European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
Directorate-General for Trade
Directorate H - Trade Defence
QUESTIONNAIRE
COMPLETE THIS PART
(tick box as appropriate and enter company name)
COMPANY NAME:
 LIMITED VERSION (1)
 VERSION OPEN FOR CONSULTATION
THIS QUESTIONNAIRE HAS TO BE COMPLETED TWICE, ONCE AS A LIMITED VERSION AND ONCE AS A
VERSION OPEN FOR CONSULTATION BY INTERESTED PARTIES – SEE ANNEX I AND III FOR INSTRUCTIONS
 Intended for:
Downstream operators of crystalline silicon photovoltaic
modules and cells in the European Union
 Country concerned
The People's Republic of China
 Product concerned:
Crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and cells, originating
in or consigned from the People's Republic of China
 Investigation period (IP):
1 October 2014 to 30 September 2015
 Statutory reference:
Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 of 30 November 2009
and Council Regulation (EC) No 597/2009 of 11 June 2009
 Regulatory reference:
 Internal registration
number:
 Deadline for response to
the questionnaire:
Notices of initiation, OJ C 405/08, 405/09, 405/10, (5.12.2015)
R629, R630 and R640
As specified in the cover letter
Officials in charge:
HEAD OF SECTION:
Per Ake Aidemark
+32 229 94347
CASE HANDLERS
Mariusz Hubski +32 229 99569
Carl Ringberg +32 229 67589
Kurt Galle +32 229 55532
João Nunes +32 229 88049
1 Please note that confidential information falls under the term 'limited' according to the internal rules of the European Commission. Hence,
only documents labelled 'limited' are considered confidential documents pursuant to Article 19 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009
(OJ L 343 of 22.12.2009, p.51) and Article 6 of the WTO Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the GATT 1994 (Anti-dumping
Agreement). Documents, which do not contain this label, are considered to be non-confidential documents pursuant to these provisions.
Therefore, any replies which contain confidential information must be labelled 'Limited'.
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
1
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Address:
EMAIL: TRADE-SOLAR-INJURY@ec.europa.eu
European Commission
Directorate General for Trade - Directorate H
CHAR 04/039
B-1049 Brussels, BELGIUM
Comment by SolarPower Europe:
The European Commission maintains anti-dumping or anti-subsidy measures including
undertakings with minimum import prices unless it considers that their maintenance is not in
the Union Interest after having weighted the interests of the EU producers against the interests
of the importers, distributors or other downstream operators and having also taken into
account the interests of the upstream operators.
Note that the downstream operators are not only the users of the modules or cells including the
installers but also operators such as project managers, investment funds, and maintenance
persons as well as operators whose activity is not directly related to the product under
investigation such as companies involved with logistics, transport, or public relations.
It is important in this regard to bear in mind a few statements that the European Commission
made in the definitive duty regulations it issued in December 2013 because the data and
especially the arguments in the response to this questionnaire should also focus on rebutting
these conclusions :
(i) For the operators whose activities were not directly related to modules and cells such as
logistics companies, the European Commission stated:
“Despite certain deficiencies in the replies, the data in the questionnaires showed that the PV
related activity of these operators was marginal as compared to their total activity. Indeed, during
the IP the PV related activity represented on average only around 5 % of their total turnover and
8 % of their total employment. Profitability was on average around 7 %. However, it is noted that
data concerning profitability were not complete, as not all operators reported on this item.”
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
2
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Comment by SolarPower Europe: (cont’d)
(ii) For the installers and project developers, the EU considered that their livelihoods did not
hinge on solar installations:
“As regards the claim that the PV business constitutes a primary source of income for installers,
further analysis of the questionnaire replies submitted by the seven downstream operators
(installers and project developers) confirmed that the activity directly related to the like product
under investigation represented on average around 42 % of the total activity of these operators and
the profitability equalled on average 11 %. However, when taking into account also their activities
(not directly related to the product under investigation), their overall importance increases
substantially for three out of the seven operators. As a result, the corresponding ratio would range
from around 45 % to 100 % during the IP. In addition, for the seven operators (installers and
project developers) the profitability of the PV activity including the activities not directly linked to
the product under investigation would amount to 9 % on average. Employment-wise, the PV activity
including the activities not directly linked to the product under investigation would amount to
around 660 full-time jobs in the IP for the seven operators. Apart from PV projects and installations
these operators were also active in wind energy installations and production of electrical
equipment.
It is considered that any impact of measures on the downstream operators has to be primarily
assessed on their activity directly related to the product under investigation which in the IP reached
a profitability of 11 % on average. However, even if it is assessed on the basis of the overall PV
activity not directly related to the product under investigation the conclusions would be similar to
the one made at provisional stage since, overall, the various factors taken into account, namely
profitability and possibility to absorb part of the duty, do not vary significantly (the profitability
decreases from 11 % on average to 9 % on average).”
(iii) On job losses:
“A number of parties contested the conclusions in recitals (247) and (250) to the provisional
Regulation that the jobs in the downstream segment will be negatively impacted in the short term
and that the overall impact will be negative but only to a limited extent in view of the fact that the
PV market in the Union is forecasted to grow in the mid-and long-term. Some parties further
claimed that in particular installers, who are dependent on the PV installations, will suffer from
the decline in demand.
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
3
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Comment by SolarPower Europe: (cont’d)
The possible job losses resulting from the imposition of the duties was further analysed. In general
terms, the information gathered during the investigation confirmed that the downstream sector has
been experiencing job losses as a result of the contraction of the demand for PV installations in
the Union of about 5 GW between 2011 and 2012, as already stated in recital (246) to the
provisional Regulation. These job losses cannot be linked to the measures as they reflected a market
evolution. Moreover, a further contraction of demand is foreseen in 2013 and 2014 and will most
likely result in further job losses in the PV sec tor. Similarly, such evolution of the demand was
forecasted by major research centres such as EPIA before the initiation of the investigation and
therefore such job losses cannot be attributed to the imposition of measures.
The Union industry submitted a study by a consultant PriceWaterHouseCoopers (‘PWC’) on the
possible impact of measure on PV related jobs. The PWC study refers to an earlier study by another
consultant Prognos, which envisaged high job losses in the PV market resulting from the
imposition of measures, which was submitted by AFASE prior to the imposition of provisional
duties and which was addressed in recitals (243) to (246) to the provisional Regulation. The PWC
study criticised the study by Prognos pointing to the fact that the total job losses estimated by
Prognos exceeded in fact the total number of existing PV jobs in the Union. Regarding the impact
of duties in the Union market, PWC reached opposite conclusions than Prognos, forecasting a net
positive impact on jobs in the Union and that the benefits outweigh the possible negative effects of
the duties (e.g. on demand). In view of the absence of new substantiated arguments on the impact
of measures on the employment in the downstream sector, the conclusions in recitals (247) to (250)
to the provisional Regulation are confirmed. …
With regard to the survey conducted by AFASE and the UK Solar Trade Association, in response
to the final disclosure the identity of the companies participating in the interview was provided.
The surveys remained however deficient, since for example certain replies were incomplete. The
analysis of the surveys showed the following. Concerning the survey by AFASE, it is firstly noted
that the majority of the 50 installers who replied to the interview declared to be exclusively active
in the PV market. 15 out of 50 installers declared to be also active in other non-PV activities such
heating, electrical installations, and wind to a certain extent. In case of the UK survey, 21 out of
31 UK companies who replied to the interview had also other than PV activities. This result shows
that with regards to a nearly a half of the project developers and installers, the finding set out in
recital (247) to the provisional Regulation on the ability to perform other activities such as electrical
and heating installations, plumbing and other green energies installations, is correct. It is,
however, recognized that this ability may exist to a lesser extent than assumed in the provisional
Regulation. Its mitigating impact on job losses may therefore be less important than initially
assumed. Secondly, some of the operators surveyed by AFASE and the UK Solar Trade Association
have been using products produced in the Union and some foresee buying non-Chinese products
following the measures to avoid a price increase. Thus, their dependence on the Chinese imports
and the impact of the measures is expected to be reduced as they can access products produced in
the Union.
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
4
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Comment by SolarPower Europe: (cont’d)
Thirdly, the estimation of the impact of the measures on the businesses of all surveyed operators'
did not allow for firm conclusions as their assessment was very diverse. Some companies were even
unable to assess such impact. Fourthly, also the answers to the question about the number of the
PV projects that risk cancelling in case of duties ranged from ‘not many’ to ‘all projects’ in the UK
survey. Some operators were unable to make an estimation. Finally, both surveys lacked the
question about the profitability of the economic operators interviewed, which is important for the
assessment of the possible absorption of the price increase, if any, resulting from the duty.
