three products with different physical,
portable and supply electricity to devices or charge
chemical and technical characteristics, and therefore
batteries,
modules, cells and wafers should be subject to three
separate investigations. Moreover, they claimed that it is
unclear whether the investigation covers one single
product or three separate products and therefore they
— thin film PV products,
have no full opportunity to defend their interests. It
was also claimed to exclude wafers from the investigation
as an alternative if monowafers would not be excluded
— crystalline silicon PV products that are permanently
(see recitals 42 to 44 below).
integrated into electrical goods, where the function of
the electrical goods is other than power generation,
and where these electrical goods consume the elec
tricity generated by the integrated crystalline silicon
(28) The wafer-cell-module production is one single
PV cell(s).
production process with different production steps.

Modules, cells and wafers determine together the char
acteristics of the finished product (i.e. modules). The
investigation showed that the wafers and cells production
(22) The
PV
modules,
cells
and
wafers
convert
sunlight
into
is directly and exclusively dedicated to produce modules;
electricity. The conversion is operated by cells which
modules, cells and wafers share the same physical,
absorb light and convert it into electricity through
chemical and technical characteristics (determined by
crystalline silicon.
the raw material used) and have the same basic end
uses, i.e. are sold for integration into PV solar systems.
The modules performance is directly linked to the
(23) Wafers are the first step of the production process. They
performance of the wafers and cells.
are made of crystalline silicon and they are the key
component for cells production.
(29) The
Notice of Initiation of the investigation clearly
expressed that modules, cells and wafers constitute the
(24) First
the
crystalline
silicon
has
to
be
molten
to
obtain
the
product under investigation. Interested parties had
crystalline silicon ingots which are sawed into wafers.
therefore full opportunity to defend their interests on
Wafers are treated through a high technology semicon
the basis of the product concerned as defined. On
ductor processing sequence to create working solar cells.
these grounds, the arguments were rejected.
Cells are the second step of the production process. They
have a positive-negative junction to collect and forward
the electricity that is generated by the cell.
(ii) Different nomenclature
(30) It
was
further
claimed
that
modules,
cells
and
wafers
(25) The modules are the third step of the production process.
could not be considered as a single product as they
To assemble the modules, cells are soldered together with
have several different eight-digit CN codes, six-digit
flat wires or metal ribbons to produce a string of cells.
subheading, four-digit HS heading and two-digit chapter
Those are laminated between sheets. Mostly glass is used
levels, and they are also found in different sections of the
on top and a polymeric backing sheet to the bottom.
HS Nomenclature. This argument is, as such, irrelevant in
Frames are usually created to allow the mounting in the
order to determine the product scope of an anti-dumping
field (e.g. on rooftops). The module may or may not have
investigation which is based on the physical character
an inverter.
istics of the product concerned.

---

L 152/10
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
5.6.2013
(iii) Value added of cells
should therefore not be considered as one single product.
The investigation showed that modules, cells and wafers
(31) Several parties claimed that the value added in the cell
can be distributed within different or similar distribution
conversion process accounts for the largest part of the
channels. However, the main criteria to define a single
value of a module and therefore cells must be considered
product are the same physical, chemical and technical
as a separate product.
characteristics and end uses. Considering recitals 27 to
29 above, it is concluded that therefore different
distribution channels are not considered as a determining
element. The argument should therefore be rejected.
(32) The investigation revealed that the cells production is the
most technologically sophisticated part in the production
process. However, it also showed that the three
processing steps are linked to each other and the value
added is not concentrated in a particular stage of the
(vii) Consumer perception
production process but is spread over the whole
production process. On these grounds, the claim was
(38) It
was
claimed
that
modules,
cells
and
wafers
differ
rejected.
substantially in terms of consumer perception and
therefore they should not be considered as one single
product.
(iv) Separate merchant markets
(33) Some
interested
parties
claimed
that
modules,
cells
and
wafers have separate merchant markets and therefore
(39) Likewise
as
above
the
main
criteria
to
define
a
single
they should be treated as different products which
product are the same physical, chemical and technical
would also be demonstrated by the fact that a large
characteristics and end uses. Considering recitals 27 to
number of producers are not vertically integrated.
29 above it is concluded that therefore different
consumer perception is not considered as a determining
element. The argument should therefore be rejected.
(34) Modules, cells and wafers cannot be considered as
separate products whose prices fluctuate only
depending on market factors. As a matter of fact their
(viii) Thin film products
prices are strictly interconnected and affected by the
polysilicon price. Likewise, as it has been explained
(40) One
interested
party
claimed
that
thin
film
PV
products
above in recitals 23 to 25 above, the product
should be included in the definition of product
concerned is produced in one single production process
concerned, arguing that they share the same basic
with different steps. The fact that some producers are not
physical, chemical and technical characteristics and the
vertically integrated is due only to business decision and
same basic end uses.
economies of scale and does not reverse this conclusion.
On these grounds, this argument had to be rejected.
(41) Thin film PV products are clearly excluded from the
(v) End use and interchangeability
product definition (see recital 21 above). Indeed, thin
film PV products have different physical, chemical and
(35) Several
interested
parties
claimed
that
modules,
cells
and
technical characteristics compared to the product
wafers must be treated as different products given that
concerned. They are produced via a different production
they have different end uses and they were not inter
process and not from crystalline silicon which is the
changeable.
main raw material to produce modules, cells and
wafers. They have lower conversion efficiency and a
lower wattage output and therefore they are not
suitable for the same types of applications than those
(36) As
mentioned
above
the
investigation
showed
that
the
of the product concerned. On these grounds, the
wafer-cell-module production process is one single
arguments had to be rejected.
production process and therefore the question of inter
changeability between different steps of a single
production process is not applicable. Moreover,
modules, cells and wafers have the same end use,
converting sunlight into electricity and therefore cannot
(ix) Exclusion of monowafers
be used in other applications.
(42) One
interested
party
claimed
that
monowafers
should
be
excluded from the definition of the product concerned,
as they have different physical, chemical and technical
(vi) Distribution channels
characteristics than multiwafers. It was claimed that
they have differences in the crystal structure, in the
(37) One
interested
party
claimed
that
modules,
cells
and
shape and in the aspect. Moreover, it was claimed that
wafers do not share the same distribution channels and
there was no Union production of monowafers.

---

EN
5.6.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
152/11
(43) The
investigation
found
that
monowafers
are
of
a
higher
compensated by an increase in dimension and/or number
quality than multiwafers, albeit issued from similar
of cells. Therefore modules dedicated to battery charging,
production processes using the same main raw material
and consisting of more than six cells, fall within the
(polysilicon). Therefore it is concluded that monowafers
definition of the product concerned.
and multiwafers have the same basic physical, chemical
and technical characteristics.
(xii) Conclusion
(49) On the basis of the above, it is provisionally concluded
(44) The
investigation
showed
that
the
basic
end
uses
are
the
that crystalline silicon PV modules or panels and cells
same, as both monowafers and multiwafers are
and wafers, of the type used in crystalline silicon PV
exclusively dedicated to the production of solar cells
modules or panels, as described above, constitute a
(mono and multi accordingly) and resulting in the
single product. However, the Commission will further
production of solar modules (mono and multi accord
investigate the question as to whether modules, cells
ingly). There are no substantial differences between the
and wafers constitute one single or two or three
two types of wafers and they are interchangeable, they
separate products. It therefore invites all interested
both can be used to produce cells. In addition, as to the
parties to make their views known on this question,
claim that there was no production of monowafers in the
taking into account the provisional conclusion reached
Union, the investigation showed that both monowafers
by the Commission at this stage. In any event, even if
and multiwafers are produced in the Union. On these
they were ultimately found to constitute two or three
grounds, this argument has to be rejected.
different products, the current investigation would
cover all of these different products, and definitive
measures could be imposed on modules, cells and
wafers independently of the question whether they
constitute one or several products.
(x) Semi-finished products
(45) Furthermore
it
was
claimed
that
wafers
and
cells
should
be considered as two semi-finished feeder products while
C. DUMPING
modules are end products, therefore they should not be
1. The PRC
considered as one single product.
1.1. Market economy treatment
(50) Pursuant
to
Article
2(7)(b)
of
the
basic
Regulation,
in
(46) As
mentioned
above,
the
main
criteria
to
define
a
single
anti-dumping investigations concerning imports orig
product are the same physical, chemical and technical
inating in the PRC, normal value shall be determined
characteristics and end uses. Considering recitals 27 to
in accordance with Article 2(1) to (6) for those
29 above it is concluded that therefore the difference
producers which were found to meet the criteria laid
between semi-finished or finished products is not
down in Article 2(7)(c) of the basic Regulation.
considered as a determining element. The argument
should therefore be rejected.
(51) Briefly,
and
for
ease
of
reference
only,
these
criteria
are
set out below:
(xi) Solar chargers
(i) business decisions are made in response to market
(47) One
interested
party
requested
the
exclusion
of
solar
conditions and without significant State interference,
panels dedicated solely to 12V battery charging on the
and costs reflect market values;
basis that they have a different end use than the modules
for grid connection due to the fact that they generate
much lower voltage and therefore are not suitable for
(ii) firms have one clear set of basic accounting records,
grid connection.
which are independently audited, in line with inter
national accounting standards and applied for all
purposes;
(48) According
to
the
Notice
of
Initiation
solar
chargers
that
consist of less than six cells, are portable and supply
(iii) there are no significant distortions carried over from
electricity to devices or charge batteries are excluded
the former non-market economy system;
from the product under investigation. Modules of more
than six cells dedicated only to battery charging have the
same basic characteristics and performance as the
(iv) legal certainty and stability is provided by bank
modules for grid connection. They use an open voltage
ruptcy and property laws; and
circuit which has a lower voltage than the circuit used in
modules for grid connection. Despite this difference the
investigation has revealed that this type of modules can
(v) currency exchanges are carried out at the market
be connected to the grid. The lower voltage can be easily
rate.

---

L 152/12
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
5.6.2013
(52) In the present investigation all sampled exporting
support of the claim they relied on the Court of Justice’s
producers requested MET pursuant to Article 2(7)(b) of
judgments in the Brosmann ( 1 ) and Aokang ( 2 ) shoes
the basic Regulation and replied to the MET claim form
cases.
within the given deadlines.
(61) First, it is recalled that the Brosmann and Aokang cases
(53) The
Commission sought
all
the
information deemed
are not pertinent for the assessment of the legality of the
necessary and verified all the information submitted in
MET analysis in the investigation at hand since those
the MET claims at the premises of the companies in
cases, contrary to this investigation, relate to situations
question.
where the MET assessments were not conducted at all.
(54) The verification
established that all seven exporting
(62) Furthermore,
the
Brosmann
and
Aokang
cases
are
not
producers (groups of companies) claiming MET did not
relevant for the assessment of the legality of the investi
meet the requirements of the criteria laid down in
gation at hand, as the basic Regulation has meanwhile
Article 2(7)(c) of the basic Regulation.
been amended. Article 2(7) of the basic Regulation, as
amended, provides that the Commission shall only make
MET determinations in respect of companies included in
a sample pursuant to Article 17 of the basic Regulation
and that it shall make such a determination within seven,
(55) All seven groups of companies benefited from prefer
and in any event within eight, months of the initiation of
ential tax regime(s) and grants and consequently have
the investigation. This amended Article is applicable to all
failed to demonstrate not to be subject to significant
new and pending investigations as from 15 December
distortions carried over from the non-market economy
2012, including therefore the present one.
system and therefore did not fulfil the requirements of
criterion 3 of the MET assessment.
(63) In any event, the interpretation of the standing case-law
that there was no infringement per se of the right to a
(56) Six
groups
of
companies
failed
to
demonstrate
that
their
MET determination, notwithstanding the fact that the
accounts would be independently audited in line with
three month time limit was not respected, must be
international accounting standards and therefore did
upheld.
not fulfil the requirements of criterion 2 of the MET
assessment.
(64) The
main
substantial
comments
received
concerned
the
preferential tax regime and grants. Exporters did not
(57) One
group
of
companies
failed
to
demonstrate
that
all
its
contest the facts established, but questioned their
companies would be subject to bankruptcy laws and did
importance for the fulfilment of the MET criterion 3.
not fulfil the requirements of criterion 4 of the MET
In particular, they argued that State benefits do not
assessment.
represent a significant proportion of their respective turn
overs.
(58) In
addition,
three
groups
of
companies
have
not
been
in
a position to demonstrate that they are free from
(65) It
is
noted
in
this
regard
that
an
income
tax
system
that
significant State interference and did not fulfil the
treats favourably certain companies deemed strategic by
requirements of criterion 1 of the MET assessment.
the Government is clearly not one of a market economy.
Such a system is still heavily influenced by State
planning. It is also noted that distortions introduced by
income tax reductions are significant, as they completely
(59) Following
the
disclosure
of
MET
findings,
comments
change the amount of pre-tax profits the company has to
were received from all sampled companies.
achieve in order to be attractive to investors. The
distortions are also permanent, and the absolute benefit
received during the investigation period is, because of the
nature of the advantage, irrelevant for assessing whether
the distortion is ‘significant’. Rather, the assessment of
(60) Two
groups
of
companies
made
a
procedural
comment
and claimed that the MET determination was made out
of time, i.e. after the three-month period laid down in
( 1 ) Court of Justice judgment of 2 February 2012 in Case C-249/10 P,
Brosmann Footwear HK and others v Council.
Article 2(7)(c) of the basic Regulation and that the inves
( 2 ) Court of Justice judgment of 15 November 2012 in Case C-247/10
tigation therefore should be terminated without delay. In
P, Zhejiang Aokang Shoes Co. Ltd v Council.

---

EN
5.6.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
152/13
the significance has to be based on the overall impact of
prevent completion of the investigation in good time.
the measure on financial and economic situation of the
Consequently, it was provisionally decided not to
company.
accept any of the claims for individual examination.
(66) With regard to criterion 2, three groups of companies
claimed that they complied with the respective rules of
1.3. Analogue country
the international accounting standards since their US
(72) According
to
Article
2(7)(a)
of
the
basic
Regulation,
consolidated accounts were fully in line with those stan
normal value for the exporting producers not granted
dards. Some companies also claimed that, in general,
MET shall be established on the basis of the price or
their accounts were in compliance with Chinese
constructed value in a market economy third country
accounting standards, which they consider to be
(‘analogue country’).
equivalent to the international ones. This issue at hand,
however, is not whether Chinese accounting standards
are in line with international accounting standards. The
issue at hand is whether the accounts comply with the
(73) In the Notice of Initiation the Commission indicated its
applicable accounting standards or not. In particular,
intention to use the USA as an appropriate analogue
those comments failed to address the fact that, with
country for the purpose of establishing normal value
regard to the individual financial statements of the
for the PRC and invited all interested parties to
Chinese companies in question, a number of inter
comment thereon.
national accounting standards (and the corresponding
Chinese equivalent), including in particular inventory
depreciation and disclosure of related parties’ trans
actions, were found to be violated.
(74) A
number
of
exporters
and
importers
have
submitted
comments on the choice of the analogue country
arguing that the USA would not be a suitable analogue
(67) With regard to criterion 1, taking into account
country, mainly due to the fact that the US market was
comments received from the parties and in the light of
protected from Chinese imports during part of the IP by
the judgment Case C-337/09 P (
anti-dumping and anti-subsidy measures.

