Section 201 Solar Tariffs Take Effect: What the 30% Duty Means for Module Prices

Published February 14, 2018  ·  Portlandia Electric Supply  ·  News

On January 23, 2018, President Trump signed Proclamation 9693, "To Facilitate Positive Adjustment to Competition From Imports of Certain Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells (Whether or Not Partially or Fully Assembled Into Other Products)," imposing safeguard duties on imported CSPV cells and modules under Sections 201–203 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. §§ 2251–2253). The proclamation was published in the Federal Register at 83 FR 3541 on January 25, and the duties took effect for goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern standard time on February 7, 2018. The solar industry is now operating under a new pricing reality. Here is what contractors, EPCs, and project developers need to understand about the tariff structure, the covered HTS codes, the exemptions, and how to procure hardware without derailing project economics.

How We Got Here: The Case File

This safeguard was not improvised. It is the product of a nine-month statutory process before the U.S. International Trade Commission, and every date below is on the public record:

The Tariff Structure: Four Years, Stepping Down

Per the USTR announcement of January 22, 2018 and Annex I to Proclamation 9693, the safeguard applies to covered imports from all countries (subject to the developing-country exclusions discussed below) on the following schedule:

Structurally, the measure is two instruments in one: a tariff-rate quota on cells — the first 2.5 GW of imported solar cells (not partially or fully assembled into other products) enter duty-free in each of the four years, with no country-specific sub-quotas — and a straight ad valorem duty increase on modules at the rates above (per Proclamation 9693, paragraph 8, and the USTR fact sheet). GSP-eligible developing nations are excluded from the measure so long as each country's import share stays at or below 3% and all such countries collectively stay at or below 9% (Proclamation 9693, paragraph 10); the Philippines and Thailand are explicitly not excluded despite their GSP status.

What Is Covered: The HTS Codes

Per paragraph 6 and Annex I of Proclamation 9693, the safeguard covers:

• HTSUS 8541.40.60 — solar cells, whether or not assembled into modules or made up into panels. Under the 2018 tariff schedule this means statistical reporting numbers 8541.40.6020 (cells) and 8541.40.6030 (modules).
• HTSUS 8501.31.80, 8501.61.00, 8507.20.80 — parts or subassemblies, DC generators, inverters, or batteries with CSPV cells attached.

Products excluded by subdivision (c)(ii)–(iii) of Note 18 in Annex I — including thin-film photovoltaic products — are outside the scope. Note also the foreign-trade-zone rule in clause (1): covered merchandise admitted into a U.S. FTZ on or after February 7 must be admitted in "privileged foreign status" under 19 CFR 146.41, so parking inventory in an FTZ does not avoid the duty.

How the Tariff Hits Module Prices

Pre-tariff, common crystalline silicon modules were trading near $0.35–0.38 per watt (NREL's Q1 2017 benchmark sits at $0.35/W; GTM Research pegged the same period at $0.38/W). GTM Research estimates the 30% Year-1 tariff pencils out to roughly $0.10 per watt on the most common c-Si modules — with a range of $0.10–0.15/W depending on module class (GTM Research, via pv magazine and Utility Dive, January 2018).

Because modules represent roughly 19% of installed commercial system costs and up to 33% of utility-scale costs (per NREL), the total system cost increase works out to approximately 6–11% depending on segment. The impact is most acute on utility-scale projects, where module costs are the largest single line item and margins are already thin.

What Buyers Should Do Now

For installers, distributors, and EPCs, the tariff creates five immediate action items:

1. Audit inventory and in-transit cargo against the February 7 line. The duty applies to goods "entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption" on or after 12:01 a.m. EST on February 7, 2018 (Proclamation 9693, clause (7)). Modules that cleared customs before that timestamp are not subject to the safeguard. If you have product on the water or in bonded warehouses, verify entry dates and bond status with your customs broker immediately — entry date, not purchase date, controls.
2. Lock pricing in writing on every open quote. With module costs stepping up ~$0.10/W and a further round of volatility likely as importers race the 2.5 GW cell quota, quotes issued without price-protection language are exposure. Add explicit validity windows and tariff pass-through clauses to new proposals, and re-paper any handshake pricing from Q4 2017.
3. Separate cells from modules in your sourcing logic. The 2.5 GW annual exemption covers imported cells only — not modules, and not cells already assembled into laminates. Modules assembled in the U.S. from in-quota imported cells avoid the duty on the cell content. This makes U.S.-assembled product newly competitive; ask suppliers for certificates of origin and their quota-allocation position.
4. Triage contracted projects before repricing the pipeline. Projects already under signed EPC or supply agreements with fixed module pricing are the highest-risk exposure — the duty is a cost nobody budgeted in 2017 bids. Identify those contracts first, confirm whether they contain change-in-law or tariff pass-through provisions, and negotiate amendments before procurement rather than after entry.
5. Recalibrate by region. In markets with high retail electricity rates — California, the Northeast — a 10-cent/W increase is absorbed more easily than in emerging markets like Texas or the Southeast, where solar economics are tighter. GTM Research projects the South and Midwest will see the largest installation declines; residential demand in high-rate states should hold up better.

The Manufacturers in Play (February 2018)

The tariff reshuffles the competitive landscape. Here is the field as it stands today:

First Solar is the clearest winner in the near term — its CdTe thin-film technology is outside the tariff scope entirely, and its Ohio factory is running at capacity. For projects where footprint is not constrained, thin-film is now significantly more cost-competitive than it was six months ago.

Market Outlook: What the Analysts Are Saying

GTM Research projects an 11% reduction in U.S. solar deployment over the next four years compared to a no-tariff scenario (GTM Research, January 23, 2018). The firm still expects more than 10 GW of installations in 2018 and 11.9 GW in 2019, but growth will come slower than previously forecast. The utility-scale segment is expected to lose nearly 5 GW of projects, many of which will be delayed rather than canceled outright.

SEIA, the industry's trade association, has been vocal in opposition. The organization estimates that 23,000 jobs are at risk, with the greatest impact falling on installation and development firms rather than manufacturers. The two petitioners — Suniva and SolarWorld — have both struggled financially; Suniva filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in April 2017, days before filing its petition, and its Georgia plant is closed, while SolarWorld's Hillsboro, Oregon facility is operating at reduced capacity following its German parent's 2017 insolvency.

FAQ

Related Reading

• Solar Panel Electrical Requirements — Contractor Guide
• Solar Inverters — PES Collection
• Residential Solar Panels — PES Collection
• Battery Installation Guide (2026)