Other parties claimed that installers cannot easily change their activities or switch to other green
energy installations because of the very different technologies and know-how involved. Therefore,
should the duties be imposed, they would go out of business. …
This argument was insufficiently substantiated as it was not demonstrated what precise knowledge
an installer would need to acquire and how difficult and expensive it is to obtain it. Irrespectively,
the institutions acknowledge that installers have developed know-how specific to the installation of
PV modules. However, the development of this know-how is relatively recent and adds to the
primary expertise of the installers being electrical and heating installations, plumbing etc. It also
developed in response to an unfair practice namely the massive inflow of dumped imports from the
PRC. Independently from the specialised skills of the employees of the installers, the argument has
to be considered in parallel with the analysis made in recitals (378) and (382) above on the
employment situation in the downstream sector which in the short term might be negatively
impacted but which, thanks to sustainable trade, would lead to an increase in the employment of
installers in the mid-to long term. Therefore, the argument was rejected.
Several parties contested the argument regarding the ability of the downstream operators to absorb
partly the possible price increase mentioned in recital (247) to the provisional Regulation. Also this
argument was insufficiently substantiated thus preventing from assessing to which extent this
allegation was accurate. As mentioned in recital (374) above, profitability of the downstream
cooperating operators related directly to the product concerned was assessed at around 11 % on
average which leaves to the operators in question the possibility to absorb at least partially some
price increase if any. In this context, it is recalled as mentioned in recital (335) above that the
overall trend of prices is downward. The argument is therefore rejected.
In reply to the final disclosure some parties reiterated the claim of the serious risk of contraction
of demand for solar products in the Union as a result of the measures, which according to these
parties speaks against the measures. One party argued that the solar energy currently has a high
price elasticity of demand and even a limited increase in the price of solar products would result in
a severe contraction of demand. This party estimated that an anti-dumping duty in the range of 30
% may further contract demand by 8 GW whereas a duty of 50 % would contract demand by 10
GW. In the same tone, AFASE referred to a study made by a market analyst, which also foresees a
contraction of demand of up to 2GW in 2013 as a result of a duty of 50 %, thus a contraction of a
much smaller magnitude.
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
5
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Comment by SolarPower Europe: (cont’d)
Although different contraction scenarios were submitted by parties during the investigation in
addition to the ones referred to above, they did not contain comparable results. While it cannot be
excluded that the duties might result in a contraction of demand for PV installations, the
quantification of such effect is difficult to establish in view of the various elements that influence
the attractiveness of the PV installations in the Union (see for instance recital (258) to the
provisional Regulation). In addition, even if such contraction were to take place in the short term,
the mid-and long-term benefits resulting from fair trade are expected to outweigh the short term
negative impact….”
The conclusions in the provisional duty regulations were confirmed which were the following:
“In view of the above, it is likely that the imposition of measures may lead to an increase of prices
in the Union of the product under the investigation thus possibly generating less PV installations
in the short term. Nevertheless the jobs in this part of the market may be negatively affected only
to a limited extent in view of the following. Firstly, the PV related activity for at least some of the
installers constitutes only part of their business activities and is also seasonal. Therefore, the
installers should be able to carry out other activities in 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 installations
will translate into increased demand for other forms of renewable electricity and energy efficiency.
Many of the employees in the downstream sector are likely to have the skills necessary to benefit
from the increased demand in these neighbouring sectors. Secondly, in view of the existing profits
in the downstream 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 installations.
Independently of the imposition of duties, the publicly available forecasts on the demand for the
PV installations indicate a likely contraction in demand in 2013, with annual installations of
between 9,8 GW and 16,5 GW in 2013, which would likely have in any event a negative impact on
the number of jobs in the downstream market.
Finally, it is remarked that this increase of PV prices would be likely to happen in any event as the
production of the PRC supplying the Union market appears to be largely loss-making, which is an
unsustainable situation.
In view of the above, it is provisionally concluded that the impact of the anti-dumping duties on the
downstream operators would be to a limited extent negative in the short term, in view of the higher
contraction in installations than in a counterfactual scenario without duties forecasted by major
research centres and to the extent the duty cannot be absorbed by the downstream operators.
Despite the possible reduction in demand for PV installations, installers should be able to carry out
other activities, whether related to other green energy sources or the installers’ primary business
activity, as referred to above.”
In short: we must show that (i) it was impossible to retool to other areas of renewable energy;
(ii) it is the combination of the duties / minimum import prices and phase-out of subsidies that
contributed to a collapse of demand; (iii) the increase of prices of EU modules and cells was
inevitable.
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
6
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
INDEX
INDEX ................................................................................................................................ 7
SECTION A - GENERAL INFORMATION ..................................................................... 8
SECTION B - PRODUCT CONCERNED ....................................................................... 11
SECTION C - INFORMATION RELATING TO PURCHASES.................................... 13
SECTION D - INFORMATION RELATING TO COSTS AND EMPLOYEES ............ 15
SECTION E - PROFIT AND LOSS SITUATION ........................................................... 17
SECTION G - OTHER QUESTIONS .............................................................................. 19
CERTIFICATION ............................................................................................................. 41
ANNEX I - INSTRUCTIONS .......................................................................................... 42
ANNEX II - GLOSSARY ................................................................................................. 44
ANNEX III - VERSION OPEN FOR CONSULTATION ............................................... 47
ANNEX IV – DECLARATION ON COPYRIGHT......................................................... 49
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
7
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
SECTION A - GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Please supply the following details about your company.
Full name of the company:
Legal form:
Address:
Telephone:
E-mail:
Website:
Contact person:
In case you appointed a legal representative to assist you in this proceeding provide the following
details and submit a scanned copy of the original power of attorney:
Name of legal representative:
Address:
Telephone:
E-mail:
Comment by SolarPower Europe:
Complete the data requested. The legal form is for example ‘limited liability company’,
‘GmbH’, etc.
2. Please give the name of your company’s ultimate controlling entity and list each shareholder that
owned more than 5% of its shares during the IP.
Response:
…
Comment by SolarPower Europe:
One of the reasons of this question is to make sure that these companies are not directly or
indirectly related to Chinese producers.
3. Please provide the contact details of all related companies (see definition in the glossary) inside and
outside the Union, which are involved in the product in question. Specify the activities of each
related company and the percentage of shares owned.
Response:
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
8
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
…
Comment from SolarPower Europe:
As per the Glossary below and the EU’s definition for ‘related parties’ in the customs law,
companies are related when any of the following is satisfied:
For the purpose of completing this questionnaire, natural persons or legal persons (i.e.
companies) should be deemed to be related if:
(a)
they are officers or directors of one another's businesses;
(b)
they are legally recognised partners in business;
(c)
they are employer and employee;
(d)
any persons directly or indirectly owns, controls or holds 5% or more of the
outstanding voting stock or shares of both of them;
(e)
one of them directly or indirectly controls the other;
(f)
both of them are directly or indirectly controlled by a third person;
(g)
together they directly or indirectly control a third person; or
(h)
they are members of the same family.
This is also used to determine whether the downstream operator is fully (directly or
indirectly) unrelated from any affiliate to a Chinese producer of modules or cells. But, it is
also used to determine whether data from any related company must be considered to
determine the financial status of the company.
4. Describe your main activities in relation to solar modules and cells (e.g. installer, service provider,
etc).
Response:
…
Comment from SolarPower Europe:
Please describe in a few sentences the scope of your activities with regard to solar modules
and cells without description of any other activities of your company.
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
9
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
5. Please attach the audited accounts for all the years considered (2011-IP). In the event that your
company's accounts have not been audited, attach the financial statements that are required by your
country's business law.
Response:
Our financial year covers … to …
Our company’s [audited] financial statements [including the auditor’s report] for the years
ended in 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014 and [2015] are attached in Exhibit A.5 hereto.
[For the Investigation Period from 1 October 2014 through 30 September 2015, since this
period does not correspond to our financial year, our company attaches the internal monthly
profit and loss statement of the company for the period concerned.] [The Investigation Period
does not correspond to our financial year such that we have no financial statement for this
period and no monthly statements to provide instead.]
Comment from SolarPower Europe:
Please amend as fits your company.
6. Please complete the turnover table below, corresponding with and in the currency of your financial
report.
Table A.1: Turnover
Turnover
2011
2012
2013
2014
IP
Total company turnover (all
products)
Turnover of products using or
incorporating solar modules or cells
Response:
…
Comment from SolarPower Europe:
The above table solely contemplates the resale of ‘products’, i.e., the sale of modules incorporating
cells that were purchased or the resale of purchased modules to which other products were integrated
or where products were sold as part of a kit with the modules. It does not as such contemplate the
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
10
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
situation of a downstream operator that is in the project business and, as a result, sells both ‘products’
and services.
This being said, we would recommend the following:
(i) if your company resells products rather than services, respond as requested based on the products
you sell;
(ii) if your company is sells products as well as services, complete the table on the basis of your
turnover for products and services and explain such in the response hereinabove.