1 ), it is concluded that
this criterion is met by all companies. However, overall
MET determination for all sampled exporters remains
unchanged since they still fail to meet the requirements
(75) Interested
parties proposed Taiwan, India and South
of criteria 2 and 3.
Korea as more suitable analogue countries. Following
those comments, it was decided to broaden the analysis
regarding the identification of a suitable analogue
(68) With
regard
to
criterion
4,
the
company
group
referred
country. As a result, all major producers of solar
to in recital 57 above could demonstrate that a bank
panels were approached. In total 34 companies in
ruptcy proceeding was initiated against the main Chinese
India, 9 companies in Japan, 15 companies in Malaysia,
group company in the meantime. It is therefore
2 companies in Mexico, 34 companies in Korea, 9
concluded that this criterion is met by this company
companies in Singapore, 43 companies in Taiwan and
group. However, overall MET determination for this
21 companies in the USA were contacted.
company group remains unchanged since they fail to
meet the requirements of criteria 2 and 3.
(76) Replies
were
received
from
two
companies
in
India,
two
(69) In
conclusion,
it
has
not
been
shown
that
MET
criteria
2
in Taiwan and two in the USA. As the companies in
and/or 3 were fulfilled by either of the sampled exporting
Taiwan almost exclusively produced PV cells while the
producers. Therefore, MET cannot be granted to any of
Chinese exports are mainly in the form of modules, and
these companies.
the USA was considered unsuitable in light of the
comments received, it was provisionally decided to use
India as analogue country. It should be noted that the
Commission may revisit this issue if the further investi
1.2. Individual examination
gation reveals that modules, cells and wafers constitute
two or three different products. In particular, as India
(70) Claims for individual examination pursuant to
Article 17(3) of the basic Regulation were submitted by
does not produce wafers, a different analogue country
18 cooperating exporting producers or groups of
may have to be chosen for wafers.
exporting producers not selected in in the sample.
(77) One Indian
producer provided an incomplete reply.
(71) Given the high number of the claims received, the
Therefore, the information submitted by this company
Commission has provisionally concluded that individual
could not be used to establish normal value. However,
examinations would be unduly burdensome and would
the information submitted by that company and verified
could be used to confirm that the information submitted
( 1 ) Judgment in Case C-337/09 P, Council v Zhejiang Xinan Chemical
by the fully cooperating analogue country producer was
Industrial Group Co. Ltd.
indeed representative of the Indian market.

---

L 152/14
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
5.6.2013
1.4. Normal Value
production and SG&A expenses were adjusted, before
being used in the ordinary course of trade test and in
(78) Since
no
sampled
Chinese
exporter
was
granted
MET,
constructing normal values.
normal value was established pursuant to the provisions
of Article 2(7)(a) of the basic Regulation, using India as
analogue market economy third country.
(86) For
solar
wafers,
normal
value
could
not
be
established
using the methodology described in recitals 79 to 85
above since none of the cooperating Indian producers
(79) First,
the
product
types
sold
domestically
by
the
analogue
produced solar wafers. It was verified whether the
country producer that were identical or directly
normal value could be established on the basis of a
comparable with the types sold for export to the
closely resembling product, applying necessary
Union were identified.
adjustments for differences in physical properties, if
necessary. In the case of solar wafers, the closest
resembling product would be a solar cell. However,
wafers need to undergo significant processing to
(80) The Commission subsequently examined for the
become cells. Moreover, following this method would
analogue country producer whether each type of the
require significant adjustments which cannot be reliably
like product sold domestically could be considered as
quantified. Therefore, the normal value of a cell cannot
being sold in the ordinary course of trade. This was
be used as a basis for calculating a normal value for a
done by establishing for each product type the
wafer. As an alternative, it was considered to use prices
proportion of profitable sales to independent customers
of wafers sold by producers from market economy
on the domestic market during the IP.
countries on the Indian market, as these prices are repre
sentative for the market conditions prevailing on the
market for wafers in India. As South Korea is the
largest market economy supplier of wafers to the
(81) Where the sales volume of a product type, sold at a net
sales price equal to or above the calculated cost of
analogue country producers, normal value is established
production, represented more than 80 % of the total
on the basis of the prices of South Korean wafers on the
sales volume of that type, and where the weighted
Indian market.
average sales price of that type was equal to or higher
than the cost of production, normal value was based on
the actual domestic price. This price was calculated as a
1.5. Export price
weighted average of the prices of all domestic sales of
that type made during the IP.
(87) The
exporting
producers
made
export
sales
to
the
Union
either directly to independent customers or through
related companies located in the Union.
(82) Where the volume of profitable sales of a product type
represented 80 % or less of the total sales volume of that
type, or where the weighted average price of that type
(88) Where export sales to the Union were made directly to
was below the cost of production, normal value was
independent customers in the Union, export prices were
based on the actual domestic price, calculated as a
established on the basis of the prices actually paid or
weighted average of profitable sales of that type only.
payable for the product concerned in accordance with
Article 2(8) of the basic Regulation.
(83) Where
the
product
types
were
all
sold
at
a
loss,
it
was
considered that they were not sold in the ordinary course
(89) Where
export
sales
to
the
Union
were
made
through
of trade.
related companies located in the Union, export prices
were established on the basis of the first resale prices
of these related companies to independent customers in
the Union, pursuant to Article 2(9) of the basic Regu
(84) For
sales
of
product
types
not
made
in
the
ordinary
lation. Adjustments were made for all costs incurred
course of trade, as well as for product types which
between importation and resale including sales, general
were not sold on the domestic market, a constructed
and administrative expenses and profit. With respect to
normal value was used.
profit margin, the profit realised by the cooperating
unrelated importer of the product concerned was used
since the actual profit of the related importer was not
considered reliable because of the relationship between
(85) To
construct
normal
value,
the
weighted
average
selling,
the exporting producer and the related importer.
general and administrative (‘SG&A’) expenses incurred
and the weighted average profit realised by the sole
fully cooperating analogue country producer on
domestic sales of the like product, in the ordinary
1.6. Comparison
course of trade during the investigation period, was
added to its own average cost of production during the
(90) The
comparison
between
normal
value
and
export
price
investigation period. Where necessary, the costs of
was made on an ex-works basis.

---

EN
5.6.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
152/15
(91) For
the
purpose
of
ensuring
a
fair
comparison
between
the normal value and the export price, due allowance in
Company
Dumping
Margin
the form of adjustments was made for differences
affecting prices and price comparability in accordance
Jiangxi LDK Solar Hi-Tech Co. Ltd;
88,4 %
with Article 2(10) of the basic Regulation.
LDK Solar Hi-Tech (Hefei) Co. Ltd;
LDK Solar Hi-Tech (Nanchang) Co. Ltd;
LDK Solar Hi-Tech (Suzhou) Co. Ltd,
(92) Appropriate adjustments for physical characteristics,
indirect taxes, transport, insurance, handling loading
JingAo Solar Co. Ltd;
99,0 %
and ancillary costs, packing, credit, commissions and
Shanghai JA Solar Technology Co. Ltd,
bank charges were made in all cases where they were
JA Solar Technology Yangzhou Co. Ltd;
found to be reasonable, accurate and supported by
Shanghai Jinglong Solar Energy Technology Co.
verified evidence.
Ltd;
Hefei JA Solar Technology Co. Ltd,
1.7. Dumping margins
Jinzhou Yangguang Energy Co. Ltd;
48,1 %
Jinzhou Rixin Silicon Materials Co. Ltd;
(93) For the sampled companies, the weighted average normal
Jinzhou Youhua Silicon Materials Co. Ltd;
value of each type of the like product established for the
analogue country was compared with the weighted
Jinzhou Huachang Photovoltaic Technology Co.
Ltd;
average export price of the corresponding type of the
product concerned, as provided for in Article 2(11) and
Jinzhou Jinmao Photovoltaic Technology Co. Ltd,
(12) of the basic Regulation.
Wuxi Suntech Power Co. Ltd;
71,5 %
Luoyang Suntech Power Co. Ltd;
(94) The weighted average dumping margin of the
Suntech Power Co. Ltd;
cooperating exporting producers not included in the
Wuxi Sun-Shine Power Co. Ltd;
sample was calculated in accordance with the provisions
Zhenjiang Ren De New Energy Science
of Article 9(6) of the basic Regulation. This margin was
Technology Co. Ltd;
established as a weighted average of the margins estab
Zhenjiang Rietech New Energy Science
lished for the sampled exporting producers.
Technology Co. Ltd,
Yingli Energy (China) Co. Ltd;
96,2 %
(95) With
regard
to
all
other
exporting
producers
in
the
PRC,
Hainan Yingli New Energy Resources Co. Ltd;
the dumping margins were established on the basis of
Baoding Tianwei Yingli New Energy Resources Co.
the facts available in accordance with Article 18 of the
Ltd,
basic Regulation. To this end the level of cooperation
Other cooperating companies (Annex) 88,5
%
was first established by comparing the volume of
exports to the Union reported by the cooperating
All other companies 112,6
%
exporting producers with the total volume of Chinese
imports into the Union.
D. INJURY
(96) As
the
cooperation
accounted
for
more
than
80
%
of
1. Definition of the Union industry and Union
total Chinese exports to the Union, the level of
production
cooperation can be considered high. Since there was no
reason to believe that any exporting producer deliberately
(98) The
like product was manufactured by around 220
abstained from cooperating, the residual dumping margin
producers in the Union. They constitute the Union
was set at the level of the sampled company with the
industry within the meaning of Article 4(1) of the
highest dumping margin. This was considered appro
basic Regulation and will hereafter be referred to as
priate since there were no indications that the non-
‘the Union industry’.
cooperating companies were dumping at a lower level,
and in order to ensure the effectiveness of any measures.
(99) All
available
information
concerning
the
Union
industry,

including information provided in the complaint, macro
economic data provided by Europressedienst, an inde
(97) On
this
basis
the
provisional
weighted
average
dumping
pendent consultancy firm (‘the consultant’) and the
margins expressed as a percentage of the CIF Union
verified questionnaire responses of the sampled Union
frontier price, duty unpaid, are as follows:
producers were used to establish the total Union

production for the IP since complete public information
on production was not available. As modules, cells and
wafers are imported into the Union under customs
Company
Dumping
Margin
headings covering other products not subject to the
present investigation, Eurostat could not be used to
Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co. Ltd;
93,3 %
determine import volumes and values. Import volumes
Trina Solar (Changzhou) Science and Technology
and values were based on the data provided by the
Co. Ltd,
consultant. When possible, the data received from the
Delsolar (Wujiang) Co. Ltd, 112,6
%
consultant was cross-checked with public sources and

with the verified questionnaire replies.

---

L 152/16
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
5.6.2013
(100) On this basis, the total Union production was estimated
import volumes and values. Therefore, the Union
to be around 4 GW for modules, 2 GW for cells and 2
consumption was based on data provided by the
GW for wafers during the IP.
consultant mentioned in recital 99 above and cross-
checked with public sources such as market researches
and publicly available studies and with the verified ques
(101) As indicated in recital 10 above, 10 Union producers
tionnaire replies.
were selected in the sample representing 18-21 % of
the total Union production of modules, 17-24 % of
total Union production of cells and 28-35 % of total
(108) Union consumption developed as follows:
Union production of wafers.
Table 1-a
2. Determination of the relevant Union market
Union consumption for modules (in MW)
(102) Part of the Union industry is vertically integrated and a
substantial part of the Union industry’s production was
2009 2010 2011 IP
destined for captive use, in particular the production of
cells and wafers.
Total market 5
465 12
198 19
878 17
538
Index
100 223 364 321
(103) In order to establish whether or not the Union industry
(2009 = 100)
suffered material injury and to determine consumption
and other economic indicators, it was examined whether
Source: Europressedienst
and to what extent the subsequent use of the Union
industry’s production of the like product (‘captive’ use)
had to be taken into account.
Table 1-b
Union consumption for cells (in MW)
(104) In order to provide a picture as complete as possible of
the situation of the Union industry, data have been
2009 2010 2011 IP
analysed for the entire activity of the like product and
it was subsequently determined whether the production
Total market 2
155 3
327 4
315 4
021
was destined for captive use or free market.
Index
100 154 200 187
(2009 = 100)
(105) It was found that the following economic indicators
related to the Union industry should be examined by
Source: Europressedienst
referring to the total activity (including the captive use
of the industry): consumption, sales volume, production,
production capacity, capacity utilisation, growth, invest
Table 1-c
ments, stocks, employment, productivity, cash flow,
return on investment, ability to raise capital and
Union Consumption for wafers (in MW)
magnitude of the dumping margin. This is because the
investigation showed that those indicators could
2009 2010 2011 IP
reasonably be examined by referring to the whole
activity as the production destined for captive use was
Total market 1
683 2
376 2
723 2
163
equally affected by the competition of imports from the
country concerned. Hereinafter the captive and the free
Index
100 141 162 129
market together are referred to as ‘total market’.
(2009 = 100)
Source: Europressedienst
(106) As regards profitability, the analysis focused on the free
market since prices in the captive market were found not
to always reflect market prices and had an impact on this
(109) In the period considered, the total Union consumption
indicator.
increased by 221 % for modules, 87 % for cells and 29 %
for wafers between 2009 and the IP, but decreased in the
IP compared to 2011. In overall terms the Union
3. Union consumption
consumption of the product under investigation grew
significantly when compared to its 2009 level.
(107) The Union consumption comprised the total volume of
imports of the product concerned and the volume of
total sales of the like product in the Union, including
4. Imports from the country concerned
those destined for captive use. No complete data for
the total sales of the Union industry on the Union
4.1. Volume and market share of the imports from the country
market were available. Furthermore, imports into the
concerned
Union were registered under customs headings covering
other products not subject to the present investigation.
(110) Imports into the Union from the country concerned
Consequently, Eurostat could not be used to determine
developed as follows:

---

EN
5.6.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
152/17
Table 2-a
from 63 to 80 % for modules, from 8 to 25 % for cells
and from 6 to 33 % for wafers. In overall terms the
Imports of modules from the PRC (in MW)
imports of the product concerned from the PRC
increased significantly in volume and market share
2009 2010 2011 IP
between 2009 and the IP.
Import volumes 3 425 8
606 15
810 13
986
from the PRC
(112) It should be noted that the increase in imports from the
Index
100 251 462 408
country concerned was much higher than the increase in
(2009 = 100)
the Union consumption for the product concerned.
Consequently, the exporting producers were able to
benefit from Union’s growing consumption and their
Market share in
63 % 71
% 80
% 80
%
position on the market became stronger due to larger
total market
market shares.
Source: Europressedienst
4.2. Prices of imports and price undercutting
Table 2-b
(113) The average price of imports into the Union from the
country concerned developed as follows:
Imports of cells from the PRC (in MW)
2009 2010 2011 IP
Table 3-a
Import volumes 175 530 970 1
019
from the PRC
Import price of modules from the PRC (in EUR/kW)
Index
100 303 554 582
2009 2010 2011 IP
(2009 = 100)
Import prices 2
100 1
660 1
350 764
Market share in
8 % 16
% 22
% 25
%
Index
100 79 64 36
total market
(2009 = 100)
Source: Europressedienst
Source: Europressedienst and verified sample questionnaire replies
Table 2-c
Table 3-b
Imports of wafers from the PRC (MW)
Import price of cells from the PRC (in EUR/kW)
2009 2010 2011 IP
2009 2010 2011 IP
Import volumes 95 523 880 711
Import prices 890 650 620 516
from the PRC
Index
100 73 70 58
(2009 = 100)
Index
100 551 926 748
(2009 = 100)
Source: Europressedienst and verified questionnaire replies
Market share in
6 % 22
% 32
% 33
%
total market
Table 3-c
Source: Europressedienst
Import price of wafers from the PRC (in EUR/kW)
2009 2010 2011 IP
(111) Over the period considered, import volumes to the
Union from the country concerned increased
Import prices 550 400 400 333
considerably by 308 % for modules, 482 % for cells
and 648 % for wafers. This led to significant market
Index
100 73 73 60
share increases of the imports from the country
(2009 = 100)
concerned into the Union. More specifically, the market
Source: Europressedienst and verified questionnaire replies
shares of imports from the country concerned increased

---

L 152/18
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
5.6.2013
(114) The average import price from the PRC dropped signifi
all Union producers. The Commission analysed the
cantly over the period considered for modules, cells and
microeconomic indicators on the basis of the sampled
wafers. For modules, the average import price decreased
Union producers’ verified questionnaire responses.
by 64 %, from 2 100 EUR/kW in 2009 to 764 EUR/kW
in the IP. Likewise, the average import price of cells from
the PRC dropped by 42 %, from 890 EUR/kW to
516 EUR/kW. Over the period considered, the average
(121) For the purpose of this investigation, the following
import price of wafers decreased by 40
%, from
macroeconomic indicators were assessed on the basis
550 EUR/kW to 333 EUR/kW.
of information relating to all producers of the like
product in the Union: production, production capacity,
capacity utilisation, sales volume, market share, growth,
employment, productivity, magnitude of the dumping
(115) In overall terms, the price of the product concerned
decreased significantly between 2009 and IP.
margin and recovery from past dumping.


