Quantcast
Energy
Dennis Schroeder / NREL

The Facts About Trump’s Solar Tariffs – Who Gets Hurt? Who Gets Helped?

By John Rogers

The solar-related shoe we've been expecting has finally dropped: President Trump recently announced new taxes on imported solar cells and modules. There's plenty of downside to his decision, in terms of solar progress, momentum and jobs. But will it revive U.S. manufacturing?


What the Solar Tariffs Look Like

First, the what. The tax has come in at 30 percent for the first year (starting this month), then it drops 5 percentage points each year through year four, before going away completely.

The worst of both worlds? The Trump solar tariffs USTR

Imports from most of our major trading partners in this area are covered by this: China, sure, but also Taiwan, South Korea, Malaysia (the origin of the biggest slice of our solar imports in recent times), Canada, Mexico…

Who They Hurt

The downside of this is pretty clear: A tax on imported solar cells and modules raises the prices of those products. And that makes solar more expensive for all of us.

That unfortunate Trump Bump will be felt more in large-scale solar projects, where solar panels make up more of the cost of the project. We're already hearing of projects cancelled or delayed because of the tariffs or, earlier, the specter of tariffs.

But it's not just the large projects: The tariff also makes systems for folks like you and me—rooftop systems or community shared solar—more expensive. Solar will still be as cheap as electricity from your local power company in a lot of states. But other states where solar had just become competitive by that metric will now fall back.

The foregone projects and home systems mean foregone megawatts of solar capacity. Projections say 7,600 megawatts of solar won't happen because of the tariffs over the next five years—more than a million homes' worth—compared to close to 12,000 megawatts installed during 2017. And without that solar, we don't get the benefits that come from that solar.

So that answers part of the "who": The Trump solar taxes hit you, me, our communities and our power system.

Who They Help(?)

Another really important "who" gets right to the heart of the purported purpose of the tariffs: the U.S. solar industry's workforce. The tariff case came about because of a couple of U.S.-based manufacturing operations that were having a hard time competing in the global marketplace. Making imports more expensive helps local producers compete, goes the thinking.

But does it? As that chart above shows, these tariffs are brief, and step down pretty quickly. Don't attribute that to the president's lack of desire to help (or any misgivings on his part about the wisdom of doing this at all): The relevant section of the U.S. trade code limits the "remedy" to four years, and requires it to drop every year.

The tariffs also actually lower than the tax/quota proposals put forth by the U.S. International Trade Commission, which evaluated the original petition.

To be clear, I'm definitely not advocating longer or higher solar tariffs (or any new tariffs at all). But this seems like sort of the worst of both worlds: tariffs that are high enough, at least at the beginning, to dent solar's momentum, but that aren't high enough or sufficiently long-lived to get much in the way of new U.S. solar factories built.

Here's how Bloomberg analyst Hugh Bromley put it:

"Anyone expecting a U.S. manufacturing renaissance as a result of these tariffs is set to be disappointed… A tariff lasting only four years and ratcheting down quickly is unlikely to attract any manufacturing investment that was not going to occur anyway."

And actually, the tariffs may not even last four years: The last time a president tried doing something like this (for steel, in that case, in 2002), the tariffs lasted less than two years (and damaged other sectors of the economy) before the U.S. pulled the plug because of World Trade Organization issues. And the legal action against these new import taxes has already started, with several Canadian companies filing suit earlier this month.

Moves like President Trump's can also prompt retaliatory action. U.S. makers of the polysilicon that solar cells are made from are still suffering from the tariffs that China put on those materials when the Obama administration put its own taxes on Chinese solar (in reaction to perceived dumping of products below cost).

Who They Hurt, Part II

In the meantime, the U.S. solar workforce has to deal with the reality of President Trump's decision. While solar employment has been impressive (and a whole lot more impressive than coal's), last year, for the first time since data started being collected in 2010, we lost solar jobs—10,000 out of 260,000, or 4 percent.

The Trump tariffs are only responsible for a piece of that—the cooling-off after a big solar push in 2016 was a big factor—but the uncertainty that the trade case provoked, the rise in prices in anticipation of tariff action, and our president's unpredictable nature sure didn't help.

The tariffs do look to be a big factor for jobs in the near term, and not in a good way there either. The Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA), calling the president's decision "a loss for America", is projecting 23,000 fewer US solar jobs this year than under business as usual because of the higher prices. That drop equals more than 10 times the number of current U.S. solar cell/module manufacturing workers, meaning we'd have to have an incredible amount of growth in manufacturing just to make up for the losses elsewhere.

Sure looking like pain without gain.

No Wall

So, where does that leave us?

On balance, these new tariffs aren't likely to be a good thing. It's pretty clear that the policy itself will cost more American jobs than it'll fuel. The higher prices will drive some projects and people out of the market. And anything that disrupts solar's incredible momentum is unwelcome.