The data is requested for the calendar years. However, if it is easier for you, you could provide
turnover date based on the financial year (e.g., if your financial year ends on March 31 st, for 2011 ,
you could provide the turnover figures for the financial year from 1 April 2011 through 31 March
2012 and explain such in the response. The total company turnover figures must then match what is
in the financial statements.
This data is important for the following reasons:
(i) if the facts allow, it is important to demonstrate that turnover in PV installations decreased after
the imposition of the duties / minimum import price in 2013 thereby supporting the conclusion that
the maintenance of the duties / minimum import prices is not in the interest of your company;
(ii) if the facts allow, to strengthen the argument that PV installations are a very important of your
total operations such that the European Commission’s assertion that the impact of duties / minimum
import prices for solar modules and cells does not overall have a significant impact on the total
business operation and profitability of the downstream sector.
SECTION B - PRODUCT CONCERNED
B.1
Scope of the Investigation
The product covered by this proceeding is crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules or panels and cells
of the type used in crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules or panels (the cells have a thickness not
exceeding 400 micrometres) (‘solar cells and modules'), currently falling within CN codes
ex 8501 31 00, ex 8501 32 00, ex 8501 33 00, ex 8501 34 00, ex 8501 61 20, ex 8501 61 80,
ex 8501 62 00, ex 8501 63 00, ex 8501 64 00 and ex 8541 40 90 (TARIC codes 8501310081,
8501310089, 8501320041, 8501320049, 8501330061, 8501330069, 8501340041, 8501340049,
8501612041, 8501612049, 8501618041, 8501618049, 8501620061, 8501620069, 8501630041,
8501630049, 8501640041, 8501640049, 8541409021, 8541409029, 8541409031 and 8541409039) and
originating in or consigned from the People's Republic of China ('PRC'), unless they are in transit in the
sense of Article V GATT. This CN code is only given for information.
The following product types are excluded from the definition of the product under review:
- thin film photovoltaic products,
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
11
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
- solar chargers that consist of less than six cells, are portable and supply electricity to devices or charge
batteries,
- crystalline silicon photovoltaic products that are permanently integrated into electrical goods, where
the function of the electrical goods is other than power generation, and where these electrical goods
consume the electricity generated by the integrated crystalline silicon photovoltaic cell(s),
- modules or panels with a output voltage not exceeding 50 V DC and a power output not exceeding 50
W solely for direct use as battery chargers in systems with the same voltage and power characteristics,
- wafers of the type used in crystalline silicon PV modules or panels.
Please limit your reply where requested only to information relating to solar cells and panels as
defined above. Should you have any queries concerning this, please contact one of the officials in
charge.
B.2
Product comparability
Please comment on the comparability of the solar cells and modules imported from the country
concerned with those produced in the EU, noting any differences in technical and physical
characteristics and end use.
To the extent possible please provide these data also with respect to solar cells and modules imported
from other third countries not covered by the current proceedings.
Response:
Our company cannot comment in this regard.
Comment from SolarPower Europe:
The objective of the above question on the comparability between (i) the modules / cells from
China and the EU modules / cells and (ii) the modules / cells from China and (as mentioned: to
the extent possible) modules / cells from outside the EU or China is to determine whether
- there are technical / functional differences between the modules / cells from the EU and China
such that some modules / cells can be purchased from China only and are not accessible from
EU producers;
- these modules / cells can nevertheless be purchased outside the EU and China such that the
maintenance of the duties / minimum import prices has no real impact on the importers.
Since the European Commission will also be comparing prices for the EU modules and cells
with prices for Chinese modules and cells, there should be no statement to the effect that the
modules from China have more features / functions than the EU modules.
Note that this is one question where you can justifiably indicate that you have no comments.
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
12
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
SECTION C - INFORMATION RELATING TO PURCHASES
Purchases of solar cells and modules – volume
State the total kilowatts of all purchases made by your company of solar cells and modules in the
following format:
Table C.1: Volume of purchases - modules
Purchase volume (kW)
2011
2012
2013
2014
IP
2011
2012
2013
2014
IP
Originating in the EU
Originating in the PRC
Originating in other countries –
please specify
TOTAL PURCHASE
VOLUME
Table C.2: Volume of purchases - cells
Purchase volume (kW)
Originating in the EU
Originating in the PRC
Originating in other countries –
please specify
TOTAL PURCHASE
VOLUME
Purchases of solar cells and modules – value
Please state net CIF value at EU frontier if the product is imported or tax-free value if of EU origin after
deduction of all discounts and rebates.
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
13
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Table C.3: Value of purchases - modules
Purchase value (euro)
2011
2012
2013
2014
IP
2011
2012
2013
2014
IP
Originating in the EU
Originating in the PRC
Originating in other countries –
please specify
TOTAL PURCHASE VALUE
Table C.4: Value of purchases - cells
Purchase value (euro)
Originating in the EU
Originating in the PRC
Originating in other countries –
please specify
TOTAL PURCHASE VALUE
Response:
Our company is not an importer of modules and cells but purchases modules and cells on
a customs cleared basis. The delivery term is … [and has calculated freight and / or
insurance based on …].
Purchases have been shown in the table above based on the date at which the purchases
were recorded in our accounting system.
Alternatively:
It is difficult for our company to respond to this question especially given the number of
years involved and the fact that the company does not have the information readily
available. However, our company provides in Section D below the cost of goods sold.
Comment from SolarPower Europe:
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
14
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Ideally, the company should respond to all questions in order to be considered
cooperating and for all of its data to be taken into account. However, if there is one
section that could potentially be omitted it is the response to this section.
Should you nevertheless respond, we note the following:
Total purchase volume and value should be provided for the calendar years 2011, 2012,
2013 and 2014 and for the Investigation Period from 1 October 2014 to 30 September
2015.
Normally, purchases should be provided based on the date shown in the purchase
invoice. However, in order to facilitate your work and to tie as closely as possible to
your accounting data, it may be the easiest and most accurate to provide the data based
on the date on which the purchase is recognized in your accounts.
The questionnaire requests to indicate the CIF value at EU frontier. This value is
actually the customs value. However, if you are the importer of the modules and cells,
i.e., you customs clear the modules and cells into the EU, then, you should normally fill
in the questionnaire for importers. This is why we indicated above, you purchase
customs-cleared products. Accordingly, report the value of purchases as recorded in
your accounting books but net of discounts.
SECTION D - INFORMATION RELATING TO COSTS AND EMPLOYEES
Total costs & employees
Please provide the total cost for each of your products that use or incorporate solar cells and modules.
Please also provide the number of employees involved in the production of your product.
Table E.1: Costs and employees
Modules
2011
2012
A. Costs of modules and/or cells
(please specify)
B. Labour costs
C. Overheads, Selling, General
and administrative expenses
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
15
2013
2014
IP
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
D. Other costs
E. Service supply costs
Full Costs (E = A+B+C+D)
Number of employees
Turnover net of any discounts
of the sales of products /
projects
involving
solar
modules / cells (F)
Total amount of profit / loss (=
G = F – E)
Response:
The table above reflects the costs of the [modules] [PV installations] that our company
sold in the EU during the periods concerned.
Materials sold as part of the PV installations other than modules and cells (such as […]
are shown in the row other costs.
[As our company also supplies services such as installation services, these costs have been
shown separately in a new row E entitled ‘service supply costs’.]
[Our company only supplies [installation] [maintenance] services. Accordingly, we incur
no costs for the purchases of modules, cells or other hardware and no labour costs in terms
of the assembly of the PV installation. Our costs with regard to services rendered in the
EU are shown in the rows C, D and in the added row E for the labour cost of our services.]
Because of the requirement to show profit ratios in Section E. below, we have added two
rows for (i) the turnover realized through the sale of PV installations in the EU,
respectively the services rendered in relation to projects in the EU involving solar modules
/ cells and (ii) the total amount of profit / loss. On that basis, we have completed the table
for profit ratios in Section E. below.
Our activities with regard to solar modules and cells have decreased since the imposition
of the duties / minimum import prices in 2013 without it being possible for our company
to compensate this by increasing our activities in other sectors such as other sources of
renewable energy such as wind installations. This is because …
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
16
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Comment from SolarPower Europe:
Amend, adjust and complete as fits the activities of your company.
If your company purchases modules / cells and other materials for the sale of PV
installations, the cost of purchases should be those of the PV installations sold, i.e., the
cost of goods sold rather than the value of purchases during that period especially if you
carry significant stocks.
Your response to Sections D and E of this questionnaire are very important for the
following reasons:
(i) The data over the period 2011 through the Investigation Period from 1 October 2014
through 30 September 2015, will give an indication of how the duties / minimum import
prices imposed in 2013 affected your company through a comparison with the data for
2011 and 2012. If purchases and sales decreased, the argument that the duties /
minimum import prices contributed to the decrease in demand is strengthened.