(116) In order to determine price undercutting during the IP,
(122) The following microeconomic indicators were assessed
the weighted average sales prices per product type of the
on the basis of information relating to the sampled
sampled Union producers charged to unrelated
producers of the like product in the Union: average
customers on the Union market, adjusted to an ex-
unit prices, unit cost, labour costs, inventories, profit
works level, were compared to the corresponding
ability, cash flow, investments, return on investments
weighted average prices per product type of the
and ability to raise capital.
imports from the cooperating Chinese exporting
producers to the first independent customer on the
Union market, established on a CIF basis, with appro
priate adjustments for post-importation costs, i.e. custom
(123) One interested party claimed that market conditions of
clearance, handling and loading costs. The average post-
the product concerned differ per Member State and that
importation costs of two sampled importers of modules
therefore the injury analysis should be made at the level
were used. The fact that their main activity was not
of each Member State separately. This allegation was not
imports, but installation of modules did not have as a
substantiated. In addition, the investigation did not reveal
consequence to render the data unrepresentative.
any particular circumstances justifying an injury analysis
per Member State. This claim was therefore rejected.
(117) The price comparison was made on a type-by-type basis
for transactions at the same level of trade, duly adjusted
where necessary, and after deduction of rebates and
5.2. Macroeconomic indicators
discounts. The result of the comparison, when
5.2.1. Production, production capacity and capacity utili
expressed as a percentage of the sampled Union
sation
producers’ turnover during the IP, showed weighted
average undercutting margins within the ranges of
(124) The total Union production, production capacity and
17,5-30,7 % for modules, 4-24,2 % for cells, 16,6-
capacity utilisation developed as follows over the
21,6 % for wafers and 11,2-27,5 % in overall terms for
period considered:
the product concerned.
5. Economic situation of the Union industry
Table 4-a
5.1. General
Modules — production, production capacity and capacity
utilisation (MW)
(118) Pursuant to Article 3(5) of the basic Regulation, the
Commission examined all relevant economic factors
2009 2010 2011 IP
and indices having a bearing on the state of the Union
industry.
Production volume 2
155 3
327 4
315 4
021
Index
100 154 200 187
(119) As mentioned in recitals 7 to 10 above, sampling was
(2009 = 100)
used for the examination of injury suffered by the Union
industry.
Production
4 739 6
983 9
500 9
740
capacity
Index
100 147 200 206
(120) For the purpose of the injury analysis, the Commission
(2009 = 100)
distinguished between macroeconomic and micro
economic injury indicators. The Commission analysed
the macroeconomic indicators for the period considered
Capacity utilisation 45
% 48
% 45
% 41
%
on the basis of the data obtained from the independent
Source: Europressedienst
consultant mentioned in the recital 99 above relating to

---

EN
5.6.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
152/19
Table 4-b
peak in 2011 and decreased after that in the IP. The
Union production of cells followed the trend of Union
Cells — production, production capacity and capacity utili
consumption with a slower increase until 2011 and then
sation (MW)
a more pronounced fall in the IP. In line with the
evolution of Union consumption, the Union industry
2009 2010 2011 IP
first increased their capacity by 51 % until 2011 and
then this decreased during the IP. In overall terms, the
Production volume 1
683 2
376 2
723 2
024
capacity increased by 39 % during the period considered.
The capacity utilisation rate increased until 2011
Index
100 141 162 120
reaching a peak of 78 % and then decreased by 15
(2009 = 100)
percentage points during the IP. Overall, the capacity
utilisation of the Union industry of cells decreased over
Production
2 324 3
264 3
498 3
231
the period considered reaching 63 % during the IP.
capacity
Index
100 140 151 139
(2009 = 100)
(127) Over the period considered, the Union production of
wafers increased by 26 % in overall terms. The Union
production reached a peak in 2010 and then
Capacity utilisation 72
% 73
% 78
% 63
%
continuously decreased in 2011 and to even lower
levels in the IP. In response to an increased Union
Source: Europressedienst
consumption, the Union producers of wafers expanded
their production capacity by 52 % until 2011 and then
their capacity decreased in the IP. Nevertheless, the
capacity production for wafers of the Union industry
Table 4-c
increased by 40 % in overall terms over the period
considered. In spite of the increase in production, the
Wafers — production, production capacity and capacity
rate of capacity utilisation of the Union industry of
utilisation (MW)
wafers increased until 2010 and then continuously
decreased after that period, translating into an overall
2009 2010 2011 IP
decrease of 7 percentage points over the period
considered, reaching 55 % during the IP.
Production volume 1
600 2
677 2
553 2
017
Index
100 167 160 126
(2009 = 100)
(128) Therefore, the Union industry expanded their capacity in
response to an increased consumption. However, the
Production
2 600 3
410 3
945 3
636
Union industry’s production levels increased at a much
capacity
slower pace than the consumption, which led to a
decrease of the capacity utilisation rates for the product
Index
100 131 152 140
concerned during the period considered.
(2009 = 100)
Capacity utilisation 62
% 79
% 65
% 55
%
5.2.2. Sales volumes and market share
Source: Europressedienst
(129) The Union industry’s sales volume and market share
developed as follows over the period considered:
(125) The overall Union production of modules increased by
87 % during the period considered. Production reached a
Table 5-a
peak in 2011 and then dropped in the IP. The Union
production of modules increased at a much slower pace
Modules — sales volume and market share (in MW)
than the growth in consumption, which more than
tripled during the same period. Against the background
2009 2010 2011 IP
of a significant increase in consumption, the Union
producers doubled their production capacity for
Sales volume on 1 037 1
890 2
683 2
357
modules during the period considered. However, in
the Union market
spite of higher production levels, the Union industry’s
capacity utilisation rate decreased by 4 percentage
Index
100 182 259 227
points, reaching only 41 % during the IP.
(2009 = 100)
Market share 19
% 15
% 13
% 13
%
(126) The Union production of cells increased by 20 % in
Source: Europressedienst
overall terms during the period considered. It reached a

---

L 152/20
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
5.6.2013
Table 5-b
2009 2010 2011 IP
Cells — sales volume and market share (in MW)
(Index
100 134 149 139
2009 = 100)
2009 2010 2011 IP
Productivity (kW/ 183 211 247 245
Sales volume total 1 470 1
913 2
245 1
545
employee)
market
(Index
100 115 135 134
Index
100 130 153 105
2009 = 100)
(2009 = 100)
Source: Europressedienst
Market share 68
% 57
% 52
% 38
%
Source: Europressedienst
Table 6-b
Table 5-c
Cells — employment and productivity
Wafers — sales volume and market share (in MW)
2009 2010 2011 IP
Number of
5 281 5
937 5
641 4
782
2009 2010 2011 IP
employees
Sales volume total 1 363 1
520 1
608 1
269
market
(Index
100 112 107 91
2009 = 100)
Index
100 112 118 93
(2009 = 100)
Productivity (kW/ 319 400 483 423
employee)
Market share 81
% 64
% 59
% 59
%
(Index
100 126 151 133
Source: Europressedienst
2009 = 100)
Source: Europressedienst
(130) During the period considered, the sales volume of
modules increased by 127 %. However, in the context
of an increase in consumption of 221 %, this was
Table 6-c
translated into a decrease of the Union industry’s
market share from 19 % in 2009 to 13 % during the
Wafers — employment and productivity
IP. As regards cells, the Union industry’s sales increased
only marginally by 5 % while consumption increased by
2009 2010 2011 IP
87 % resulting in a market share reduction from 68 % in
2009 to 38 % in the IP. As regards wafers total volume
Number of
1 944 3
853 4
291 3
920
of sales decreased by 7
% against an increased
employees
consumption, which translated into a decrease in
market share for wafers from 81 % in 2009 to 59 % in
(Index
100 198 221 202
the IP.
2009 = 100)

Productivity (kW/ 823 695 595 515
(131) In response to a growing consumption, the Union
employee)
industry’s sales of modules and cells grew much less
than the imports from the country concerned while the
(Index
100 84 72 63
sales of wafers decreased. Thus, the Union industry could
2009 = 100)
not benefit from the growing consumption. As a
consequence, the market shares for all three segments
Source: Europressedienst
decreased over the period considered.
5.2.3. Employment and productivity
(133) Employment increased between 2009 and the IP for
(132) Employment and productivity developed as follows
modules and wafers by 39 % and 102 %, respectively,
during the period considered:
while it decreased by 9 % for cells. However, it is
noted that employment increased until 2011 and then
Table 6-a
decreased during the IP for modules and wafers. For cells,
employment increased until 2010 and then decreased
Modules — employment and productivity
during 2011 and IP. The total productivity showed
positive trends for modules and cells increasing by
2009 2010 2011 IP
34 % and 33 %. This is partly due to the efforts of the
Number of
11 779 15
792 17
505 16
419
Union industry to respond to the pressure of the dumped

employees
imports from the PRC. However, the total productivity
for wafers decreased by 37 % over the period considered.

---

EN
5.6.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
152/21
(134) Therefore, in line with the decrease in Union production
2009 2010 2011 IP
of modules and wafers between 2011 and the IP,
employment for modules and wafers also decreased
(Index
100 76 51 31
during the same period. For cells, the employment
2009 = 100)
increased until 2010 and then decreased in 2011 and
in the IP while the Union production of cells grew
Cost of production 1 647,10 1 021,67 1 057,56 745,61
steadily until 2011 and then started to fall.
(EUR/kW)
(Index
100 62 64 45
5.2.3.1. Magnitude of the dumping margin and recovery
2009 = 100)
from past dumping
(135) All dumping margins are significantly above the de
Source: verified questionnaire replies
minimis level. As regards the impact of the magnitude
of the actual margins of dumping on the Union
industry, given the volume and prices of imports from
the country concerned, the impact can be considered
Table 7-c
substantial.
Wafers — average sales prices in the Union
2009 2010 2011 IP
(136) Since this is the first anti-dumping investigation
regarding the product concerned, recovery from past
Average sales price
709 564 515 426
dumping is not relevant.
in the Union on
free market
(EUR/kW)
5.3. Microeconomic indicators
(Index
100 80 73 60
5.3.1. Prices and factors affecting prices
2009 = 100)
(137) The average sales prices of the sampled Union producers
to unrelated customers in the Union developed as follows
Cost of production
631 496 520 648
over the period considered:
(EUR/kW)
(Index
100 78 82 103
2009 = 100)
Table 7-a
Modules — average sales prices in the Union
Source: verified questionnaire replies
2009 2010 2011 IP
Average sales price 2 198,75 1 777,15 1 359,35 1 030,83
(138) Sales prices fell sharply i.e. by 53 % for modules, by 69 %
in the Union on
for cells and by 40 % for wafers during the period
free market
considered. Sales prices fell continuously throughout
(EUR/kW)
the period considered, but the decrease in prices was
(Index
100 81 62 47
particularly pronounced during the IP where they
2009 = 100)
collapsed to unsustainable levels. Over the period
considered the cost of production fell by 48 % for
Cost of production 2 155,02 1 599,44 1 400,13 1 123,60
modules and by 55 % for cells. For wafers, cost of
(EUR/kW)
production fell in 2010 as compared to 2009, but
increased in 2011 while still remaining below the level
(Index
100 74 65 52
of 2009. In the IP costs increased further and reached
2009 = 100)
slightly higher levels than in 2009 which can be mainly
Source: verified questionnaire replies
explained by a production stop during the IP. The Union
industry could neither benefit from its continuous efforts
to increase its cost efficiency nor from the impact of the
decrease in cost of the main raw material, polysilicon.
Table 7-b
This was mainly due to the increasing price pressure of
Cells — average sales prices in the Union
the dumped imports which had a negative effect on the

sales prices of the Union industry which decreased even
more than efficiency gains. This can be seen in the
2009 2010 2011 IP
negative trend of the Union industry’s profitability as
Average sales price 1 525,09 1 160,99 777,62 474,91
described in recital 144 below. Overall there was a

in the Union on
significant decrease of the average sales price and the
free market
cost of production of the like product (except for
(EUR/kW)
wafers) with devastating effect on Union industry’s profit
ability.

---

L 152/22
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
5.6.2013
5.3.2. Labour costs
5.3.3. Inventories
(139) The average labour costs of the sampled Union producers
(141) Stock levels of the sampled Union producers developed
developed as follows over the period considered:
as follows over the period considered:
Table 8-a
Table 9-a
Modules — average labour costs per employee
Modules — inventories
2009 2010 2011 IP
2009 2010 2011 IP
Average labour
38 194 40
793 41
781 42
977
cost per employee
Closing Stocks (in 28 612 40
479 74
502 65
415
(EUR)
kW)
(Index
100 107 110 113
(Index
100 141 260 229
2009 = 100)
2009 = 100)
Source: verified questionnaire replies
Source: verified questionnaire replies
Table 8-b
Table 9-b
Cells — average labour cost per employee
Cells — inventories
2009 2010 2011 IP
2009 2010 2011 IP
Average labour
49 677 49
357 49
140 49
350
Closing Stocks (in 16 995 23
829 76
889 68
236
cost per employee
kW)
(EUR)
(Index
100 140 452 402
(Index
100 99 99 99
2009 = 100)
2009 = 100)
Source: verified questionnaire replies
Source: verified questionnaire replies
Table 9-c
Table 8-c
Wafers — inventories
Wafers — average labour cost per employee
2009 2010 2011 IP
2009 2010 2011 IP
Closing Stocks (in 34 891 5
601 36
697 59
340
Average labour
39 409 40
933 39
323 46
060
kW)
cost per employee
(EUR)
(Index
100 16 105 170
2009 = 100)
(Index
100 104 100 117
2009 = 100)
Source: verified questionnaire replies
Source: verified questionnaire replies
(142) Stocks increased significantly, i.e. by 129 % for modules,
by 302 % for cells and by 70 % for wafers over the
(140) Between 2009 and the IP, the average labour cost per
period considered. Concerning modules, stocks
employee for modules continuously increased overall by
increased continuously reaching very high levels in
13 %. Regarding cells, the average labour cost remained
2011 (by 160 %), while it decreased in the IP but still
stable throughout the period considered and slightly
remaining at very high levels in comparison with the
decreased by 1 % between 2009 and 2010 but then
beginning of the period considered. Concerning cells,
remained stable until the IP. Regarding wafers, the
the development was even more pronounced, with an
average labour cost per employee varied, increased
increase in stocks between 2009 and 2011 more than
between 2009 and 2010, decreased in 2011, but
350 %. Likewise, the stocks decreased during the IP but
increased during the period considered overall by 17 %
remained at very high levels in comparison with the
for the period considered. The overall increase of labour
beginning of the period considered. Concerning wafers,
cost can be partly explained by the simultaneous increase
while the Union industry decreased its stocks between
in productivity (modules), the evolution of inflation and
2009 and 2010 by more than 80 % caused by the
the social costs of some Union producers (wafers) linked
increase of their sales, closing stocks increased rapidly
to the downsizing of the industry between 2011 and the
and reached levels beyond the level of 2009 and
IP.
further increased by 65 percentage points in the IP.