Whether U.S. manufacturing will experience a resurgence depends on a lot of factors, with the new tax being just one part. We'll hope for the best on that count, but I'm not sure I'd put my money on it. (If you're looking to invest, there are plenty of other opportunities to get a piece of the action, given that the U.S. solar industry is about so much more than cell/module manufacturing).

However it plays out, solar as a whole is strong, powerful, irresistible. The industry—and many customers—will persevere. The tariffs will hurt (and already have), and may help very little. At a recent solar conference, though, I heard one analyst say the tariffs would be "impactful, but not devastating," and another call this "a speed bump, not a brick wall," forcing solar to slow down, but not stopping it. Lots of other forces and needs are pushing solar to accelerate instead.

So drive on, solar. We're with you.

John Rogers is a senior energy analyst with expertise in renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies and policies.

Show Comments ()

EcoWatch Daily Newsletter

Sponsored
Climate
Women fetching water in India. Pixabay

India Suffers 'Worst Water Crisis in Its History'

India is facing its "worst-ever" water crisis, according to a report from a government think tank issued last week.

Around 200,000 Indians die each year due to lack of water access, the report finds, and demand will be twice as much as supply by 2030.

Keep reading... Show less
Food
daryl_mitchell / Flickr / CC BY-SA 2.0

Urban Gardening 101: How to Deal With Contaminated Soil

By Brian Barth

Urban soils are particularly prone to contamination. Fifty years ago, your yard could have belonged to a farmer, who, perhaps not knowing any better, disposed of old bottles of anti-freeze or contaminated diesel in a hole out behind the tractor garage. Or perhaps the remains of a fallen down outbuilding, long ago coated in lead-based paint, was buried on your property buy a lazy contractor when your subdivision was built.

Keep reading... Show less
Climate
High-tide flooding in Miami, FL, a state that could lose more than 10 percent of its residential properties to chronic flooding by 2100. B137 / CC BY-SA 4.0

Sea Level Rise Could Put 2.4 MIllion U.S. Coastal Homes at Risk

More than 300,000 U.S. coastal homes could be uninhabitable due to sea level rise by 2045 if no meaningful action is taken to combat climate change, a Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) study published Monday found.

The study, Underwater: Rising Seas, Chronic Floods and the Implications for U.S. Coastal Real Estate, set out to calculate how many coastal properties in the lower 48 states would suffer from "chronic inundation," non-storm flooding that occurs 26 times a year or more, under different climate change scenarios.

Keep reading... Show less
Climate

NASA Climate Scientist Warned Us About Warming 30 Years Ago

Climate science marks a troubling anniversary this week: in June of 1988, NASA scientist James Hansen told Congress that global warming had already begun to affect the world and would only get worse.

Keep reading... Show less
Sponsored
Climate
Pixabay

4 Ways You Can Make a Difference on Climate

By Jaime Nack

"Where do I start?"

Whatever the forum, whatever the audience, it's always the first question I hear when I talk to people about sustainability and personal impact.

Keep reading... Show less
Renewable Energy
Minnesota Senate Building solar array ribbon-cutting ceremony on May 10. MN Administration / CC BY 2.0

U.S. Sees Steady Solar Growth Despite Trump, But China Slashes Subsidies

By Andy Rowell

Donald Trump can't stop the sun from shining. Despite the climate denier's pro-fossil fuel agenda, and despite his tariffs on imported solar panels, the U.S. still installed more solar than any other source of energy in the first quarter of the year.

The amount of solar power installed in the U.S. climbed 13 percent in the first quarter, according to the trade body, the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA).

Keep reading... Show less
Sponsored
Politics
frankieleon / CC BY 2.0

How a Minor Change to EPA Rules Could Slash Environmental Protection

By Joseph Aldy

Since the Reagan administration, federal agencies have been required to produce cost-benefit analyses of their major regulations. These assessments are designed to ensure that regulators are pursuing actions that make society better off.

In my experience working on the White House economic team in the Clinton and Obama administrations, I found cost-benefit analysis provides a solid foundation for understanding the impacts of regulatory proposals. It also generates thoughtful discussion of ways to design rules to maximize net benefits to the public.

Keep reading... Show less
Popular
E. Kahl / National Park Service

America’s Most Obscure Desert Is in Alaska

By Michael Engelhard

Time slipping, a tabula rasa. Footprints erased, slopes advanced, ripples unsculpted. A whole world recast by whims of weather. Besides snowfields and foreshores, few landscapes appear so clean-cut and subtle. Here, emptiness is the main attraction.

Keep reading... Show less
Sponsored

mail-copy

The best of EcoWatch, right in your inbox. Sign up for our email newsletter!