The US Department of Commerce has begun an antidumping and countervailing duty (AD/CVD) investigation into solar cells produced in Ethiopia.
A coalition of US solar manufacturers—including cadmium telluride (CdTe) thin-film module producer First Solar, Korea-owned Hanwha Qcells, Suniva, Swift Solar, and Silfab Solar—filed the allegations. The companies submitted a petition to the US Department of Commerce (DOC) in May.
According to the petition, the manufacturers identified a growing volume of silicon photovoltaic cells and modules produced in Ethiopia being imported into the United States. They said this trend occurred alongside a significant increase in Chinese exports of “key cell and module imports” to Ethiopia. The filing stated that Ethiopian exports of cells and modules to the US totaled US$277 million during the second half of 2025 and asserted that those shipments “have continued climbing”.
The petitioners contend that the companies under investigation are harming domestic US manufacturers by offering products at lower prices through the use of Chinese-made components.
“Our sustained monitoring of these trade flows is delivering results, and this new investigation sends a clear signal to bad actors: we will not stand by while they repeatedly circumvent our trade laws to undercut American manufacturing,” said Tim Brightbill, lead counsel representing the petitioners and co-chair of Wiley’s International Trade Practice. “We commend the Department of Commerce for following the evidence and initiating this inquiry.”
Toyo Solar launched operations at its 2GW solar cell manufacturing facility in Ethiopia in April and intends to increase annual production capacity to 4GW. At the same time, the company is developing manufacturing operations in the United States. Origin Solar also runs a cell and module manufacturing site in Ethiopia and is reported to have delivered its first products to the US in early 2026.
When the investigation was first announced, Toyo Solar chief strategy officer Rhone Resch told PV Tech that “all [Toyo’s] solar cells manufactured in Ethiopia use exclusively polysilicon supplied from the US and Malaysia, and our wafers are processed in Southeast Asia. We plan to vigorously clarify these facts through the appropriate official channels.”
In comments provided today, Resch reaffirmed that position. “The allegations do not accurately characterise Toyo’s current supply chain or the sophisticated manufacturing performed at our Ethiopian facility,” Resch told PV Tech.
“Toyo respects the right of interested parties to participate in US trade proceedings. We also believe that allegations must be tested against complete, company-specific evidence.
“Toyo’s current Ethiopian production does not use Chinese-origin wafers. At our 4GW facility in Hawassa, approximately 1,800 employees operate an advanced TOPCon manufacturing platform that performs the complete wafer-to-cell conversion process,” he continued.
Resch further explained that wafers entering the Ethiopian plant “undergo chemical texturing, high-temperature emitter and p-n junction formation, tunnel-oxide and passivating-contact formation, plasma-enhanced coating, metallization, firing, and final electrical testing.”
Earlier legal disputes have treated the creation of a p-n junction in a wafer—commonly referred to as doping—as a determining factor in establishing a product’s “origin” for the purposes of antidumping and countervailing duty (AD/CVD) rules. Once doped, these “blue” wafers are capable of conducting electricity, although there remains debate over whether the procedure represents a sufficiently “substantial” manufacturing transformation.
Resch added: “It would be premature to quantify the potential effect of an affirmative determination. No respondents have yet been selected, and Commerce has not made any preliminary findings or determined the scope, timing or company-specific treatment that might result. Toyo is evaluating potential scenarios while continuing to serve its customers and advance its previously announced US manufacturing expansion.”
AD/CVD decisions can have significant and sometimes unforeseen consequences for manufacturers and companies importing products. In previous AD/CVD proceedings, the Department of Commerce has imposed widely differing duty rates on individual producers, with separate variations across antidumping duties and countervailing duties. There is also the possibility that duties could be applied retroactively to products imported into the United States after the investigation began.
The latest action is part of a broader series of AD/CVD petitions and investigations initiated by the same segment of the US solar industry. Previous cases have resulted in investigations and duties covering cells and modules imported from Thailand, Cambodia, Malaysia, and Vietnam. Another case involving India, Indonesia, and Laos remains ongoing, while an earlier case focused on Chinese products. Looking ahead, industry specialists have suggested that future investigations could shift toward expanding solar manufacturing operations in the Middle East, comparing the pattern of repeated trade actions to a game of “whack-a-mole” (subscription required).
More recently, the US tariff dispute has become even more complicated after another coalition of North America-based manufacturers submitted a separate petition to the Department of Commerce requesting an investigation into solar products from South Korea.
That petition specifically targeted Hanwha and its subsidiary, Qcells, despite the company having played a leading role in pursuing many of the previous AD/CVD cases alongside other Korea-based manufacturers. The complaint was filed by Canadian Solar, Heliene, and SEG Solar, effectively creating opposing camps within different parts of the US solar industry.
Originally reported by PV Tech on Jul 20, 2026.