---

EN
5.6.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
152/23
(143) The investigation showed that given the adverse current
(145) Profitability of the sampled Union producers was estab
situation, Union producers would tend to hold limited
lished by expressing the pre-tax net profit of the sales of
stocks for the like product, basing their production on
the like product to unrelated customers in the Union, as
orders. Therefore, the increase in stocks for the like
the percentage of the turnover of such sales.
product over the period considered is a relevant factor
in establishing if the Union industry suffered material
injury.
(146) The profitability decreased sharply and turned to losses
over the period considered for the like product. The
5.3.4. Profitability, cash flow, investments and return on
profitability dropped by 11 percentage points for
investments, ability to raise capital
modules, by 49 percentage points for cells and by 63
percentage points for wafers.
(144) Profitability and cash flow developed as follows over the
period considered:
(147) Profitability for the like product increased between 2009
Table 10-a
and 2010 but then decreased significantly in 2011 where
Union industry realised losses and further decreased
Modules — profitability and cash flow
significantly in the IP. Losses were particularly high for
cells and wafers.
2009 2010 2011 IP
Profitability of
2 % 10
% –
3
% –
9
%
sales in the Union
to unrelated
customers (% of
(148) The trend of net cash flow, which is the ability of the
sales turnover)
sampled Union producers to self-finance their activities,
likewise followed a progressively negative trend between
Cash flow 13
% 10
% 12
% 3
%
2009 and the IP. Thus, decreasing by 10 percentage
points for modules with a slight increase in 2011, the
Source: verified questionnaire replies
highest decrease of the cash flow occurred between 2011
and the IP. The decline of cash flow for cells and wafers
was more pronounced than modules and reached signifi
cantly negative levels during the IP. Therefore, the cash
Table 10-b
flow for the like product decreased over the period
Cells — profitability and cash flow
considered.
2009 2010 2011 IP
Profitability of
– 8 % 12
% –
36
% –
57
%
sales in the Union
(149) The figures below represent the evolution of investments
to unrelated
and return on investments of the sampled Union
customers (% of
producers in relation to the total market during the
sales turnover)
period considered:
Cash flow 75
% 52
% –
0,3
% –
46
%
Source: verified questionnaire replies
Table 11-a
Table 10-c
Modules — investments and return on investments
Wafers — profitability and cash flow
2009 2010 2011 IP
2009 2010 2011 IP
Investments 12 081 999 50 105 017 64 643 322 32 730 559
(EUR)
Profitability of
11 % 12
% –
1
% –
52
%
sales in the Union
(Index
100 415 535 271
to unrelated
2009 =
customers (% of
100)
sales turnover)
Return on
– 15 % 19
% –
15
% –
17
%
Cash flow 39
% 47
% 32
% –
19
%
investments
Source: verified questionnaire replies
Source: verified questionnaire replies

---

L 152/24
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
5.6.2013
Table 11-b
decreased during the period considered reaching – 17 %
in the IP for cells, i.e. by 1 %, however still remaining at
Cells — investments and return on investment
significant negative levels, i.e. – 19 %. As for wafers ROI
followed a continuously negative trend reaching – 7 %
2009 2010 2011 IP
during the IP. Overall ROI for the like product showed
negative trends during the period considered.
Investments 31 448 407 34 451 675 10 234 050 6 986 347
(EUR)
(Index
100 110 33 22
2009 =
(152) The ability to raise capital was analysed in relation to the
100)
total market and it has been found that there was a
constant deterioration of the ability of the Union
Return on
– 4 % 10
% –
20
% –
19
%
industry to generate cash for the like product and,
investments
consequently, a weakening of the financial situation of
the Union industry.
Source: verified questionnaire replies
Table 11-c
5.3.5. Conclusion on injury
Wafers — investments and return on investment
(153) The analysis of the situation of the Union industry
2009 2010 2011 IP
showed a clear downward trend of all the main injury
indicators. Against a generally increasing consumption,
Investments 201 911 346 83 802 212 74 166 331 39 938 349
overall production increased for modules and cells in
(EUR)
the period considered. Although the volume of sales
increased, the market share of the Union industry
(Index
100 42 37 20
shrank in the IP due to the higher increase of the
2009 =
consumption during the period considered. Average
100)
sales price fell sharply throughout the period considered,
negatively impacting on all the financial performance
Return on
10 % 8
% 0
% –
7
%
indicators such as profitability, cash flow, return on
investments
investments and ability to raise capital.
Source: verified questionnaire replies
(154) Over the period considered, the overall Union industry’s
(150) The table above shows that the Union industry increased
sales volume increased. However, the increase in sales
its investments by 171 % for modules between 2009 and
volumes of the Union industry was accompanied by a
the IP. This was mainly linked to the significant additions
tremendous decrease in average sales price.
of capacity. However, during the same period, the Union
industry decreased its investments by 78 % for cells and
80 % for wafers; the investments made were mainly
linked to R & D as well as improving and maintaining
production technology and process in order to improve
efficiency. Since the Union industry could not afford
(155) During the period considered, imports of the interested
parties from the PRC increased in terms of volumes and
making additional investments for cells and wafers
market share. At the same time, import prices
during the period considered, the level of investments
continuously decreased, undercutting significantly the
during the IP was rather low. As investments were
Union industry’s average price on the Union market.
financed basically by cash flow and intercompany

loans, the decrease in the cash flow had immediate
effect on the level of investments made.
(156) Several interested parties claimed that the Union industry
(151) The return on investments (‘ROI’) was expressed as the
and in specific the sampled Union producers were
profit in per cent of the net book value of investments.
performing well. It was claimed that the evolution of
ROI of the like product followed the similar negative
certain injury indicators, namely production volume,
trends as the other financial performance indicators
production capacity, sales and employment but even in
between 2009 and the IP for all the three types of
some sampled producers’ profitability, were increasing
product. For cells and wafers, while there was an
and would not show material injury. These allegations
increase in 2009 and 2010, ROI decreased significantly
were not confirmed by the results of the investigation,
in 2011 reaching negative levels. For modules, ROI was
which has shown clear downward trends of many injury
at negative levels throughout the period considered,
indicators, relevant for the conclusion that the Union
except in 2010 where it reached 19 %. Overall, it
industry suffered material injury.

---

EN
5.6.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
152/25
(157) In view of the above, the investigation confirmed in
the product concerned increased dramatically during the
particular the fact that the sales prices are below the
period considered. There was a clear coincidence in time
production costs, thus having a negative effect on the
between the increase in dumped imports and the loss of
Union industry’s profitability, reaching negative levels
market share of the Union industry. The investigation
during the IP. It is concluded that should dumped
also established that as mentioned in recital 117 above,
imports continue to enter the Union market, the losses
the dumped imports undercut the prices of the Union
of the Union industry would be likely to lead to the
industry during the IP.
permanent discontinuation of any sizeable Union
production of the like product. This seems to be
confirmed by the developments during and after the IP,
i.e. some companies has declared insolvency and/or
(162) The investigation showed that the prices of the dumped
stopped temporarily or permanently production.
imports decreased by 64 % for modules, by 42 % for
cells and by 40 % for wafers during the period
considered and led to an increase of undercutting.
Against this price pressure, the Union industry
underwent considerable effort to decrease its production
(158) In the light of the foregoing, it is provisionally concluded
costs. Despite these efforts the exceptionally low level of
that the Union industry suffered material injury within
Chinese import prices forced the Union industry to
the meaning of Article 3(5) of the basic Regulation.
further decrease its sales price to unprofitable levels.
Thus, the profitability of the Union industry decreased
dramatically during the period considered and showed
losses during the IP.
E. CAUSATION
1. Introduction
(163) Based on the above, it is concluded that the presence of
(159) In accordance with Article 3(6) and (7) of the basic
Chinese imports and the increase of the market share of
Regulation it was examined whether the material injury
dumped imports from the PRC at prices constantly
suffered by the Union industry was caused by the
undercutting those of the Union industry have had a
dumped imports from the country concerned.
determining role in the material injury suffered by the
Furthermore, known factors other than dumped
Union industry, which is reflected in particular in its
imports, which might have injured the Union industry,
poor financial situation and in the deterioration of
were examined to ensure that any injury caused by those
most of the injury indicators.
factors was not attributed to dumped imports.
3. Effect of other factors
(160) One interested party claimed that market conditions of
3.1. Imports from other third countries
the product concerned differ per Member State and that
therefore the causality analysis should be made at the
(164) The volume of imports from other third countries during
level of each Member State separately. National support
the period considered for modules increased by 19 %
schemes determine to a certain extent the size of the
while the market share decreased over the period
Member States’ markets. The investigation has however
considered from 18,4 to 6,8 %. Taiwan is the second
also revealed that demand does not exclusively depend
largest exporter after the PRC.
on support schemes. Depending on geographical location
(sun exposure) and the electricity price at a given
location, solar panels appear to have reached, or were
at least close to, grid parity, which means that certain
(165) The volume of imports from other third countries for
investments take place independently of support
cells increased by 186 % during the period considered
schemes. Therefore, it could not be established that
which translated in an increase of market share from
market conditions depend exclusively on support
around 24 % in 2009 to around 36 % during the IP.
schemes and this claim was therefore rejected.
As for cells, Taiwan is second largest exporter after the
PRC, by far exceeding import quantities and market
shares from the other third countries, but still below
those from the PRC.
2. Effect of dumped imports
(161) The investigation showed that dumped imports from the
PRC increased dramatically over the period considered,
(166) The volume of imports from other third countries for
increasing their volumes significantly by more than
wafers decreased by 19 % during the period considered
300 % for modules and of 482 % for cells and 648 %
and market share from 13,4 % in 2009 to 8,5 % in the
for wafers and their market share by 17 percentage
IP. As above, Taiwan is second largest exporter of wafers
points for modules, by 17 percentage points for cells
after the PRC. However, import levels and market share
and by 27 percentage points for wafers. Therefore, it is
of Taiwan did not show significant increases and
confirmed that volume of imports and market share for
remained at low levels during the period considered.

---

L 152/26
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
5.6.2013
(167) The import prices of third countries of modules, cells and
Modules 2009 2010 2011 IP
wafers were on average higher than the average unit price
of the Chinese imports. The information available as
Market share of
0,9 % 1,2
% 0,7
% 0,8
%
regards imports from Taiwan shows that the average
imports from
import price for modules and wafers was higher than
Taiwan
the average Chinese import price for modules and
wafers, while the average import price for cells was in
Average import
2 102,04 1 659,72 1 350,00 1 125,93
the same range as the average Chinese import price for
price EUR/kW
cells. However, since no detailed price information per
product type was available, the price comparison on an
(Index
100 79 64 54
average basis can only be used as an indication but no
2009 = 100)
firm conclusions can be drawn on this basis. Throughout
the period considered, volume of imports of cells from
Volume of imports
140 180 51 60
Taiwan increased continuously, resulting in a gain of
from USA (MW)
market share of around 14 percentage points. However,
overall for the product under investigation, despite their
increase in market share, the volumes were lower than
(Index
100 129 36 43
PRC and their price levels were generally higher with the
2009 = 100)
exception of cells during the IP. On these grounds, in
particular in view of the import volumes and market
Market share of
2,6 % 1,5
% 0,3
% 0,3
%
shares from other third countries as well as their price
imports from USA
levels, which are on average similar or higher than those
from the Union industry it can be provisionally
Average import
2 400,00 1 872,22 1 431,37 1 233,33
concluded that third country imports did not break the
price EUR/kW
causal link between the dumped imports and the injury
suffered by the Union industry.
(Index
100 78 60 51
2009 = 100)
Table 12
Volume of imports
720 1
140 1
029 879
from rest of Asia
Imports and market shares from other third countries
(MW)
Modules 2009 2010 2011 IP
(Index
100 158 143 122
2009 = 100)
Volume of imports
1 003 1
702 1
385 1
195
from all other
Market share of
13,2 % 9,3
% 5,2
% 5,0
%
third countries
imports from rest
(MW)
of Asia
Average import
2 400,00 1 870,18 1 440,23 1 229,81
(Index
100 169 138 119
price EUR/kW
2009 = 100)
(Index
100 78 60 51
Market share of
18,4 % 14,0
% 7,0
% 6,8
%
2009 = 100)
imports from all
other third
Volume of imports
94 238 165 121
countries
from rest of the
World (MW)
Average import
2 385,34 1 852,23 1 430,90 1 218,41
(Index
100 253 176 129
price EUR/kW
2009 = 100)
(Index
100 78 60 51
Market share of
1,7 % 2,0
% 0,8
% 0,7
%
2009 = 100)
imports from rest
of the World
Volume of imports
49 144 140 135
Average import
2 404,26 1 869,75 1 442,42 1 231,40
from Taiwan
price EUR/kW
(MW)
(Index
100 78 60 51
2009 = 100)
(Index
100 294 286 276
2009 = 100)
Source: Europressedienst

---

EN
5.6.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
152/27
Cells 2009 2010 2011 IP
Cells 2009 2010 2011 IP
Volume of imports
510 884 1
100 1
457
(Index
100 78 61 48
from all other
2009 = 100)
third countries
(MW)
Volume of imports
175 290 350 282
(Index
100 173 216 286
from rest of the
2009 = 100)
world (MW)
Market share of
23,7 % 26,6
% 25,5
% 36,2
%
imports from all
(Index
100 166 200 161
other third
2009 = 100)
countries
Market share of
8,1 % 8,7
% 8,1
% 7,0
%
Average import
1 166,67 1 072,40 751,82 553,88
imports from rest
price EUR/kW
of the world
(Index
100 92 64 47
2009 = 100)
Average import
1 348,57 1 051,72 831,43 638,30
price EUR/kW
Volume of imports
235 400 540 997
from Taiwan
(MW)
(Index
100 78 62 47
2009 = 100)
(Index
100 170 230 424
2009 = 100)
Source: Europressedienst
Market share of
10,9 % 12,0
% 12,5
% 24,8
%
imports from
Taiwan
Wafers 2009 2010 2011 IP
Average import
948,94 1
100,00 670,37 514,54
Volume of imports
225 333 235 183
price EUR/kW
from all other
third countries
(Index
100 116 71 54
(MW)
2009 = 100)
Volume of imports
40 40 40 33
(Index
100 148 104 81
from USA (MW)
2009 = 100)
(Index
100 100 100 83
Market share of
13,4 % 14,0
% 8,6
% 8,5
%
2009 = 100)
imports from all
other third
Market share of
1,9 % 1,2
% 0,9
% 0,8
%
countries
imports from USA
Average import
1 350,00 1 050,00 825,00 636,36
Average import
800,00 588,59 43,30 420,77
price EUR/kW
price EUR/kW
(Index
100 78 61 47
(Index
100 74 55 52
2009 = 100)
2009 = 100)
Volume of imports
60 154 170 145
from Japan (MW)
Volume of imports
20 50 50 36
from Taiwan
(MW)
(Index
100 257 283 242
2009 = 100)
(Index
100 250 250 180
Market share of
2,8 % 4,6
% 3,9
% 3,6
%
2009 = 100)
imports from
Japan
Market share of
1,2 % 2,1
% 1,8
% 1,7
%
Average import
1 350,00 1 051,95 829,41 641,38
imports from
price EUR/kW
Taiwan