(ii) SolarPower Europe has commissioned a study by Ernst & Young showing that the
imposition of duties / minimum import prices contributed to a significant decrease in
employment (direct and indirect) especially at the level of the downstream operators.
The study also shows that the withdrawal of the duties / minimum import prices would
lead to increased demand and increased employment at the level of the downstream
operators. As a result, if the facts of your company shows a significant decrease in
employment in the period after 2011 – 2012, this would contribute to support the
findings made in the Ernst & Young study.
(iii) As shown in introduction above, the European Commission in 2013 alleged that
downstream operators had sufficient profitability (11%) to absorb the increase of prices
that the duties / minimum import prices might cause. Hence, it is important to show
first that the profitability was not 11% in 2011 – 2012 but, in addition, that profitability
has, unfortunately, decreased since 2013 and that the downstream solar sector is an
important sector of which the survival and profitability must be stimulated including
through the withdrawal of the duties / minimum import prices.
Thus, the response to Sections D and E is key if your company wishes to contribute to
the demonstration that the duties / minimum import price should be withdrawn.
Note that if it is easier to provide the data requested based on your financial year rather
than your calendar year, you should do so and explains such in the response.
SECTION E - PROFIT AND LOSS SITUATION
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
17
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
This section refers to the profitability of your activities in the European Union.
Table F.1: Profitability modules
Profit/loss in % of turnover
2011
2012
2013
2014
IP
2011
2012
2013
2014
IP
Total company
Total
for
the
products
using/incorporating modules
Table F.2: Profitability cells
Profit/loss in % of turnover
Total company
Total
for
the
products
using/incorporating cells
Explain in short how the supporting data that was used to fill in each cell was compiled, namely the
absolute amount of profit/loss.
Response:
As mentioned above, our company produces and sells modules from purchased cells and has
completed Table F.2 for the profitability of cells.
ALTERNATIVELY
As mentioned above, our company [produces PV installations from purchased modules] [produces
PV installations from purchased modules and sells these together with installation services]
[renders services, i.e., [installation] [maintenance] [project management] [investment] services. As
a result, it has completed Table F.2 for the profitability of modules.
The total company profit ratios are those of the financial statements for the financial year covering
the largest part of the calendar years shown above. The profit ratio of the total company for the
Investigation Period is that of [the financial year ended in 2015] [the aggregate of our monthly
profit and loss statements for October 2014 through September 2015].
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
18
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
The profit ratios for the products using / incorporating modules, respectively cells is obtained on
the basis of the data in Table E.1, i.e.:
the total profit / loss of row G : the total turnover of row F
Comment from SolarPower Europe:
Amend, adjust and complete as fits the activities of your company.
For the reasons already mentioned in Section D above, both sections are key to the
response in this questionnaire. If your company wishes to demonstrate that the duties /
minimum import prices should be withdrawn, it should provide the data showing that
the duties / minimum import prices have affected its sales, profitability and
employment. If your data supports this demonstration, then, it is important to provide
this data to the European Commission.
SECTION G - OTHER QUESTIONS
It should be noted that the information submitted under this point can only be taken into account if
supported by factual evidence at the time of its submission. Please note that, if you form part of a group
of companies you may indicate information referring either to the group or to your specific company,
by indicating it in your relevant replies. If you feel you have insufficient knowledge to reply some of
the questions, please state 'insufficient knowledge'.
Comment from SolarPower Europe:
Note the above on a response at group level.
Also bear in mind that when you make arguments in I. and II. below, to the extent available,
submit documentary evidence for example from survey companies. These can be provided on a
confidential basis within the limits of your contracts with these surveyors. In this regard, bear
in mind item 12 of the Instructions below and Annex IV hereto which read as follows:
(i) Item 12 of the Instructions
“Information submitted to the Commission for the purpose of trade defence investigations shall
be free from copyrights. Interested parties, before submitting to the Commission information
and/or data which is subject to third party copyrights, must request specific permission to the
copyright holder explicitly allowing a) the Commission to use the information and data for the
purpose of this trade defence proceeding and b) to provide the information and/or data to
interested parties to this investigation in a form that allows them to exercise their right of
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
19
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
defence. Interested parties are invited to fill in the annexed form (Annex II) [Read: Annex IV]
attesting that the information submitted is free from copyrights or that they have obtained the
above mentioned permission before submitting it. Interested parties shall contact the
Commission for any doubts about the handling of copyrighted information.”
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
20
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Comment from SolarPower Europe: (cont’d)
(ii) Annex IV
“Please choose one of the options specified below and fill in the respective form as
instructed in point 17 of the Introduction to this Questionnaire.
Option 1 – the questionnaire reply contains no copyrighted information:
"I, Mr/Ms …, declare that none of the information and/or data submitted in this
questionnaire reply is subject to third party copyrights"
(1)
Option 2 – the questionnaire reply contains copyrighted information
(2)
a) Permission obtained:
" I, Mr/Ms …, declare that I am submitting to the Commission information and/or
data in tables/annexes etc. which is subject to third party copyrights for which I have
requested and obtained specific permission from the copyright holder/s (name/s of the
company/ies) explicitly allowing [please attach document attesting the permission if
possible]:
- the Commission to use the information and data for the purpose of this trade defence
proceeding and
- to provide the information and/or data to interested parties to this investigation
I also declare that all the other information and data submitted for the purpose of this
investigation are free from copyrights."
(3)
b) Permission not obtained:
" I, Mr/Ms …, declare that I am submitting to the Commission information and/or data in
tables/annexes etc. which is subject to third party copyrights for which I have requested but
not obtained specific permission from the copyright holder/s (name/s of the company/ies) to
provide the information and/or data to interested parties to this investigation (I provide a
meaningful summary of the copyrighted information).
(4) I also declare that all the other information and data submitted for the purpose of this
investigation are free from copyrights."
Please make sure that you use one or the other option as is relevant.
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
21
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
I.
Please fill in data relative to your market share, customers and suppliers in Table H of the excel
file.
Response:
There is no excel file and no Table H attached to this questionnaire for downstream operators.
II. Please answer the following questions:
(1)
Please mention and elaborate any causes which may contribute to injury to the Union Industry
e.g. volume and prices of imports not sold at subsidised or dumped prices, contraction in demand
or changes in patterns of consumption, changes in renewable energy incentives, restrictive trade
practices of, and competition between, third country and Union producers, developments in
technology and the export performance and the productivity of the Union industry. Please add
any other factors which are important in your view.
Response:
Our company supports the views expressed by SolarPower Europe in the submission it
filed on 25 January 2016 in which the following was stated.
SolarPower Europe believes that the core problems facing the expansion of module and
cell production in the EU to date are primarily two-fold:
(i)
Instability in regulatory regimes and support for the deployment of photovoltaic
industry in several EU Member States has a substantial impact on demand but also on the
attractiveness of PV installations for investors. SolarPower Europe refers to the Position
Paper on the Future of the Photovoltaic Manufacturing Industry in Europe that
underscores the need for a stable regulatory regime as a prerequisite for the PV industry
in the EU:2
2
Position Paper on the Future of the Photovoltaic Manufacturing Industry in Europe, Gaëtan Masson
(European Photovoltaic Technology Platform, Milan Nitzschke (SolarWorld AG), Ruggero Schleigher
)
Tappeser
(European
Gigawatt
Fab
(xGWp),
20
March
2015,
http://slord.sk/buxus/docs//PODUJATIA/Future_of_the_Photovoltaic_Manufacturing_Industry_in_E
urope.pdf, last accessed on 22 January 2016.
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
22
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
(ii)
The scale of production required to achieve the necessary economies of scale to
allow solar energy to be competitive with other traditional sources of energy and yield the
returns on investments needed for investors in large-scale installations, with smaller
production catering for high added value and specific niche products. According to a JRC
report of 20153:
“For a large-scale manufacturing initiative (modules) to be economically viable and to have
impact on the global market it would need to aim for a capacity of several GW. This reflects
the importance of economies of scale… It would need to meet a short-term module cost price
target of below EUR 0.40/W and have a credible plan for further reduction. This reflects the
reality that product differentiation is based primarily on price, and is expected to continue to
be so in the medium term.”
The JRC report has identified that it is economies of scale that drive cost reduction in
modules today and that a realistic price for modules is 0,4 EUR/w considerably below the
MIP level.
The JRC report notes that PV manufacturing is transforming into a mass-producing
industry with its sights on multi-GW production sites. This development is linked to
increasing industry consolidation, which presents a risk and an opportunity at the same
time.’ This demonstrates that JRC are aware that module manufacturing is becoming
concentrated in a few companies hands, this is certainly the case in Europe. JRC note the
need for multi-GW sites of which we have none in the EU today.
3
Perspectives on Large Scale Manufacturing of PV in Europe, JRC, 2015.
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
23
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
The JRC report notes that moving to a 2 GW size factory leads to approximately an 8%
reduction in module cost. These economies of scale are experienced in Asia, not just China,
but not found in the EU.