---

L 152/28
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
5.6.2013
Wafers 2009 2010 2011 IP
Development of the Union consumption
Average import
800,00 580,00 440,00 416,67
(168) As mentioned in recital 108 above, Union consumption
price EUR/kW
increased by 221 % for modules, 87 % for cells and 29 %
for wafers during the period considered. Consumption
reached a peak in 2011 and dropped during the IP
(Index
100 73 55 52
while still remaining far above the level at the
2009 = 100)
beginning of the period considered in 2009. The
Union industry could not benefit from this increase in
consumption as its market share fell from 19 to 13 % for
Volume of imports
50 55 40 28
from USA (MW)
modules, from 68 to 38 % for cells and from 81 to 59 %
for wafers during the same period. At the same time, the
market share of the PRC was increasing sharply, until
(Index
100 110 80 56
2011 and then remained stable at significant high level
2009 = 100)
during the IP, when consumption fell. Therefore, in view
of the fact that, despite a decrease in Union consumption
in the IP, the dumped imports from the PRC either
Market share of
3,0 % 2,3
% 1,5
% 1,3
%
maintained their market share (modules) or increased it
imports from USA
(cells and wafers) to the detriment of the Union industry
over the period considered, it cannot be concluded that
Average import
800,00 581,82 450,00 428,57
the decrease in consumption was such as to break the
price EUR/kW
causal link between the dumped imports and the injury
suffered by the Union industry.
(Index
100 73 56 54
2009 = 100)
Volume of imports
55 50 30 26
(169) Based on the information available it is difficult to
from Japan (MW)
establish to what extend the demand is driven by the
Member States support schemes. Indeed, as mentioned
below in recital 171 a variety of support schemes
(Index
100 91 55 47
exists and interaction between those and demand is
2009 = 100)
highly complex and therefore their precise impact is
difficult to quantify. However, the evidence available
Market share of
3,3 % 2,1
% 1,1
% 1,2
%
also indicates that even in the absence of support
imports from
schemes the demand for solar energy will continue to
Japan
exist and will even grow over time, albeit at lower levels
than in the context of support schemes. In this context,
several parties argued that ‘grid parity’ (i.e. when the cost
Average import
800,00 580,00 433,33 423,08
to produce solar energy equals the cost to produce
price EUR/kW
conventional energy) had already been reached or
nearly reached in some regions of the Union. These
(Index
100 73 54 53
claims could not be confirmed by the investigation so
2009 = 100)
far and will be further investigated.
Volume of imports
100 178 115 93
from rest of the
World (MW)
3.2. Feed-in-tariffs (‘FITs’) as the main example of support
schemes
(Index
100 178 115 93
2009 = 100)
(170) It has been claimed by several interested parties that the
cause of the injury suffered by the Union industry was
linked to the reductions in the feed-in-tariffs imple
Market share of
5,9 % 7,5
% 4,2
% 4,3
%
mented by the Member States. Those cuts had allegedly
imports from rest
led to a decrease of the solar installations and reduced
of the World
demand for the product under investigation in the Union
market, thus causing material injury to the Union
industry.
Average import
800,00 589,89 434,78 419,35

price EUR/kW
(Index
100 74 54 52
2009 = 100)
(171) Member States introduced FITs, quota obligations with
tradable green certificates, investment grants and tax
Source: Europressedienst
incentives to support renewable energy generation.
Support is also granted in certain Member States from

---

EN
5.6.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
152/29
EU structural funds. The most frequently implemented
described in detail in recital 163 above. Indeed, the inves
support instrument for solar energy were FITs. At this
tigation showed that while the situation of the Union
stage, the analysis of the Commission focused on this
industry was deteriorating, the exporting producers
type of support scheme.
were able to maintain their high market shares for
modules (80 %) and even increased their market shares
slightly for cells (from 22 % in 2011 to 25 % during the
IP) and wafers (from 32 % in 2011 to 33 % during the
IP). In addition it should be noted that the average price
of modules charged by the Union industry dropped by
(172) FITs are a financial support instrument aiming to achieve
53 % over the period considered, mainly due to the
mandatory national targets for the use of renewable
significant increase of dumped imports and the
energy, as prescribed by the Directive 2009/28/EC of
substantial price pressure they exerted on the Union
the European Parliament and of the Council (
market. Therefore, the loss in profitability suffered by

1 ) on the
promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources.
the Union industry cannot be mainly attributed to the
The level of support and the way FITs operate vary by
FIT cutbacks.
Member State. By means of FITs grid operators are
bound to buy solar energy at prices which ensure that
solar energy producers (usually the owners of the solar
installations) recover their costs and earn reasonable rates
of return. FITs, as other support schemes, are in most
(175) Consequently, it is acknowledged that FITs generated
demand for solar energy and that recent FIT suspensions
cases also subject to State aid control pursuant to Articles
(as in Spain) and reductions in other Member States
107 and 108 TFEU, which ensures the absence of over
lowered the consumption for the product under investi
compensation for electricity producers.
gation during the IP, thus possibly having contributed to
the injury suffered by the Union industry. However, the
decrease in consumption during the IP was not such as
to break the causal link between the dumped imports
and the injury suffered by the Union industry.
(173) In spite of the national differences, three phenomena
could be observed as regards the evolution of FITs in
the Union: (i) the reduction of the FIT rates, (ii) the
suspension of the FIT scheme as a whole (Spain) and
(176) Several parties argued that FITs cutbacks rendered the
(iii) the introduction of capacity thresholds (‘caps’) for
solar investment opportunities unattractive for investors
the installations eligible for financing as well as overall
and thus lowered the demand for the product concerned
caps on the yearly installed new supported capacity at
in the Union.
the Member State level. As regards the caps, they appear
to have been introduced mainly during 2012 and, most
likely, do therefore not have any effect on the
consumption during the IP. Consequently, the analysis
focused on the recent FIT suspensions in Spain and
(177) While the investigation confirmed a link between the FIT
reductions of FIT rates in most Member States. It was
rates and the level of investments in the solar industry, it
analysed whether they had an impact on the demand in
also showed that investments in the solar energy are less
the Union market and whether this could have caused
dependent in regions with high sun exposure where
the material injury suffered by the Union industry. In this
production of solar energy is more efficient and in
regard, it was considered that the impact of the evolution
regions with high electricity prices. Indeed, the investi
of FITs with regard to the demand of modules was also
gation showed that investments are still being made (e.g.
representative for the situation with regards to cells and
in Spain) in spite of the suspension of the FIT scheme.
wafers. Indeed, as cells and wafers are indispensable for
Moreover, the investigation showed that solar energy
the production of modules and as they are not used in
investment opportunities still remained attractive even
other production processes, a decrease in demand for
with lower FIT rates.
modules triggers automatically a decrease in demand
for cells and wafers.
(178) On the basis of the above it could not be clearly
concluded that the FIT cutbacks rendered the solar
investments unattractive for investors and thus
contributing to the injury suffered by the Union industry.
(174) While the investigation confirmed the link between the
evolution of FIT and consumption, the investigation
established that the decrease in consumption between
2011 and the IP did not contribute to break the causal
link between the dumped imports from the PRC and the
(179) One interested party argued that the decrease in FITs
material injury suffered by the Union industry as
forced Union producers to decrease their prices to keep
the interests of the investors in PV energy and to keep
( 1 ) OJ L 140, 5.6.2009, p. 16.
developing demand and growth.

---

L 152/30
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
5.6.2013
(180) The investigation showed that the Union industry was
(186) While the Union industry indeed increased its production
forced to decrease its prices mainly due to the pressure
capacity, its total production volume did not cover the
of the dumped imports and not to the FIT cutbacks. This
increasing consumption levels in the Union market
is indicated by the fact that the most significant decrease
during the period considered. Thus, the increase of the
in the prices of the Union industry occurred in 2010 and
Union industry production capacity was reasonable and
2011, before the major FIT cutbacks took place. Indeed,
followed market developments, i.e. the increase in
the increase in dumped imports from the PRC signifi
consumption. It cannot therefore be considered as a
cantly undercutting the Union industry’s prices forced
cause of the injury suffered.
the Union industry to cut down their prices to
increasingly low levels.
(187) Likewise, on this basis, the argument that the Union
industry did not invest in capacity expansion was not
(181) On these grounds, the claim was therefore rejected.
confirmed during the investigation. To the contrary
however, as mentioned above, throughout the period
considered the Union industry progressively increased
(182) In summary, FITs have been an important factor for the
capacity and had available excess capacity throughout
development of the PV market in the Union and the
the period considered, indicating that it was capable of
evolution of consumption of the product under investi
supplying additional demand. Therefore, this argument
gation was influenced by the existence of the FITs.
had to be rejected.
However, the investigation showed that the consumption
did not decrease significantly despite important FIT
cutbacks. Therefore, it is provisionally concluded that
the developments of FITs were not such as to break
(188) Some interested parties claimed that all operators in the
the causal link between the dumped imports and the
market, including the ones in the downstream and
material injury suffered by the Union industry.
upstream sectors were in a difficult situation which was
due to the overcapacity in the global market and the
resulted change of the market. In this regard it was
argued that the product under investigation has become
3.3. Other financial support granted to the Union industry
a commodity where individual producers are not able
anymore to set prices but where prices are subject to
(183) Some interested parties claimed that the material injury
worldwide demand and supply. It was alleged that this
suffered by the Union industry was due to a decrease of
situation has caused the material injury of the Union
financial support granted to the Union industry. In
industry rather than the dumped imports.
support of this claim, information was provided based
on subsidies granted to one of the Union producers prior
to the period considered (between 2003 and 2006).
(189) The investigation confirmed the existence of overcapacity
in the global market, mainly originating in the PRC.
(184) The evidence provided did not reveal any link between
Concerning the market change that would allegedly
the material injury suffered by the Union industry and
bring the product under investigation to be a
any alleged subsidy received by one of the Union
commodity, this would not justify an unfair price
producers during the period preceding the period
behaviour and unfair trade practices. In this respect, it
considered. Moreover, as this information predates the
should be noted that the Union industry has been
period considered, it seems to be irrelevant. Therefore,
producing and selling the product under investigation
no link could be established between any alleged subsidy
for more than 20 years, while the PRC industry of the
received by the Union industry and the material injury
product concerned developed only recently (around mid
suffered. On this ground, the argument was rejected.
of last decade), mainly attracted by the feed-in-tariffs and
other policy incentives in Union and the subsequent
increase in demand.
3.4. Overcapacity
(185) It has been claimed that the material injury suffered by
(190) On these grounds, the arguments were rejected.
the Union industry was due to an overcapacity in the
Union market and in the global market in general. It was
also argued that the overcapacity in the global market led
to the consolidation of the Union industry that is
3.5. Impact of raw material prices
currently taking place and that any injury suffered was
a consequence of too many production facilities.
(191) Several interested parties claimed that the material injury
Moreover, several interested parties claimed that the
suffered by the Union industry was linked to the
material injury suffered by the Union industry was
evolution of prices of polysilicon, the main raw
linked to the self-inflicted overexpansion of capacity of
material for the production of wafers. It was argued
the EU industry. On the contrary, some interested parties
that the Union industry concluded long term fixed
claimed that the injury suffered by the Union industry is
priced supply contracts and could therefore not benefit
due to the Union industry’s failure to make the necessary
from the decrease in polysilicon prices during the period
investments in capacity additions.
considered.

---

EN
5.6.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
152/31
(192) The investigation revealed that polysilicon prices
normal market conditions should have more security
increased in 2008, but decreased again in 2009 with
over their supply chain. However, the investigation
only a slight upwards trend in 2010 and early 2011.
showed that the advantage of vertical integration by
Prices dropped significantly during the IP.
part of the Union industry that was vertically integrated
could not be fully exploited as the price pressure from
dumped imports was extremely high. Moreover, the
(193) The investigation showed that although the Union
Union industry, even the vertically integrated Union
industry had long term supply contracts for polysilicon,
producers, due to the dumped imports could not fully
the terms of these contracts were mostly renegotiated
benefit from high capacity utilisation rates to achieve
based on the price developments of polysilicon and
economies of scale. Furthermore, the investigation did
contract prices reached levels close to or sometimes
not reveal any correlation between vertical integration
even lower than prices on the spot market.
and better profitability rates, as the high price pressure
has altered this correlation.
(194) On these grounds, it is concluded that even if some
specific Union producers may have been affected by
(199) Some interested parties claimed that the Union industry
long term contracts for the supply of polysilicon, the
lacked technical innovation as well as investments in new
Union industry, overall, did not suffer from these long
technology. However, the investigation did not bring to
term contracts and were able to fully benefit from the
light any factual evidence confirming these allegations.
price decrease in polysilicon prices. The long term
To the contrary, the investigation showed that the
contracts were therefore not found to contribute to the
majority of the investments made by the Union
material injury suffered by the Union industry.
industry were dedicated to new machinery and R & D
and that there are no meaningful differences in tech
nology between the products worldwide.
3.6. Self-inflicted injury: impact of automation, size,
economies of scale, consolidation, innovation, cost effi
ciency
(200) Moreover, one interested party claimed that the material
(195) Several interested parties claimed that the injury suffered
injury suffered is due to the poor project execution (failed
by the Union industry was due to the high degree of
projects). In this respect, it should be noted that the
automation of the production process. It was claimed
argument was not substantiated. In addition, any failed
that the small-scale producers had a disadvantage
project could rather be considered as a consequence of
compared to the larger vertically integrated producers
the dumped imports. The argument had therefore to be
and therefore any injury suffered by these producers
rejected.
cannot be attributed to the dumped imports. In this
context it was also claimed that in any event, overall,
the Union industry was of a small size and therefore
(201) Several interested parties claimed that the Union industry
was not able to benefit from economies of scale.
was not able to rationalise its costs in time to respond to
the developments in the world market. Other parties
claimed that labour and overhead costs are higher in
(196) The investigation showed that also the small-scale
the Union than in the PRC.
producers in Union market had a high level of auto
mation in their production process with a positive
effect to their production costs. Most Union producers
have specialised in one part of the production process
(202) The investigation showed that the cost of production of
(wafers, cells or modules), which, through specialisation,
the Union industry was steadily decreasing during the
increased their competitiveness with regard to the specific
period considered, except for wafers where costs were
product type they were producing. The argument that
decreasing in 2010 but increased in 2011 and further
impact of the high degree automation caused the injury
in the IP to levels slightly higher than at the beginning of
suffered by the Union industry, had therefore to be
the period considered (see recital 138 above). Produc
rejected.
tivity increased for modules and cells, but decreased for
wafers. As mentioned above, due to the surge of dumped
imports from the PRC and the consequent significant
(197) Some interested parties claimed that the price pressure
price pressure on the Union market, the Union
resulted in the consolidation of the Union industry, the
industry was not able to benefit from the reductions in
latter being the cause of the material injury suffered by
cost.
the Union industry. However, the investigation showed
that the consolidation was rather a consequence of the
dumped imports. Furthermore, this party did not support
(203) It is noted that the exporting producers in the PRC do
with any evidence to what extend the consolidation
not enjoy any comparative advantage with regard to raw
process could have been the cause of the injury suffered.
materials (polysilicon) and the machinery used as both
were mostly imported from the Union. As far as labour
and overhead costs are concerned, they represented on
(198) Moreover, it was claimed that the lack of vertical inte
average less than 10 % of the total cost of a module in
gration of the Union industry is the cause of the injury
the IP and are not considered to have played any
suffered. In general the vertically integrated producers in
significant role.

---

L 152/32
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
5.6.2013
(204) Moreover, it was claimed that some Union producers
(212) The ability of the Union industry to raise capital
sourced wafers, cells and/or modules from the country
decreased significantly during the period considered. As
concerned, and resold those products on the Union
the solar industry is capital intensive, the ability to raise
market as their own. The investigation revealed that
capital is crucial. The economic recession had a certain
imports from the Union industry of the product
impact on the situation of the Union industry. The inves
concerned were complementary in nature as well as
tigation showed, however, that despite the growth of the
limited in terms of volume when compared to the
Union market between 2009 and 2011, the situation of
Union production and would therefore not be considered
the Union industry deteriorated as a result of the dumped
as to break the causal link between the dumped imports
imports from the PRC heavily undercutting the Union
and the injury suffered by the Union industry.
industry’s sales prices. It was therefore concluded that
the potential effects of the financial crisis was aggravated
by the increase of dumped imports from the PRC and
that the limited access to finance was largely a
(205) Therefore, in order to match the decreasing price trend of
consequence of the negative market climate, the
the imports from the PRC, the Union industry had to
situation and prospects of the Union industry a
make considerable efforts to rationalise its cost of
consequence of the dumped imports. Therefore, while
production. Despite the efforts of the Union industry,
the financial crises had a certain impact on the
this cost rationalisation could not be reflected in the
situation of the Union industry, it could not break the
sales price due to the significant undercutting exerted
causal link between the dumped imports and the injury
by the dumped imports.
suffered by the Union industry. The argument was
therefore rejected.
(206) On these grounds, all the above mentioned arguments
had to be rejected.
3.9. Export performance of the Union industry
(213) Some interested parties claimed that the Union industry’s
3.7. Competition from thin film PV products and other PV
export sales dropped significantly during the period
technologies
considered and especially between 2009 and 2011 for
modules and between 2009 and first quarter of 2012 for
(207) Several interested parties claimed that the injury suffered
by the Union industry was caused by the competition
cells and that this has caused the material injury suffered
from thin film PV products and other PV technologies, as
by the Union industry.
these technologies were interchangeable and with same
end use.
(214) However, as shown in the table below, the export
volumes for modules remain significant despite a slight
(208) The investigation showed that thin film PV products are
decrease in the IP and average price levels during the IP
produced from different raw materials and do not use
were above the average costs of modules throughout the
crystalline silicon wafers. In general, they have much
period considered. Therefore, this could not have caused
lower conversion efficiencies and a lower wattage
the injury suffered by the Union industry. As for cells,
output than crystalline silicon modules. As a result,
the export volumes represented only around 12 % of the
they cannot be used on restricted areas such as roof-
total production volume of cells. Therefore, despite the
tops, i.e. they are not fully interchangeable with the
low prices during the IP, this could only have had limited
product concerned. Therefore, although there may be
impact on the situation of the Union industry. Finally, as
some competition between the thin film products and
regards wafers, exports represented around 24 % of the
the product concerned, this competition is considered
total production volume and likewise, despite the low
to be marginal.
export prices during the IP, this could only have had
limited impact on the situation of the Union industry.
The arguments in this respect had therefore to be
(209) Therefore the investigation found no link between the
rejected.
injury suffered by the Union industry and the
competition of thin film PV and other PV technologies.
Table 13-a
(210) On these grounds, this argument had to be rejected.
Modules
2009 2010 2011 IP
3.8. Financial crisis and its effects
Volume of exports
989 1
279 1
157 1
148
(211) It was claimed that the financial crisis and the economic
modules in MW
recession had a negative effect on the access to finance
for the Union industry and thus caused the injury
(Index
100 129 117 116
2009 = 100)
suffered by the Union industry.

---

EN
5.6.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
152/33
2009 2010 2011 IP
(217) The investigation found that the consumption for the
product under investigation increased substantially
Average export
2 500 1
900 1
470 1
230
throughout the period considered, as already mentioned
price (EUR/kW)
in recital 108 above. Moreover, the investigation did not
(Index
100 76 59 49
bring into light any factual evidence that the injury

2009 = 100)
suffered by the Union industry was due to the
discovery of shale gas deposits in the Union. The claim
Source: Europressedienst
was therefore rejected.
Table 13-b
3.11. The European Union’s Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS)
Cells
(218) The same party claimed that the injury suffered by the
2009 2010 2011 IP
Union industry was caused by the low investments in
solar energy production due to the low market prices
Volume of exports
62 320 315 238
for the European Union’s Emissions Trading Scheme
cells in MW
CO 2 emission credits.
(Index
100 516 508 384
2009 = 100)
Average export
1 350 1
050 830 640
(219) No evidence was however provided and the investigation
price (EUR/kW)
did not bring into light any factual circumstances
confirming these allegations. To the contrary, the inves
(Index
100 78 61 47
tigation showed that the consumption of the product
2009 = 100)
under investigation was increasing substantially during
Source: Europressedienst
the period considered. On these grounds, the claim was
rejected.
Table 13-c
Wafers
3.12. Management decisions
(220) Some interested parties claimed that the material injury
2009 2010 2011 IP
suffered by at least one of the Union producers was
Volume of exports
93 916 750 486
caused by a wrong management decisions. These alle
wafers in MW
gations were based on the annuals accounts and some
information contained in a letter sent by a shareholder of
(Index
100 985 806 523
the company to the other shareholders.
2009 = 100)
Average export
850 590 530 480
price (EUR/kW)
(221) None of the information in the file showed that any of
(Index
100 70 63 57
the management decisions of the company concerned
2009 = 100)
were unusual or imprudent or had an impact on the
entire Union industry. Therefore, the arguments in this
Source: Europressedienst
respect were rejected.
(215) On these grounds, it was found that the impact of the
Union’s industry’s export performance was not such as to
3.13. Other government policies
contribute to the material injury suffered by the Union
industry. Therefore, the parties’ arguments in this respect
(222) One interested party claimed that the material injury
had to be rejected.
suffered by the Union industry was caused by other
government policies such as renewable energy policies,
policies aimed at encouraging innovation, policies of
cutting red tape, trade facilitation policies and grid
access regulations, as these policies benefit the
3.10. The discovery of shale gas deposits in the Union
exporting producers. However, even if it is true that
certain of the claimed policies might facilitate imports
(216) One interested party claimed that the injury suffered by
from other third countries and overall growth of solar
the Union industry was caused by the discovery of shale
industry, these policies would also benefit the Union
gas deposits in the Union and the prospect of increasing
industry. Moreover, these policies should not be meant
production of cheap shale gas in the Union has reduced
that such imports in the Union should be made at
public and private investments in renewable energy
injurious dumped prices. Therefore, the arguments in
projects.
this respect were rejected.

---

L 152/34
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
5.6.2013
3.14. Conclusion on causation
(228) The investigation established that the Union industry has
suffered material injury caused by the dumped imports
(223) The investigation has established a causal link between
from the country concerned during the investigation
the material injury suffered by the Union industry and
period. It is recalled that a number of injury indicators
the dumped imports from the PRC. Other possible causes
showed a negative trend during the period considered. In
of injury, such as imports from other third countries,
particular, injury indicators related to the financial
consumption, feed-in-tariffs, other financial support
performance of the cooperating Union producers, such
granted to the Union industry, overcapacity, impact of
as profitability, cash flow and return on investments were
raw material prices, self-inflicted injury, competition from
seriously affected. In fact, the Union producers of
thin-film, financial crisis and its effects, export
modules, cells and wafers were loss making in 2011
performance of the Union industry, the discovery of
and in the IP. Consequently, some Union producers
shale gas deposits in the Union, managements decisions,
were already forced to close down their production
the European Union’s Emissions Trading Schemes, other
facilities while some others have faced insolvency. In
government policies were analysed and none of them
the absence of measures, a further deterioration in the
was found to be such as to break the causal link estab
Union industry’s economic situation appears very likely.
lished between the dumped imports from the PRC and
the material injury suffered by the Union industry.
(229) It is expected that the imposition of provisional anti-
dumping duties will restore fair trade conditions on the
(224) Based on the above analysis, which has properly distin
guished and separated the effects of all known factors on
Union market, allowing the Union industry to align the
the situation of the Union industry from the injurious
prices of the like product to reflect the costs of
effects of the dumped imports, it was therefore
production thus improving its profitability. It can also
provisionally concluded that there was a causal link
be expected that the imposition of provisional
between the dumped imports from the PRC and the
measures would enable the Union industry to regain at
material injury suffered by the Union industry during
least part of the market share lost during the period
the IP.
considered, with a positive impact on its overall

financial situation. Moreover the Union industry should
be able to have better access to capital and to further
invest in R & D and innovation in the PV market. Finally,
the investigation also pointed to a possible restarting of
F. UNION INTEREST
the business activity of the Union producers who were
1. Preliminary remarks
forced to stop the production as a result of the pressure
of the Chinese imports. Overall, under this scenario, not
(225) In accordance with Article 21 of the basic Regulation,
only the existing 25 000 jobs of the Union industry (in
the Commission examined whether, despite the
the IP) would be secured but there would also be a
provisional conclusion on injurious dumping, compelling
reasonable prospect for further production expansion
reasons existed for concluding that it is not in the Union
and increase in employment.
interest to adopt provisional measures in this particular
case. The analysis of the Union interest was based on an
appreciation of all the various interests involved,
including those of the Union industry, companies in
(230) Should measures not be imposed, further losses in the
the upstream and downstream markets of the PV
market share are expected with a further deterioration of
sector, importers, users and consumers of the product
the Union industry’s profitability. This would be unsus
concerned.
tainable in the short to medium-term. As a consequence,
in addition to the large number of the Union producers
that were already forced out of the market as described
in recital 157 above, other producers could be facing
(226) Around 150 operators made themselves known after the
insolvency which would in the short to medium term
initiation of the investigation. Specific questionnaires
lead to a likely disappearance of the Union industry with
were sent to unrelated importers, upstream operators
the consequent significant impact of the existing jobs.
(including a raw material producer and suppliers of
production equipment for the product under investi
gation), downstream operators (including project
developers and installers) and BEUC — a consumer
organisation. Three associations representing various
(231) It was therefore provisionally concluded that the
operators (Union industry, upstream and downstream
imposition of the anti-dumping duties would be in the
operators) in the PV sector submitted information.
interest of the Union industry.
2. Interest of the Union industry
3. Interest of unrelated importers
(227) The Union industry directly employed about 25 000
(232) As mentioned in recital 12 above, for only one out of
people in the IP in the production and sale of the like
three sampled importers the major business activity
product.
consisted in trading the product concerned.

---

EN
5.6.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
152/35
(233) An argument was put forward that the imposition of
PRC would limit the imports of polysilicon and
measures on the product concerned will negatively
production equipment from the Union. As a
affect the importers’ business activity. Firstly, the
consequence, the Union upstream operators in the
imposition of duties should not result in the elimination
Union would allegedly need to scale down their
of all imports from the PRC. Secondly, although it can be
business activities and reduce employment.
expected that the imposition of measures may have a
negative effect on the financial situation of the
importers importing only from the PRC, in view of the
likely increase of imports from other third countries, the
(239) It is first noted that the aim of the duty is not to
importers sourcing from different countries should be in
eliminate the Chinese imports of the product concerned
the position to shift their sources of supply
but to restore a level playing field. Thus the Chinese
imports should continue to supply the Union market
to a certain degree, but at fair prices. Furthermore, the
(234) It is therefore provisionally concluded that the imposition
investigation showed that the Union upstream operators
of measures at the proposed level may have a certain
are present globally on different national markets and
negative impact on the situation of unrelated importers
therefore do not depend exclusively on their export to
of the product concerned.
the PRC. It is thus reasonable to assume that in the
global PV market, Union upstream operators would
likely be able to compensate the eventual decrease in
the export to the PRC by the export to the other
4. Interest of the upstream operators
markets which according to publicly available market
studies are expected to grow. In any case, the Chinese
(235) The upstream operators are mainly active in the
production of the raw materials and in the production
PV market is already facing a significant production over
and engineering of the manufacturing equipment for the
capacity and therefore it is doubtful whether the Union
product under investigation. Eight replies were received
machinery producers would be able to sell much more of
to the questionnaires from the upstream operators. Two
manufacturing equipment in the short to medium term.
verification visits were carried out covering a raw
material producer and a producer of manufacturing
equipment.
(240) In view of the above, it is provisionally concluded that
the impact of the anti-dumping duties on the machinery
producers would not be significant, while the impact on
(236) Overall, during the IP, the activity of the eight
the raw material supplier may be negative in the short
cooperating upstream operators related to the product
term in view of the possible reduction of its sales to the
under investigation varied in proportion to their total
PRC.
activity and only for one cooperating company repre
sented 100 % of its business, while for the others it
varied between 6 and 80 %. On average, in the IP, the
activity related to the product concerned represented
around 41 % of the total activity of the cooperating
5. Interest of downstream operators
upstream operators. In terms of jobs, the eight
cooperating upstream operators employed in the IP
(241) The downstream operators are mainly active in project
about 4 200 people. Profitability varied according to
development, marketing and communications and PV
segment and individual company from high rates to
installations. While 13 replies to the downstream ques
slightly negative profitability. The investigation showed
tionnaires were received from the downstream operators
that those operators with a negative profitability
only seven were sufficiently complete and allowed for
suffered from the deteriorated situation of the Union
meaningful assessment. Two verification visits were
industry, as some of the clients they lost were Union
carried out covering the PV project development and
producers of the product under investigation, and from
installations. When analysing the questionnaire replies
the decline in consumption.
received from the 36 cooperating unrelated importers,
it turned out that a certain number of them may
actually have to be qualified as downstream operators,
as their main activity is installation. This issue will be
(237) The sales of the Union upstream operators covered the
further investigated in the further course of the investi
Union, the PRC and other third countries. In the IP the
gation.
repartition of the sales corresponded on average to
around 20 % of sales in the Union, almost 50 % to the
PRC and around 30 % to other third countries.
(242) Overall, the activity of the downstream operators in
relation to the product under investigation varies as
(238) Some parties in the upstream sector claimed that the
compared to their total activity. On average, in the IP,
imposition of anti-dumping measures would affect their
it represented 41 %. The profitability of the cooperating
business activities negatively as the PRC is their main
operators related to the product under investigation was
exporting market. It was argued that the duties would
on average around 11 %, in the IP. In terms of jobs, the
seriously limit the imports of the product concerned
seven cooperating downstream operators employed in
from the PRC to the Union as a result of which the
the IP about 550 people.