None of the EU producers has a capacity of several GW as is demonstrated by the
responses to the standing questionnaires that are available in the non-confidential file. The
large majority has a capacity that is significantly smaller. The data from the report
published by the European Commission4 when compared with the production capacity of
the EU producers as provided in the responses to the standing file is striking:5
The smallest of the 15 largest module suppliers shipped no less than 800 to 900 MW in
2013 whilst seven of them shipped more than 1,500 MW. Compare this with the data
provided by the EU module producers in their responses to the standing file:
-
Company AE:
950 – 1,150 MW
-
SolarWorld:
650 MW
-
Company S
320 MW
-
Sillia:
260 MW
-
Company B:
200 MW
-
SolarWorld Thüringen
200 MW
4
Id., page 11.
5
See : Top Solar Module Manufacturers of 2013, May 14th, 2014 by James Ayre,
http://solarlove.org/top-solar-module-manufacturers-2013/, accessed on 25 January 2016.
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
24
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
-
Company DA
150 MW
-
Company W
100 – 150 MW
-
Company O
50 to 100 MW
-
Energetic Energietechnik GmbH
70 MW
-
Company X
60 MW
-
MG AB “Precizika”
60 MW
-
Solvis d.o.o.
60 MW
-
Waris:
40 MW
-
Cappello:
30 – 50 MW
-
Company H
40 MW
-
Global Sun SA
30 MW
-
Company I
10 MW
As mentioned above, the JRC report itself states that PV producers must choose to either
develop and produce high added value or tailor-made solutions or, alternatively, move into
large-scale production with a capacity of several Gigawatt in order to be economically
viable with cost rationalizations sustaining module prices of EUR 0.40/W and below. The
latter option is not sustainable for the vast majority of the EU producers which would have
to choose the first option as is confirmed in the Position Paper on the Future of the
Photovoltaic Manufacturing Industry in Europe cited above. That being the case, these
producers should benefit from accompanying measures to do just that, i.e., develop high
added value and tailor-made solutions rather than offering a commodity product.
However, this is a different market and anti-dumping and countervailing measures are
not the instrument to achieve this goal, especially not if it means that other sectors of the
photovoltaic industry catering to the large-scale deployment of PV installations are
hindered in their expansion. The table submitted in the request for the expiry review by
EU ProSun itself demonstrates not only that imports from China have collapsed but, in
addition, that in absolute figures the decrease in the consumption of modules (- 10,554
MW) outstrips the decrease in imports from China (- 7,782 MW). The decrease in
consumption has to be sought in the changes in regulatory support for the photovoltaic
industry and the uncertainty of investors, which in combination stifled demand.
In those EU Member States, such as the UK, where the regulatory support through feedin tariffs or otherwise was kept in the most recent period, demand for photovoltaic
installations thrived and solar installations boomed. With the change in the regulations in
the UK starting in 2016, it is feared that the boom in demand will be called to a halt. This
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
25
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
sufficiently demonstrates that the regulatory changes are unrelated and not caused by
imports from China. The UK experience demonstrates conclusively that demand for solar
installations is a matter of price: either public support is provided such that these
installations are profitable or, if not, the prices for the solar installations including the
modules must be at a level to allow sufficient profitability.
In fact, the changes in support schemes relate to the fact that support for renewable energy
in the form especially of feed-in tariffs is inherently limited in time. As the industry
stimulated by feed-in tariffs takes off, the feed-in tariffs must decrease and ultimately
disappear lest they cause too great a strain on the national budgets. There are then only
two remedies to maintain demand: change the form the public support, or implement cost
rationalizations to decrease the price of the PV installations in order to make certain that
PV installations remain competitive with sources of conventional energy and to sustain
demand. This puts pressure on all participants along the PV value chain to decrease costs
and in the first place on the manufacturers of wafers, cells and modules, as also on the
manufacturers of inverters and other balance-of-system (BOS) manufacturers. The
maintenance of minimum import prices at artificial levels that are not in sync with world
market prices, unfortunately, has adverse effects by impacting demand negatively.
With regard to cells, it must be noted that the number of cell manufacturers in the EU is
extremely limited. There is one sole significant producer which uses all, or a very large
part, of its cell production captively. Accordingly, module producers in the EU - especially
if they want stability of supplies through access to several cell producers - have no choice
but to purchase cells also outside the EU. But, it must be highlighted, this is not a cause of
continued injury. It is simply a fact: non-captive EU cell production is insufficient to meet
demand for cells in the EU. Imports are needed and are a factor of economic solution
rather than a factor of injury. The requests for expiry review indicate that imports of cells
from China increased particularly from 2013 to 2014 well after duties were imposed and
cells from China made subject to minimum import prices. The increase of imports from
China therefore are a clear indicator of the need of EU producers to fill demand including
from sources that are subject to the anti-dumping / countervailing measures. This being
said, as mentioned above, production capacity for modules in the EU is also largely
insufficient to meet EU demand for modules.
(2)
What is the degree of concentration in your sector (number of companies operating)?
Response:
…
Comment from SolarPower Europe:
Please complete as relevant. The objective of the question is to determine whether the
number of downstream operators is so important that it is difficult to transfer price
increases to the customers because of the high degree of competition. Hence, if accurate,
the response should be that it is difficult in light of the competitiveness of the market for
downstream operators to transfer price increases. Also, the question is whether it is the
maintenance of the minimum import price as an artificial price threshold that is causing
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
26
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
injury to the downstream operators or the natural price competition amongst the
downstream operators.
(3)
Who are your four main competitors on the EU market and on the export markets and what are
their price levels?
Response:
…
Comment from SolarPower Europe:
Please complete as relevant and to the extent that you have information available. The
objective of the question is again to determine whether the number of downstream
operators and their market strength is so important that it is difficult to transfer price
increases to the customers because of the high degree of competition. Also, the question
is whether it is the maintenance of the minimum import price as an artificial price
threshold that is causing injury to the downstream operators or the natural competition
among downstream operators.
(4)
Which are the elements that determine competition in your sector (i.e. prices, delivery times,
service, etc)? Please substantiate.
Response:
…
Comment from SolarPower Europe:
Supply in accordance with delivery times and quality services will be important but we
imagine that even in the case of a project manager or installer, nothing will surpass the
importance of price and that there is no possibility to transfer price increases. Hence, in
your own words, you should indicate why contrary to the European Commission’s
statement in the definitive duty regulation (see quotations in introduction above) that
the negative impact on the importers of duties / minimum import prices would be
limited is incorrect with prices driving the market and increases or even stable prices
entailing stark decreases of demand.
(5)
What has been the evolution since 2011 of trade volumes from third countries?
Response:
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
27
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Specific statistical import data for the solar modules and cells is not available to the
respondent. However, based on Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/185 of
11 February 2016 extending the definitive anti-dumping duty imposed by Council
Regulation (EU) No 1238/2013 on imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and
key components (i.e. cells) originating in or consigned from the People's Republic of China
to imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (i.e. cells)
consigned from Malaysia and Taiwan, whether declared as originating in Malaysia and in
Taiwan or not6, the total volume of imports into the EU and the share of third countries
was the following :
In MW
2012
2013
2014
Reporting Period
1/04/2014 – 31/03/2015
Total imports into the EU
15,740
10,300
8,067
8,325
Imports from the PRC
11,119
5,584
3,443
3,801
Total
464
495
1,516
1,610
Modules
108
1,036
1% market share
17% market share
358
573
10% market
share
27% market share
Imports
Malaysia
from
Cell
Imports from Taiwan
1,375
1,557
1,752
1,793
Imports from other countries
2,782
2,664
1,311
1,121
EU consumption modules based
on Malaysian data
10,800
6,094
EU consumption cells based on
Malaysian data
3,580
2,122
Market share of other countries
in total EU consumption
17.7%
13.5%
Our company has no other means to verify the imports of modules and cells from different
countries.
6
Official Journal No L 37, 12 February 2016, p. 76.
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
28
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
(6)
Has some external factor other than anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties in force (trade
arrangements, currency fluctuation, supply and demand, etc.) influenced the evolution of prices
in your market since 2011? Please explain and substantiate.
Response:
The very significant decrease in demand which is apparent also from the table shown
above based on the European Commission’s data in the anti-circumvention investigation
has been caused by a combination of the withdrawal of subsidies such as feed-in tariffs for
solar installations and the maintenance of prices at an artificially high level as a result of
the minimum import prices and duties. Our company as others in the downstream sector
has had to charge prices at an absolute minimum level by squeezing profit margins in
order to try and sustain demand and sales to some extent. Only a few markets such as the
UK felt this impact a little less due to the temporary continuation of subsidies as a result
of which the UK was almost the sole EU market in which demand for solar installations
continued to increase up to 2015. With regulatory changes in the subsidization of solar
installations, this will be called to a halt.