---

L 152/36
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
5.6.2013
(243) An argument was raised that the anti-dumping measures
time jobs dedicated solely to the PV industry. To this
are not in the interest of the Union as they will increase
end, the investigation revealed that, especially in the
the price of modules, thus discouraging the end-users/
downstream market (installations) the PV activity is in
consumers from making installations. Consequently, the
general only a part of a much broader business
downstream operators would have far fewer orders and
activity, primary business activity being heating or elec
would have to scale down their businesses. This
tricity installations, plumbing etc.
assessment was based on a study by Prognos on the
possible loss of jobs submitted in the course of investi
gation. The study foresees that the great majority of jobs
in the PV market of the Union are in danger, if duties are
imposed. The study uses an estimation by the European
Photovoltaic Industry Association (EPIA) according to
(247) In view of the above, it is likely that the imposition of
which the total number of direct jobs existing in 2011
measures may lead to an increase of prices in the Union
at all stages of the Union PV market including Union
of the product under the investigation thus possibly
producers, importers, the upstream and downstream
generating less PV installations in the short term. Never
operators is 265 000. Taking as a starting point the
theless the jobs in this part of the market may be
2011 estimation on the total direct PV jobs, the study
negatively affected only to a limited extent in view of
by Prognos concluded that out of 265 000 jobs up to
the following. Firstly, the PV related activity for at least
242 000 jobs will be lost in three years, depending on
some of the installers constitutes only part of their
the level of duties. Most of the job losses will allegedly
business activities and is also seasonal. Therefore, the
occur in the downstream market, which in 2011 was
installers should be able to carry out other activities in
said by Prognos to employ about 220 000 people.
the situation of reduced demand for PV installations. As
the renewable and energy efficiency objectives agreed at
the level of the EU are legally binding on Member States,
it is to be expected that reduced demand for solar instal
lations will translate into increased demand for other
(244) The investigation did not confirm the above scenario and
forms of renewable electricity and energy efficiency.
pointed to a much lower number of direct jobs existing
Many of the employees in the downstream sector are
in the Union PV market in 2011, during the IP and in
likely to have the skills necessary to benefit from the
2012.
increased demand in these neighbouring sectors.
Secondly, in view of the existing profits in the down
stream market (see recital 242 above) installers should be
able to absorb part of the price increase thus limiting the
impact on the final prices and on the demand for PV
(245) To start with, the investigation raised doubt as to the
installations.
accuracy of the total number of direct PV jobs as
estimated by the European PV association. In particular,
during the verification visit at the EPIA, it turned out that
the underlying data leading to a conclusion of 265 000
was imprecise and did not allow for such conclusion. In
fact, the information obtained during the verification visit
(248) Independently of the imposition of duties, the publicly
indicates that the number of direct PV jobs calculated for
available forecasts on the demand for the PV installations
2011 would have a margin of error of up to 20 %. In
indicate a likely contraction in demand in 2013, with
addition, the estimation includes employment in other
annual installations of between 9,8 GW and 16,5 GW
European countries outside the Union as well the
in 2013, which would likely have in any event a negative
employment related to thin film product, which falls
impact on the number of jobs in the downstream
outside the scope of this investigation.
market.
(246) Despite these doubts, even if the original estimation of
jobs was used to analyse the impact on the measures the
(249) Finally, it is remarked that this increase of PV prices
following remarks must be made. The estimation covers
would be likely to happen in any event as the production
the European PV jobs in 2011, which was correlated
of the PRC supplying the Union market appears to be
with a very high number of PV installations in the EU
largely loss-making, which is an unsustainable situation.
that year (about 20 GW). It is reasonable to assume that
in view of the decline in installations reaching about 17,5
GW in the IP and 15 GW in 2012 the number of down
stream jobs in particular, as directly correlated to the
level of installations decreased accordingly. To this end,
publicly available specialised press indicated that in
(250) In view of the above, it is provisionally concluded that
Germany, the largest national market, between 2011
the impact of the anti-dumping duties on the down
and 2012 the employment in the PV sector decreased
stream operators would be to a limited extent negative
from 128 000 to 100 000, including the jobs on the side
in the short term, in view of the higher contraction in
of the producers. Furthermore, the investigation raised
installations than in a counterfactual scenario without
serious doubts on whether the figure included only full
duties forecasted by major research centres and to the

---

EN
5.6.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
152/37
extent the duty cannot be absorbed by the downstream
7. Other arguments
operators. Despite the possible reduction in demand for
PV installations, installers should be able to carry out
(255) Some parties argued that the Union industry is not
other activities, whether related to other green energy
capable of supplying the EU market in the quantities
sources or the installers’ primary business activity, as
required and thus if anti-dumping duties are imposed
referred to above.
there is a serious risk of shortage in the EU, which
may lead to a further increase of prices of the product
concerned.
6. Interest of end-users (consumers)
(251) No parties directly representing the interests of end-users
such as associations of consumers made any represen
(256) The investigation has found this argument to be unjus
tations. In this case reference is made to two types of
tified. The Union industry has been underutilising their
end-users: consumers (households) and other end-users
production capacities since 2009. In the IP, the utilisation
(e.g. institutions, companies). The investigation revealed
rate of the Union production capacity of modules was
that only about a quarter of existing PV installations in
41 % with additional spare capacity of about 5,7 GW;
the Union (so called roof-top, smaller installations) were
the utilisation rate of the Union production capacity of
ordered by consumers. The other installations (ground
cells was 63 %, with additional spare capacity of about
mounted, industrial and commercial of a much bigger
1,2 GW and the utilisation rate of the Union production
scale) were ordered by other end-users.
capacity of wafers was 55 % with additional spare
capacity of about 1,6 GW. Therefore, thanks to the
spare capacity, the Union industry would be able to
compete for an additional part of the market in short
(252) Several parties claimed that if anti-dumping duties are
term. Also in the medium-term, it is reasonable to
imposed, consumers would suffer from a price increase
assume that the Union industry will expand its
of PV modules. While as a result of duties the prices of
production capacity to be able to achieve better
PV modules in the EU market could be expected to rise
economies of scale and allow for further price reductions.
somewhat, it is likely that the consumers and other end-
Furthermore, there are also other sources of supply in the
users would be affected only to a limited extent because
world, which are present on the Union market and
the investigation revealed that the price of a module
which will be able to compete on the Union market in
represents up to 50 % of the total costs of a PV instal
case of decrease of imports of the Chinese products. The
lation. In view of the profit margins earned by the
investigation revealed that the existing spare capacity of
project developers and installers, it is reasonable to
the non-Chinese production outside the EU was in the IP,
assume that the eventual price increase of modules for
5,6 GW for modules, 6 GW for cells and 6 GW for
the consumer may be at least partly absorbed and
wafers. It is therefore concluded that the total spare
therefore mitigated. On the basis of the available
capacity of the EU and third producers outside the EU
evidence it is provisionally concluded that measures at
is sufficient to complement in the short term the
the proposed duty level will be at least partly taken in by
potential decrease in Chinese imports in light of the
the supply chain and, therefore, not necessarily result in
demand for PV installations in the EU as forecasted for
higher prices for consumers at the retail level.
2013 (between 9,8 GW and 16,5 GW) and 2014 (9 GW
and 17,1 GW) by major research centres such as EPIA.
(253) It is further noted that should duties not be imposed, the
likely disappearance of the Union Industry could leave
the consumers with only one source of supply of
modules in the future. In this scenario the Chinese
(257) Some parties also argued that that the imposition of anti-
exporting producers would be in a position to further
dumping duties on the product concerned will harm the
increase their very strong position on the market and this
development of the PV market in Europe and thus the
could also result in increased prices in the short to
goals of the EU Agenda 2020 concerning the renewable
medium term to the detriment of the consumers/end-
sources of energy and a reduction in EU greenhouse gas
users. In any case, as mentioned above, the increase in
emissions will not be achieved.
prices would be likely to happen in any event in view of
the fact that the PRC production is loss-making.
(258) To start with, the 2020 goals do not depend on the solar
(254) On the basis of the above, it is provisionally concluded
energy exclusively. Equally important are other green
that the imposition of measures would have overall a
energies such as: wind, biomass, hydro etc. Since no
limited impact on consumers and other end-users. This
particular percentage is attributed to the solar energy
is irrespective of the role of the national support schemes
for the 2020 goals, a slightly lower number of PV instal
in stimulating the demand for PV installations as referred
lations is not expected to raise the overall cost of the
to in recital 182 above. If national support schemes are
2020 Agenda. Furthermore, the price of solar panels is
adapted to higher prices for solar panels (by means of
only one of many factors, which are vital for the devel
higher FITs), the impact on consumers may be inexistent.
opment of the PV industry in Europe. Equally important

---

L 152/38
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
5.6.2013
are: a favourable legal and financial framework at
a profit before tax that could be reasonably achieved by
European and national levels, improved access to
this industry under normal conditions of competition, i.e.
financing of renewable energies projects and the
in the absence of dumped imports, on sales of the like
investment in R & D. As regards the financing of solar
product in the Union. It is thus considered that a profit
investments, the imposition of duties will enhance the
margin of 10 % of turnover based on the information
situation of the Union industry and of the PV sector in
provided in the complaint could be regarded as an
total. As a result, it will also likely enhance access to
appropriate minimum which the Union industry could
capital for both the Union industry and investors in
have expected to obtain in the absence of injurious
the PV sector. Finally, it is recalled that the aim of the
dumping.
duty is not to eliminate the Chinese imports but restore
fair competition. Should the price of the product
concerned rise the evidence on the profits achieved in
the downstream market allows the assumption that the
(265) On this basis, a non-injurious price was calculated for the
price increase will be partly absorbed by the operators in
Union industry for the like product. The non-injurious
the downstream market. Therefore the price of modules
price was obtained by adding the abovementioned profit
should not rise significantly for the end-users/consumers
margin of 10 % to the cost of production during the IP
and the demand for solar installations could be main
of the sampled Union producers.
tained in the forecasted range.
(259) On the basis of the above, it is provisionally concluded
(266) The necessary price increase was then determined on the
that the imposition of measures would not, overall, have
basis of a comparison of the weighted average import
a significant adverse impact on other EU polices.
price of the sampled cooperating exporting producers in
the PRC, as established for the price undercutting calcu
lations, duly adjusted for importation costs and customs
duties with the weighted average non-injurious price of
8. Conclusion on the Union interest
the like product sold by the sampled Union producers on

the Union market during the IP. Any difference resulting
(260) The overall positive effects for the Union industry
from this comparison was then expressed as a percentage
outweigh the likely negative impact on other operators
of the weighted average CIF import value.
on the PV market including consumers/other end-users.
2. Provisional measures
(261) In view of the above, it is provisionally concluded that
based on the information available concerning the Union
(267) In the light of the foregoing, and in accordance with
interest, there are no compelling reasons against the
Article 7(2) of the basic Regulation, it is considered
imposition of provisional measures on imports of the
that provisional anti-dumping measures should be
product concerned originating in the PRC.
imposed on imports of crystalline silicon PV modules
and key components (i.e. cells and wafers) originating
in or consigned from the PRC at the level of the lower
of the dumping and the injury margins found, in
G. PROVISIONAL ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES
accordance with the lesser duty rule.
(262) In view of the conclusions reached with regard to
dumping, injury, causation and Union interest,
provisional anti-dumping measures should be imposed
(268) Given the high rate of cooperation of Chinese exporting
in order to prevent further injury being caused to the
producers, the ‘all other companies’ duty was set at the
Union industry by the dumped imports.
level of the highest duty to be imposed on the
companies, respectively, sampled or cooperating in the
investigation. The ‘all other companies’ duty will be
applied to those companies which had not cooperated
1. Injury elimination level
in the investigation.
(263) For the purpose of determining the level of these
measures, account was taken of the dumping margins
found and the amount of duty necessary to eliminate
the injury sustained by the Union producers, without
(269) For the cooperating non-sampled Chinese companies
exceeding the dumping margins found.
listed in the Annex, the provisional duty rate is set at
the weighted average of the rates of the sampled
companies.
(264) When calculating the amount of duty necessary to
remove the effects of the injurious dumping, it was
considered that any measures should allow the Union
(270) The proposed rates of the provisional anti-dumping
industry to cover its costs of production and to obtain
duties are as follows:

---

EN
5.6.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
152/39
Company Dumping
margin Injury
margin Duty
Rate
Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co. Ltd;
93,3 % 51,5
% 51,5
%
Trina Solar (Changzhou) Science and Technology Co. Ltd,
Delsolar (Wujiang) Co. Ltd, 112,6
% 67,9
% 67,9
%
Jiangxi LDK Solar Hi-Tech Co. Ltd;
88,4 % 55,9
% 55,9
%
LDK Solar Hi-Tech (Hefei) Co. Ltd;
LDK Solar Hi-Tech (Nanchang) Co. Ltd;
LDK Solar Hi-Tech (Suzhou) Co. Ltd,
JingAo Solar Co. Ltd;
99,0 % 58,7
% 58,7
%
Shanghai JA Solar Technology Co. Ltd;
JA Solar Technology Yangzhou Co. Ltd;
Shanghai Jinglong Solar Energy Technology Co. Ltd;
Hefei JA Solar Technology Co. Ltd,
Jinzhou Yangguang Energy Co. Ltd;
48,1 % 38,3
% 38,3
%
Jinzhou Rixin Silicon Materials Co. Ltd;
Jinzhou Youhua Silicon Materials Co. Ltd;
Jinzhou Huachang Photovoltaic Technology Co. Ltd;
Jinzhou Jinmao Photovoltaic Technology Co. Ltd,
Wuxi Suntech Power Co. Ltd;
71,5 % 48,6
% 48,6
%
Luoyang Suntech Power Co. Ltd;
Suntech Power Co. Ltd;
Wuxi Sun-Shine Power Co. Ltd;
Zhenjiang Ren De New Energy Science Technology Co. Ltd;
Zhenjiang Rietech New Energy Science Technology Co. Ltd,
Yingli Energy (China) Co. Ltd;
96,2 % 37,3
% 37,3
%
Hainan Yingli New Energy Resources Co. Ltd;
Baoding Tianwei Yingli New Energy Resources Co. Ltd,
Other cooperating companies (Annex) 88,5
% 47,6
% 47,6
%
All other companies 112,6
% 67,9
% 67,9
%
(271) The above anti-dumping measures are provisionally
be addressed to the Commission ( 1 ) forthwith with all
established in the form of ad valorem duties.
relevant information, in particular any modification in
the company’s activities linked to production, domestic
(272) The individual company anti-dumping duty rates
and export sales associated with, for example, that name
specified in this Regulation were established on the
change or that change in the production and sales
basis of the findings of the present investigation.
entities. If appropriate, the Regulation will accordingly
Therefore, they reflect the situation found during that
be amended by updating the list of companies benefiting
investigation with respect to these companies. These
from individual duty rates.
duty rates (as opposed to the countrywide duty
applicable to ‘all other companies’) are thus exclusively
(274) In order to ensure a proper enforcement of the anti-
applicable to imports of products originating in the
dumping duty, the all other companies duty level
People’s Republic of China and produced by the
should not only apply to the non-cooperating
companies and thus by the specific legal entities
exporting producers, but also to those producers which
mentioned. Imported products produced by any other
did not have any exports to the Union during the IP.
company not specifically mentioned in the operative
part of this Regulation with its name, including entities
(275) As mentioned under Section 5 of the Notice of Initiation,
related to those specifically mentioned, cannot benefit
the Commission is in the process of determining whether
from these rates and shall be subject to the duty rate
all imports of the product concerned from the PRC can
applicable to ‘all other companies’.
be considered as originating in the PRC. This is in
particular important in case of modules that can incor
(273) Any claim requesting the application of these individual
porate components and parts from different countries.
company anti-dumping duty rates (e.g. following a
change in the name of the entity or following the
( 1 ) European Commission, Directorate-General for Trade, Directorate H,
setting-up of new production or sales entities) should
1049 Brussels, Belgium.

---

L 152/40
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
5.6.2013
Pursuant to Article 1(3) of the basic anti-dumping Regu
industry in particular sustained injury as a result of unfair
lation, the exporting country of a dumped product may
trade practices from the country concerned in the IP,
be an intermediate country. It should also be noted that
Union producers cannot immediately supply the
the complaint relate to imports from the PRC without
necessary quantities if import levels fall as a result of
specifying the origin thereof. Lastly, the anti-dumping
measures. Phasing-in the anti-dumping duty will allow
and countervailing investigations conducted by the USA
the Union industry in the short term to increase
involving the same product imported from the PRC high
supply. In addition, by allowing the Union industry
lighted the complexity of the production and assembly
sufficient time to increase its production levels, avail
operations which might or might not confer origin ( 1 ). In
ability of the product concerned will remain at
the light of these considerations and without prejudice to
reasonable levels to meet demand. Therefore, it is
the conclusion that will be reached on these matters at
considered appropriate to introduce the duty in two
the definitive stage, it is considered appropriate that
steps.
provisional measures should cover the product under
investigation originating in or consigned from the PRC,
unless the product is a product in transit in the sense of
Article V GATT.
I. FINAL PROVISION
(281) In the interests of sound administration, a period should
be fixed within which the interested parties which made
(276) As mentioned above in recital 3 the Commission made
themselves known within the time limit specified in the
imports of the product concerned originating in and
Regulation may make their views known in writing and
consigned from the PRC subject to registration by Regu
request a hearing. Furthermore, it should be stated that
lation (EU) No 182/2013. This was in view of the
the findings concerning the imposition of a duty made
possible retroactive application of the anti-dumping and
for the purposes of this Regulation are provisional and
countervailing measures, under Article 10(4) of the basic
may have to be reconsidered for the purpose of any
Regulation and Article 16(4) of Council Regulation (EC)
definitive duty,
No 597/2009 of 11 June 2009 on protection against
subsidies imports from countries not members of the
European Community (‘basic Anti-subsidy Regulation) ( 2 ).
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
(277) As far as the current anti-dumping investigation is
concerned and in view of the above findings, the regis
Article 1
tration of imports for the purpose of the anti-dumping
investigation in accordance with Article 14(5) of the
1. A
provisional
anti-dumping
duty
is
hereby
imposed
on
basic Regulation should be discontinued.
imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules or panels
and cells and wafers of the type used in crystalline silicon
photovoltaic modules or panels (the cells and wafers have a
thickness not exceeding 400 micrometres), currently falling
(278) As far as the parallel anti-subsidy investigation is
within
CN
codes
ex 3818 00 10,
ex 8501 31 00,
concerned, initiated by the Commission pursuant to
ex 8501 32 00, ex 8501 33 00, ex 8501 34 00, ex 8501 61 20,
Article 10 of the basic Anti-subsidy Regulation, by a
ex 8501 61 80, ex 8501 62 00, ex 8501 63 00, ex 8501 64 00
notice published in the Official Journal of the European
and
ex 8541 40 90
(TARIC
codes
3818 00 10 11,
Union on 8 November 2012 ( 3 ), registration of imports
3818 00 10 19,
8501 31 00 81,
8501 31 00 89,
pursuant to Article 24(5) of the basic Anti-subsidy Regu
8501 32 00 41,
8501 32 00 49,
8501 33 00 61,
lation should continue.
8501 33 00 69,
8501 34 00 41,
8501 34 00 49,
8501 61 20 41,
8501 61 20 49,
8501 61 80 41,
8501 61 80 49,
8501 62 00 61,
8501 62 00 69,
8501 63 00 41,
8501 63 00 49,
8501 64 00 41,
(279) No decision on a possible retro-active application of anti-
dumping measures can be taken at this stage of the
8501 64 00 49,
8541 40 90 21,
8541 40 90 29,
proceeding.
8541 40 90 31 and 8541 40 90 39) and originating in or

consigned from the People’s Republic of China, unless they
are in transit in the sense of Article V GATT.
(280) In view of the exceptional circumstances of the present
proceeding, notably that it concerns a product addressing
a market that requires a stability of supplies in the short
The following product types are excluded from the definition of
term, it is considered appropriate to phase-in the
the product concerned:
provisional anti-dumping measures. As the Union
( 1 ) See Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Determination in
— solar chargers that consist of less than six cells, are portable
the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Crystalline Silicon Photo
and supply electricity to devices or charge batteries,
voltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled into Modules, from the
People’s Republic of China, 9 October 2012, at http://ia.ita.doc.
gov/frn/summary/prc/2012-25580-1.pdf
( 2 ) OJ L 188, 18.7.2009, p. 93.
( 3 ) OJ C 340, 8.11.2012, p. 13.
— thin film photovoltaic products,

---

EN
5.6.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
152/41
— crystalline silicon photovoltaic products that are perma
TARIC
nently integrated into electrical goods, where the function
Company Duty
Rate additional
of the electrical goods is other than power generation, and
code
where these electrical goods consume the electricity
generated by the integrated crystalline silicon photovoltaic
Zhenjiang Ren De New Energy Science
Technology Co. Ltd;
cell(s).
Zhenjiang Rietech New Energy Science
Technology Co. Ltd,
2. The
rate
of
the
provisional
anti-dumping
duty
applicable
to the net free-at-Union-frontier price, before duty, of the
Yingli Energy (China) Co. Ltd;
37,3 % B797
product described in paragraph 1 and produced by the
Hainan Yingli New Energy Resources Co.
companies listed below shall be as follows:
Ltd;
Baoding Tianwei Yingli New Energy
Resources Co. Ltd,
(i) from entry into force of this regulation until 5 August
2013:
Companies listed in the Annex 47,6
%
All other companies 67,9
% B999
Company Duty
Rate
All companies 11,8
%
3. The release for free circulation in the Union of the
product referred to in paragraph 1 shall be subject to the
provision of a security equivalent to the amount of the
(ii) from 6 August 2013:
provisional duty.
TARIC
4. Unless
otherwise
specified,
the
provisions
in
force
Company Duty
Rate additional
concerning customs duties shall apply.
code
Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co. Ltd;
51,5 % B791
Article 2
Trina Solar (Changzhou) Science and
Technology Co. Ltd,
Without prejudice to Article 20 of Regulation (EC) No
1225/2009, interested parties may request disclosure of the
Delsolar (Wujiang) Co. Ltd, 67,9
% B792
details underlying the essential facts and considerations on the
basis of which this Regulation was adopted, make their views
Jiangxi LDK Solar Hi-Tech Co. Ltd;
55,9 % B793
known in writing and apply to be heard orally by the
LDK Solar Hi-Tech (Hefei) Co. Ltd;
Commission within one month of the date of entry into
force of this Regulation.
LDK Solar Hi-Tech (Nanchang) Co. Ltd;
LDK Solar Hi-Tech (Suzhou) Co. Ltd,
Pursuant to Article 21(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009, the
JingAo Solar Co. Ltd;
58,7 % B794
parties concerned may comment on the application of this
Shanghai JA Solar Technology Co. Ltd;
Regulation within one month of the date of its entry into force.
JA Solar Technology Yangzhou Co. Ltd;
Shanghai Jinglong Solar Energy Technology
Article 3
Co. Ltd;
Hefei JA Solar Technology Co. Ltd,
Regulation (EU) No 182/2013 is amended as follows:
Jinzhou Yangguang Energy Co. Ltd;
38,3 % B795
(1) a new heading G and a new recital 22 are inserted:
Jinzhou Rixin Silicon Materials Co. Ltd;
Jinzhou Youhua Silicon Materials Co. Ltd;
Jinzhou Huachang Photovoltaic Tech
‘G. CESSATION OF REGISTRATION FOR THE PURPOSES
nology Co. Ltd;
OF PROTECTION AGAINST DUMPED IMPORTS
Jinzhou Jinmao Photovoltaic Technology
(22) As
of
6
June
2013,
a
provisional
anti-dumping
duty
Co. Ltd,
provides for the protection against dumped imports.
It is therefore no longer necessary to register imports
Wuxi Suntech Power Co. Ltd;
48,6 % B796
for the purpose of protection against dumped
Luoyang Suntech Power Co. Ltd;
imports.’;
Suntech Power Co. Ltd;
Wuxi Sun-Shine Power Co. Ltd;
(2) in Article 1(1) the words ‘to Article 14(5) of Regulation (EC)
No 1225/2009 and’ are deleted.

---

L 152/42
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
5.6.2013
Article 4
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the
European Union.
Article 1 shall apply for a period of six months.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 4 June 2013.
For the Commission
The President
José Manuel BARROSO

---

EN
5.6.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
152/43
ANNEX
Cooperating Chinese exporting producers not sampled:
Name of the Company
TARIC
additional code
AIDE Solar Energy Technology Co. Ltd B798
Alternative Energy (AE) Solar Co. Ltd B799
Anhui Chaoqun Power Co. Ltd B800
Anhui Schutten Solar Energy Co. Ltd B801
Anji DaSol Solar Energy Science & Technology Co. Ltd B802
Arhui Titan PV Co. Ltd
B803
BP SunOasis (Prime) Co. Ltd B804
Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Luoyang) Inc.
B805
CSI Cells Co. Ltd
Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Changshu) Inc.
Changzhou NESL Solartech Co. Ltd B806
Changzhou Shangyou Lianyi Electronic Co. Ltd B807
Chinaland Solar Energy Co. Ltd B808
China Sunergy (Nanjing) Co. Ltd
B809
CEEG (Shanghai) Solar Science Technology Co. Ltd
CEEG Nanjing Renewable Energy Co. Ltd
Chint Solar (Zhejiang) Co. Ltd B810
ChuangZhou EGing Photovoltaic Technology Co. Ltd B811
Cixi City Rixing Electronics Co. Ltd B812
CNPV Dongying Solar Power Co. Ltd B813
CSG PVtech Co. Ltd
B814
DCWATT POWER Co. Ltd B815
Dongfang Electric (Yixing) MAGI Solar Power Technology Co. Ltd B816
EOPLLY New Energy Technology Co. Ltd B817
ERA Solar Co. Ltd
B818
ET Solar Industry Limited
B819
Dotec Electric Co. Ltd
GD Solar (Jiangsu) Co. Ltd B820
Greenway Solar-Tech (Shanghai) Co. Ltd B821
Guodian Jintech Solar Energy Co. Ltd B822

---

L 152/44
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
5.6.2013
Name of the Company
TARIC
additional code
GS PV Holdings Group
B823
Hangzhou Bluesun Solar Energy Technology Co. Ltd B824
Hangzhou Zhejiang University Sunny Energy Science and Technology Co. Ltd B825
Hanwha SolarOne Co. Ltd
B826
Hanwha SolarOne (Qidong) Co. Ltd
Hengdian Group DMEGC Magnetics Co. Ltd B827
Hengji PV-Tech Energy Co. Ltd B828
Himin Clean Energy Holdings Co. Ltd B829
Jetion Solar (China) Co. Ltd B830
Jiangsu Green Power PV Co. Ltd B831
Jiangsu Hosun Solar Power Co. Ltd B832
Jiangsu Jiasheng Photovoltaic Technology Co. Ltd B833
Jiangsu Runda PV Co. Ltd B834
Jiangsu Sainty Photovoltaic Systems Co. Ltd B835
Jiangsu Seraphim Solar System Co. Ltd B836
Jiangsu Shunfeng Photovoltaic Technology Co. Ltd B837
Jiangsu Sinski PV Co. Ltd B838
Jiangsu Sunlink PV Technology Co. Ltd B839
Jiangsu Zhongchao Solar Technology Co. Ltd B840
Jiangxi Risun Solar Energy Co. Ltd B841
Jiangyin Hareon Power Co. Ltd
B842
Schott Solar Hareon Co. Ltd
Hareon Solar Technology Co. Ltd
Jiangyin Shine Science and Technology Co. Ltd B843
Jinggong P-D Shaoxing Solar Energy Tech Co. Ltd B844
Jinko Solar Co. Ltd
B845
Zhejiang Jinko Solar Co. Ltd
Juli New Energy Co. Ltd B846
Jumao Photonic (Xiamen) Co. Ltd B847
King-PV Technology Co. Ltd B848
Kinve Solar Power Co. Ltd (Maanshan) B849

---

EN
5.6.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
152/45
Name of the Company
TARIC
additional code
Konca Solar Cell Co. Ltd
B850
Suzhou GCL Photovoltaic Technology Co. Ltd
Jiangsu GCL Silicon Material Technology Development Co. Ltd
Lightway Green New Energy Co. Ltd
B851
Lightway Green New Energy (Zhuozhou) Co. Ltd
Motech (Suzhou) Renewable Energy Co. Ltd B852
Nanjing Dago New Energy Co. Ltd B853
Nice Sun PV Co. Ltd
B854
Levo Solar Technology Co. Ltd
Ningbo Best Solar Energy Technology Co. Ltd B855
Ningbo Huashun Solar Energy Technology Co. Ltd B856
Ningbo Jinshi Solar Electrical Science & Technology Co. Ltd B857
Ningbo Komaes Solar Technology Co. Ltd B858
Ningbo Osda Solar Co. Ltd B859
Ningbo Qixin Solar Electrical Appliance Co. Ltd B860
Ningbo South New Energy Technology Co. Ltd B861
Ningbo Sunbe Electric Ind Co. Ltd B862
Ningbo Ulica Solar Science & Technology Co. Ltd B863
Perfectenergy (Shanghai) Co. Ltd B864
Perlight Solar Co. Ltd
B865
Phono Solar Technology Co. Ltd B866
Qingdao Jiao Yang Lamping Co. Ltd B867
Risen Energy Co. Ltd
B868
Shandong Linuo Photovoltaic Hi-Tech Co. Ltd B869
Shanghai Alex Solar Energy Science & Technology Co. Ltd
B870
Shanghai Alex New Energy Co. Ltd
Shanghai BYD Co. Ltd
B871
Shanghai Chaori Solar Energy Science & Technology Co. Ltd
B872
Shanghai Weixue Solar Energy Co. Ltd
Shanghai Propsolar New Energy Co. Ltd
B873
Propsolar (Zhejiang) New Energy Technology Co. Ltd
Shanghai Shanghong Energy Technology Co. Ltd B874
Shanghai Solar Energy Science & Technology Co. Ltd
B875
Lianyungang Shenzhou New Energy Co. Ltd
Shanghai Shenzhou New Energy Development Co. Ltd

---

L 152/46
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
5.6.2013
Name of the Company
TARIC
additional code
Shanghai ST-Solar Co. Ltd
B876
Jiangsu ST-Solar Co. Ltd
Shanghai Topsolar Green Energy Co. Ltd B877
Shenzhen Sacred Industry Co. Ltd B878
Shenzhen Sungold Solar Co. Ltd B879
Shenzhen Topray Solar Co. Ltd B880
Sopray Energy Co. Ltd
B881
Sun Earth Solar Power Co. Ltd
B882
Ningbo Sun Earth Solar Power Co. Ltd
Suzhou Shenglong PV-Tech Co. Ltd B883
TDG Holding Co. Ltd
B884
Tianwei New Energy Holdings Co. Ltd
B885
Tianwei New Energy (Chengdu) PV Module Co. Ltd
Wenzhou Jingri Electrical and Mechanical Co. Ltd B886
Winsun New Energy Co. Ltd B887
Worldwide Energy and Manufacturing USA Co. Ltd B888
Wuhu Zhongfu PV Co. Ltd B889
Wuxi Saijing Solar Co. Ltd B890
Wuxi Shangpin Solar Energy Science & Technology Co. Ltd B891
Wuxi Solar Innova PV Co. Ltd B892
Wuxi Taichang Electronic Co. Ltd B893
Wuxi UT Solar Technology Co. Ltd B894
Xiamen Sona Energy Co. Ltd B895
Xi’an Huanghe Photovoltaic Technology Co. Ltd B896
Xi’an LONGi Silicon Materials Corporation
B897
Wuxi LONGi
Years Solar Co. Ltd
B898
Yuhuan BLD Solar Technology Co. Ltd
B899
Zhejiang BLD Solar Technology Co. Ltd
Yuhuan Sinosola Science & Technology Co. Ltd B900
Yunnan Tianda Photovoltaic Co. Ltd B901
Zhangjiagang City SEG PV Co. Ltd B902
Zhejiang Fengsheng Electrical Co. Ltd B903

---

EN
5.6.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
152/47
Name of the Company
TARIC
additional code
Zhejiang Global Photovoltaic Technology Co. Ltd B904
Zhejiang Heda Solar Technology Co. Ltd B905
Zhejiang Jiutai New Energy Co. Ltd
B906
Zhejiang Yutai Photovoltaic Material Co. Ltd
Zhejiang Kingdom Solar Energy Technic Co. Ltd B907
Zhejiang Koly Energy Co. Ltd B908
Zhejiang Longbai Photovoltaic Tech Co. Ltd B909
Zhejiang Mega Solar Energy Co. Ltd B910
Zhejiang Shuqimeng Photovoltaic Technology Co. Ltd B911
Zhejiang Shinew Photoeletronic Technology Co. Ltd B912
Zhejiang SOCO Technology Co. Ltd B913
Zhejiang Sunflower Light Energy Science & Technology Limited Liability Company
B914
Zhejiang Yauchong Light Energy Science & Technology Co. Ltd
Zhejiang Sunrupu New Energy Co. Ltd B915
Zhejiang Tianming Solar Technology Co. Ltd B916
Zhejiang Trunsun Solar Co. Ltd B917
Zhejiang Wanxiang Solar Co. Ltd B918
Zhejiang Xiongtai Photovoltaic Technology Co. Ltd B919
Zhejiang Yuanzhong Solar Co. Ltd B920
Zhejiang Yuhui Solar Energy Source Co. Ltd
B921
RENESOLA JIANGSU LTD
Zhongli Talesun Solar Co. Ltd B922
Znshine PV-Tech Co. Ltd B923
Zytech Engineering Technology Co. Ltd B924

---

Document Outline

• �

---