Our company supports the following statements made by SolarPower Europe in its
submission of 25 January 2016:
Through the MIP, prices for modules have been kept at an artificially high level in the EU
at around € 0.56 / Wp for modules and € 0.28 / Wp for cells instead of following their
normal development in line with increased cost rationalization. Industry experts7 predict
that price decreases could be significant if demand is sustained, i.e.:
-
7
Evolution of photovoltaic installations
See PV LCOE in Europe 2015 – 2050, Eero Varitainen, Gaëtan Masson, Christian Breyer, 31st
European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference, September 14 – 18, 2015, Hamburg, at
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/281939918_PV_LCOE_in_Europe_2015-2050,
last
accessed on 27 October 2015.
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
29
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
-
Corresponding evolution of prices reflecting the effect of the learning curve
following increased production
Continued cost rationalization is confirmed by other commentators as well. Reference is
made to the following:
“Our analysis of different scenarios concludes that an end to cost reduction for power from
solar photovoltaics is not in sight. Even in the most conservative scenarios for market
development, without considering technology breakthroughs, significant further cost
reductions are expected.
The following methodology was used to reach this conclusion:
The starting point of the analysis was to derive consistent scenarios for the global
photovoltaics market development between 2015 and 2050. These scenarios were discussed
and revised in expert workshops and represent a range from “very pessimistic” to “very
optimistic” in terms of global photovoltaics market developments. In the most pessimistic
scenario, annual additional photovoltaic installations would increase from ~40 GW in 2014
to 175 GW in 2050 (cumulated produced capacity until 2050 of ~6000 GW). In the most
optimistic scenario (“breakthrough scenario”), 1780 GW of photovoltaic systems will be
installed per year by 2050 (cumulated produced capacity by 2050: ~36000 GW).
Based on these market scenarios, future prices for photovoltaic modules were estimated using
the “photovoltaic learning curve,” which builds on the historic experience that with each
duplication in the total number of modules produced, the price per module fell by roughly 20
percent. Based on expert discussions at the workshop, we varied the future learning rate
between 19 and 23 percent and introduced the conservative assumption that prices will fall
with a learning rate of only roughly 10 percent in the next years, until a total (cumulated)
capacity of 5000 GW is produced. This approach results in module costs decreasing from
approximately 550 EUR/kW today to 140-210 EUR/kWp by 2050 in the breakthrough
scenario, and to 270-360 EUR/kWp in the most pessimistic scenario. A similar approach was
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
30
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
applied to estimate the future cost of solar inverters, resulting in investment costs falling from
110 EUR/kWp today to between 23 and 39 EUR/kWp by 2050.”8
As mentioned above, the market for modules and hardware components of a PV
installation is already or is en passe of becoming a commodity market. That is confirmed
in the following statement:9
“The cost of hardware sourced from global markets will decrease irrespective of local
conditions. Solar photovoltaic modules and inverters are traded already today on global
markets, similar to commodity products, and costs for other components are similarly global.
While regional differences may exist due to the very young nature of utility-scale solar
photovoltaic markets in different parts of the world, it is very unlikely that large differences
in investment costs between different regions of the world will persist in the future.”
The EU cannot be secluded from these developments.
The JRC report mentioned above, states that ‘Bloomberg New Energy Finance claims that
top tier Chinese manufacturers already have module production costs as low as USD 0.48/W
(2013). Further, they assume a further cost reduction to USD 0.33/W by 2020. The main cost
savings should come from cheaper polysilicon, thinner wafers with smaller kerf losses and
increased efficiency.’ Maintaining prices above their natural level does not benefit the
production of modules and cells and the solar sector in the EU.
Some have disputed that the MIP keeps prices in the EU at a level beyond that prevailing
in other countries. In countries where prices for modules are high, or potentially higher
than in the EU, there are also strong incentives for photovoltaic installations, i.e.:
-
in the USA where the federal energy investment tax credit amounts to 30%, statelevel incentives such as net metering, grants, feed-in-tariffs are granted and
renewable portfolio standards encourage photovoltaic investments;
-
in Japan where high feed-in-tariffs apply.
In these countries (as in the EU in the period until 2011 when high feed-in-tariffs and other
incentives existed), even with high prices for the modules, investment in photovoltaic
installations continues to grow as the support schemes make the investment attractive.
8
Current and Future Cost of Photovoltaics, Long-term Scenarios for Market Development, System
Prices and LCOE of Utility-Scale PV Systems, Study commissioned by Agora Energiewende,
Fraunhofer
ISE,
February
2015,
p.7,
http://www.agoraenergiewende.de/fileadmin/Projekte/2014/Kosten-Photovoltaik2050/AgoraEnergiewende_Current_and_Future_Cost_of_PV_Feb2015_web.pdf, last accessed on 21
January 2016.
9
Id., p. 9.
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
31
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
However, when compared to prices in countries such as India or Turkey, the prices in the
EU remain higher. This is important when there are limited incentive schemes and
tendering is introduced as per the requirements of the European Commission under the
State Aid Guidelines, which makes price a premium consideration.
Suppliers of other components or services for PV installations (e.g., inverters or installers)
have decreased the prices for their products / services by 62% as a result of cost
rationalizations but also of an effort to render the global price for a PV installation as
attractive as possible and to stimulate demand as is shown in the table below:
Potential for cost reduction
The age of feed in tariffs in Europe is coming to an end, therefore price is becoming
increasingly important in investment decisions. Tenders are based on competitive
prices.
PV System Price* Development (€/Wp)
*average price during calendar year; ground-mounted systems, Germany
4.00
BOS
3.50
Modul
3.00
In Europe the price of modules
is going up – not down. This is
contrary to the potential of
module prices which can fall by
25-40% in the next 3 years
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Sources: market surveys, industry announcements
8
The expiry of the measures for modules and cells and the establishment of the prices of
modules and cells on the basis of cost rationalisations would contribute to stimulating
installations in Europe and therefore benefit the solar sector at large.
(7)
What is the possibility for your company to switch to other sources of supply of solar cells and
modules?
Response:
The possibility to switch to other sources of supply for the modules or cells that are used
in our activities is reduced. First, the imposition of anti-circumvention measures on
exports from Malaysia and Taiwan reduces this possibility. Some producers are exempted
from these duties but they have established customers and are in any event unable to
supply in accordance with EU demand also in light of booming demand in South-East Asia
and other regions of the world. Second, as the table drawn above based on the Commission
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
32
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Regulation imposing anti-circumvention investigations demonstrate the imports into the
EU of modules and cells from other third countries has decreased as well as their market
share thereby emphasizing that other sources of supply do not offer a solid possibility for
importers to switch to.
We also wish to emphasize that it is very difficult for a company like ours to switch to
activities in areas outside PV installations. This is because …
Comment from SolarPower Europe:
As mentioned in the introduction above, the European Commission in 2013 also
indicated that downstream operators could fairly easily switch to carry out activities in
other areas including in other renewable energy areas such as wind. It is important to
disprove this. Hence, would it be possible for you in your own words to complete the
above to explain why this is not possible for you?
(8)
Do the producers/exporters of the country concerned have any comparative advantage in
comparison with the Union producers? Please substantiate your comments by giving some
examples.
Response:
As confirmed by the EU producers themselves in the attachment to the JRC report, solar
products have become mass commodity products where economies of scale at the level of
2Gigawatts production is required for prices to be at a level to sustained demand. The JRC
report itself states that “[t]hese economies of scale are experienced in Asia, not just China,
but not found in the EU”. The response above shows that none of the EU producers save
perhaps one meets even the 1 Gigawatt level and the vast majority of the EU producers
produce well below the 500 MW level with many even producing far below 100 MW. It is
therefore impossible for the EU producers to achieve the economies of scale that are
needed to obtain price levels that can stimulate demand.
(9)
What was the impact for your company of imposition of measures? What has changed since
measures were imposed (adjustment of business model, consolidation, finding new sources and
new markets, etc)? Did measures affect your investment capacity?
Response:
…
Comment from SolarPower Europe:
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
33
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
The response to this question will have to be drafted based on your own experience and
with reference to the response you gave in Sections D and E. If possible, however, you
should stress:
(i) many downstream operators having had to stop trading solar products;
(ii) operators have had to start activities in markets outside the EU;
(iii) the difficulties of finding new sources of supply;
(iv) the impact on profitability due to an artificially high level of prices and the ensuing
decrease of demand.
III. Future perspectives:
(10)
What will happen to your business and the market in general if measures continue to be
imposed on solar cells and modules from the People's Republic of China? Please explain the
reasons for your view.
Response:
For all the reasons mentioned above, with prices being at an artificially inflated level,
demand will not be stimulated and with the further dismantling of subsidy schemes such
as in the UK, demand will continue to deteriorate rather than increase. Our company will
loose sales volume, profitability and, as a result employment. This will equally affect the
EU producers.
Comment from SolarPower Europe:
You may wish to add further supporting language and data from the point of view your
own business and the data you have submitted in response to this questionnaire.
(11)
What will happen to your business and the market in general if measures will not continue to
be imposed on imports of solar cells and modules from the People's Republic of China? Please
explain the reasons for your view.
Response:
We support the statements by SolarPower Europe in its submission of 25 January 2016
which are as follows:
A. If the measures are removed this will contribute to demand being increased and
significant new employment will be created with commensurate value added
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
34
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Employment in the EU that hinges on the deployment of PV installations extends well
beyond the production of modules and cells. In fact, employment at the level of the module
and cell producers is only a fraction of employment in the EU’s photovoltaic industry.
Much more significant employment is connected to the upstream industry (production of
materials and equipment) and particularly to the downstream industry (including
engineering, installations and maintenance).
The requests for the expiry review allege that employment at the level of module and cell
production developed as follows:10
2012
Modules
Cells
2013
2014
RP
11,100
8,418
6,094
6,094
3,046
2,058
1,705
1,705
But, the situation is significantly worse if the entire EU PV value chain is taken into
account as is shown in the table below taken from the study prepared by E&Y. 11
The Ernst & Young report confirms, as mentioned hereinabove, that the decline in PV
installations is to be attributed to regulatory changes:
“This decline is largely caused by regulatory changes in several countries (e.g. Belgium,
Spain and Germany) where public policy has evolved to limit prosumers as a consequence of,
for instance, grid fees and the reduction/termination of incentive schemes. In Spain for
example, which had the second highest cumulated capacity in 2008, retroactive changes, solar
taxes and fines for non-declared prosumers have considerably reduced solar installation. In
2014, Spain fell to the fourth place and it is estimated that it will only have the fifth largest
cumulated capacity by 2020. Germany, Europe’s largest PV industry, saw its annual installed
10
See Tables 15 and 16 of the requests for an expiry review of the anti-dumping measures.
11
This masks the even greater loss of employment if one considers as is stated in the European
Commission’s JRC report that in 2011, employment in the EU’s PV value represented no less than
260,060 FTEs of which 33,600 in cell and module manufacturing but no less than 137,200 in
installations. According to this report, within in 2 years from 2011 to 2013, no less than 83,800 jobs
were lost amongst the EU’s PV installers. See the European Commission’s JRC report cited above,
at p. 14.
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
35
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
capacity decrease due to reduced incentives, while module prices set at the MIP level could
not follow this trend. This created market uncertainty.”12
The report notes the significant cost reductions that were made which impacted global
market prices for modules and concludes that the EU could not make use of those to
stimulate demand for PV installations as a result of the anti-dumping / countervailing
measures:
“The full benefits of these cost reductions have not been realised in Europe, as imports of
modules and cells have been limited since the end of 2013 due to the EU’s trade defence
measures, such as the MIP, without a noticeable increase in European production. Reduced
prices have thus not been linked to increases in demand, which would normally be
expected.”13
The E&Y report also emphasizes that employment especially among downstream
operators is much larger than amongst upstream operators and has gradually shifted
more towards the downstream sector of the European photovoltaic industry:14
Against the above background, the Ernst & Young report then estimated the effect of the
expiry of the anti-dumping / countervailing measures noting the following:15
12
See Ernst & Young report, at p. 17.
13
Id.
14
See Ernst & Young report, at p. 26.
15
See Ernst & Young report, at p. 30.
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
36
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Based on the increase in demand, Ernst & Young then estimated the effect on employment
in Germany and Italy and extrapolated the results thereof for the entire EU. That resulted
in very signification job creation as shown below:16
In other words, Ernst & Young estimates that 22,674 new jobs would be created in
Germany and Italy alone and 54,615 jobs in the EU overall with a commensurate increase
in value added and budgetary revenues for the governments concerned.
It must be emphasized that the upstream sector including the EU module manufacturers
benefit from the creation of new jobs.
B.
16
Demand for PV installations must be stimulated in order to contribute to the EU’s
goals for the use of renewable energy by 2030 and the commitments it took in the Paris
COP21 agreement
See Ernst & Young report, at p. 31.
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
37
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
The EU has set a target for use of renewable energy of 27% by 2030.17 SolarPower Europe
considers that solar energy can contribute 10% to 15% of the electricity demand in 2030
as shown below:18
However, this means that the demand for PV installations must be stimulated and that will
require as mentioned above, allowing hardware to be sold at prices that reflect cost
rationalizations as reflected in global market prices without secluding the EU from the
rest of the global PV market.
This has become all the more important with the Agreement reached in Paris during the
COP 21. With the commitments taken by all parties to the Agreement, including the EU,
SolarPower Europe believes that it is all the more important for the EU to act consistently
with its commitments and take all actions to stimulate solar installations which is a very
17
Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, A policy framework for climate
and energy in the period from 2020 to 203, Brussels, Brussels, 22.1.2014, COM(2014) 15 final.
18
Global Market Outlook for Solar Power, 2015 – 2019, SolarPower Europe, at p. 28?
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
38
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
significant source of renewable energy that directly contributes to combating globalwarming.19
C.
EU production capacity cannot meet demand
The requests for expiry review show the following demand and production capacity
figures:20
In MW
Demand
Production
capacity
Shortfall
Modules
7,172
1,543
5,629
Cells
3,450
1,00021
2,450
Thus, even taking total current production capacity into account, the EU producers are
unable to meet even a depleted demand, let alone meeting demand assuming that they
would be able to operate at full capacity.
It is in the overall interest of the public policy objectives of the EU towards meeting the
targets for use of renewable energy and combating climate change, as well as the EU’s
photovoltaic industry at large that the measures expire in order for the EU to benefit from
cost rationalizations, stimulated demand, job and value added creation.
(12)
What will happen to your business and the market in general if measures will continue to be
imposed only on imports of modules but not on imports of cells from the People's Republic
of China? Please explain the reasons for your view.
Response:
Anti-dumping measures should be removed on both cells and modules. Removing antidumping measures on cells would be a step in the right direction. A significant number of
cell producers have closed production. The sole large cell producer remaining, SolarWorld
uses cell production captively for the production of modules in the EU or in the USA. Thus,
19
Paris Agreement, Framework Convention on Climate Change, FCCC/CP/2015/L9, 12 December
2015, http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/l09.pdf.
20
See Tables 1and 4 of the request for the expiry review of the anti-dumping measures.
21
Estimate by SolarPower Europe.
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
39
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
module producers in the EU depend on the availability of alternative supply sources
especially from China and Taiwan.
This would not, however, resolve the problems faced by our company and most if not all
other importers and the downstream operators. Indeed, demand for solar installations
must be stimulated. That is not achieved by excluding cells from anti-dumping and
countervailing measures. It requires the withdrawal of the anti-dumping and
countervailing measure altogether so that prices can develop to their natural level
reflecting economies of scale.
(13)
Please indicate whether your company would be in favour or against the continued imposition
of anti-dumping and anti-subsidy measures in the current form.
Response:
Our company is opposed to the continued imposition of anti-dumping and anti-subsidy
measures for solar modules and cells in any form.
Comment from SolarPower Europe:
As mentioned above, please do not forget to complete and sign Annex IV hereto.
As well, please do not forget to complete and sign the certification page below.
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
40
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
CERTIFICATION
The undersigned certifies that all information herein supplied in response to the questionnaire is
complete and correct to the best of his knowledge and belief and understands that the information
submitted may be subject to audit and verification by the European Commission.
Internal registration number (see page 1):
Company name:
 LIMITED VERSION (*)
 VERSION OPEN FOR CONSULTATION
_____________________
Date
_______________________
Signature of authorised official
_____________________
Company stamp
_______________________
_______________________
Name and title of authorised official
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
41
ANNEX I - INSTRUCTIONS
1. Answer questions in the order presented in the questionnaire. Listed information and tables
should conform to the requested formats and should be clearly labelled. You only need to
fill in what is applicable to your company. If you encounter difficulties with this you should
contact the officials in charge to find an acceptable solution.
2. The confidentiality of information will be fully respected in the proceeding. Therefore,
information and supporting evidence may be given on a confidential basis (e.g. business
secrets, such as list of customers, etc.) and will not be made available to any other interested
party or any administration, except DG Trade, Directorate H of the European Commission.
If you provide such confidential information, it must – in accordance with the Commission’s
internal rules on markings – be labelled as “limited”. Moreover, pursuant to Articles 19 and
21 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009, any party providing such “limited”
information is required to furnish a non-confidential summary thereof which is open for
inspection to other parties. Such summaries shall be in sufficient detail to permit a
reasonable understanding of the substance of the information submitted as “limited”. In
exceptional circumstances, such party may indicate that such information is not susceptible
to such summary. Where a meaningful summary is not provided, and where the information
is susceptible to such summary, the information submitted as “limited” may be disregarded.
All documents which are submitted to the Commission services which are not labelled
“limited” are open for inspection to all interested parties in order to ensure the necessary
transparency of the investigation.
3. You should to send your reply with all the electronic files to the functional mailbox:
TRADE-SOLAR-INJURY@ec.europa.eu or, if files are too voluminous, provide an electronic
version of the questionnaire including its annexes and all data on a CD-R/DVD to be
delivered by post or by hand. The "Certification" should also be provided electronically.
4. Identify clearly all units of measurement and currencies used in tables, lists and calculations.
5. Member States of the European Union are listed in the glossary. Answers to questions
referring to the "Total Union" or "European Union" should include them all.
6. Do not leave any question or section blank. If a question does not apply to your company,
please explain clearly why this is the case. If the answer to the question is "zero", "no",
“none” or "not applicable", then write "zero", "no", “none” or "not applicable".
7. Unless otherwise specified, replies should relate to the investigation period ('IP') as defined
on page 1 of this questionnaire.
8. The European Commission may carry out on-the-spot visits to examine the records of your
company and to verify the information provided in this questionnaire. All worksheets and
documents used in answering this questionnaire, in particular those linking the
information supplied with accounting and management records, should be retained
for on the spot verification purposes by the European Commission.
9. If you intend to have another party acting on your behalf, e.g. a law, accountancy or
consultancy firm, please ensure that the Commission receives a scanned copy of the original
power of attorney and fill in the legal representative table.
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
10. If the requested information is not received by the Commission within the time limit
specified, preliminary or final decisions may be made on the basis of facts available in
accordance with Article 18 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 and Article 28 of
Regulation (EC) No 597/2009.
11. If you have any problems completing the questionnaire, please contact the Commission
officials in charge of the proceeding (see cover page) forthwith – they will assist you.
General information about trade defence processes (general overview, steps, etc.) is
available on the website: http://ec.europa.eu/trade/tackling-unfair-trade/trade-defence/
12. Information submitted to the Commission for the purpose of trade defence investigations
shall be free from copyrights. Interested parties, before submitting to the Commission
information and/or data which is subject to third party copyrights, must request specific
permission to the copyright holder explicitly allowing a) the Commission to use the
information and data for the purpose of this trade defence proceeding and b) to provide the
information and/or data to interested parties to this investigation in a form that allows them
to exercise their right of defence. Interested parties are invited to fill in the annexed form
(Annex II) attesting that the information submitted is free from copyrights or that they have
obtained the above mentioned permission before submitting it. Interested parties shall
contact the Commission for any doubts about the handling of copyrighted information.
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
43
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
ANNEX II - GLOSSARY
Explanations and definitions of some of the more specialised terms used in the questionnaire
are provided here.
Annual working unit/AWU
In light of the Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC regarding the SME definition, the
staff headcount should be expressed in annual work units (AWU). Anyone who worked fulltime within an enterprise, or on its behalf, during the entire reference year counts as one unit.
Part-time staff, seasonal workers and those who did not work the full year should be treated as
fractions of one unit.
Country of origin
The country of origin is normally either the country where the good has been wholly obtained
or, when more than one country is concerned in the production of the good, the country where
the last substantial transformation has been carried out.
European Commission
The European Commission is the executive body of the European Union. In anti-dumping
proceedings it has the responsibility for the receipt of complaints and for conducting antidumping investigations. The European Commission is also the only decision-making body
which means that it decides among others whether to impose provisional or definitive duties,
to terminate proceedings and to accept undertakings.
Exporting country
The exporting country is normally the country of origin. However, it may be an intermediate
country, except where, for example, the products are merely transhipped through that country,
or the products concerned are not produced in that country, or there is no comparable price for
them in that country.
Export price
The export price is the price actually paid or payable for the product concerned when sold for
export to the European Union, or to other countries.
Independent customers
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
44
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
A customer is being considered independent if he cannot be defined as a related company; see
under related company.
Investigation period (IP)
For the purpose of representative findings, an investigation period has to be selected which, in
the case of dumping, normally covers a period of not less than six months immediately prior to
the initiation of the proceeding. The investigation period is indicated in the questionnaire.
Member states
Country
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Croatia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Ireland
Italy
Latvia
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Malta
Netherlands
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
United Kingdom
Code
AT
BE
BG
HR
CY
CZ
DK
EE
FI
FR
DE
GR
HU
IE
IT
LV
LT
LU
MT
NL
PL
PT
RO
SK
SL
ES
SE
UK
Currency
EUR
EUR
BGN
HRK
EUR
CZK
DKK
EUR
EUR
EUR
EUR
EUR
HUF
EUR
EUR
LVL – EUR after 1/1/2014
LTL – EUR after 1/1/2015
EUR
EUR
EUR
PLN
EUR
RON
EUR
EUR
EUR
SEK
GBP
Related party (company)
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
45
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
For the purpose of completing this questionnaire, natural persons or legal persons (i.e.
companies) should be deemed to be related if:
(a)
they are officers or directors of one another's businesses;
(b)
they are legally recognised partners in business;
(c)
they are employer and employee;
(d)
any persons directly or indirectly owns, controls or holds 5% or more of the outstanding
voting stock or shares of both of them;
(e)
one of them directly or indirectly controls the other;
(f)
both of them are directly or indirectly controlled by a third person;
(g)
together they directly or indirectly control a third person; or
(h)
they are members of the same family.
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
46
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
ANNEX III - VERSION OPEN FOR CONSULTATION
When completing the questionnaire version open for consultation by interested parties you
should bear in mind that all exporters, importers and other Union producers will have access to
it. The reply open for consultation should be sufficiently detailed to permit a reasonable
understanding of the substance of the information submitted in confidence.
In order to assist you in completing the questionnaire version open for consultation by interested
parties, we advise you to proceed as follows:
1.
Use the completed “limited” questionnaire response as a basis. Identify all information
in the limited response which you consider is not limited and copy it to the version open for
consultation.
2. After this, check once more whether the information you did not copy to the file for
consultation is really limited. If you still consider it to be confidential, you must give the reasons
why, item by item and summarise the limited information in a form which is suitable for
consultation by interested parties. If, in exceptional circumstances, it is not possible to even
summarise the limited information, give reasons why summarisation is not possible.
3. Please refer to the general rules on confidential vs non confidential information.
Examples on how to summarise "limited" information
 When the information concerns numbers for various years you can use indices.
Example of limited information:
2006
20.000 EUR
2007
30.000 EUR
2008
40.000 EUR
The summary open for consultation by interested parties could be as follows:
2006
2007
2008
100
150
200

When the information concerns a single number you can apply a % change to it.
Example of limited figure:
"My cost of production is EUR 300 per tonne."
The summary for consultation could be as follows:
"My cost of production is EUR 330 per tonne" (+ footnote saying: "actual numbers have been
amended by a margin of maximum + 10% to protect confidentiality").
47
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________

When the limited information concerns text you can either summarise it or eliminate the
names of parties by indicating their function.
Example: TRADING COMPANY Ltd told me that the prices of imports were 20% lower.
Summary for consultation by interested parties: [one of my customers] told me that the prices
of imports were 20% lower.
48
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31
European Commission questionnaire for DOWNSTREAM OPERATORS in the ongoing expiry / interim
reviews into the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties and undertakings for solar modules and cells
originating in or consigned from China / Clarification of the questions and explanation on how to respond
16 February 2016
_____________________________________________________________________________________
ANNEX IV – DECLARATION ON COPYRIGHT
Please choose one of the options specified below and fill in the respective form as instructed in
point 17 of the Introduction to this Questionnaire.
Option 1 – the questionnaire reply contains no copyrighted information:
"I, Mr/Ms …, declare that none of the information and/or data submitted in this questionnaire
reply is subject to third party copyrights"
Option 2 – the questionnaire reply contains copyrighted information
a) Permission obtained:
" I, Mr/Ms …, declare that I am submitting to the Commission information and/or data in
tables/annexes etc. which is subject to third party copyrights for which I have requested and
obtained specific permission from the copyright holder/s (name/s of the company/ies) explicitly
allowing [please attach document attesting the permission if possible]:
- the Commission to use the information and data for the purpose of this trade defence
proceeding and
- to provide the information and/or data to interested parties to this investigation
I also declare that all the other information and data submitted for the purpose of this
investigation are free from copyrights."
b) Permission not obtained:
" I, Mr/Ms …, declare that I am submitting to the Commission information and/or data in
tables/annexes etc. which is subject to third party copyrights for which I have requested but not
obtained specific permission from the copyright holder/s (name/s of the company/ies) to provide
the information and/or data to interested parties to this investigation (I provide a meaningful
summary of the copyrighted information).
I also declare that all the other information and data submitted for the purpose of this
investigation are free from copyrights."
49
EMECURRENT 936408639.1 17-févr.-16 09:31