TRADE REMEDIES | 2026-09-20

Commerce Finalizes Solar Duties From 73.20% to 173.70% on India, Laos and Indonesia

Four final determinations published September 16, 2026 set All Others rates as high as 126.09 percent, and a critical circumstances finding reaches Indian entries back to January 28, 2026.

Commerce published four final affirmative solar determinations on September 16, 2026 covering India, Laos and Indonesia, with rates running from 73.20 percent to 173.70 percent. Several were calculated on adverse facts available, which pushed the All Others rates that unnamed suppliers carry to within a rounding error of the punitive rates. For California solar importers the immediate questions are which entries are caught, which of the two printed rates CBP will actually collect, and how far ba

Commerce published four final affirmative determinations on solar cells on September 16, 2026, covering India, the Lao People's Democratic Republic, and Indonesia. The rates run from 73.20 percent to 173.70 percent. For California solar importers, EPC contractors, and developers holding forward supply contracts, these are not abstract trade numbers — they are the landed cost of modules already on the water.

What Commerce decided on September 16, 2026

The determinations appeared in the Federal Register of Wednesday, September 16, 2026 (Volume 91, Number 178). They are final determinations, not preliminary ones, which means the investigative phase at Commerce is over and the rates carry forward into cash deposit obligations and eventual assessment. Each covers crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not assembled into modules.

Three points make this set unusually punishing. The rates are very high. Several were calculated on the basis of facts available with adverse inferences, which is what Commerce does when a respondent fails to cooperate. And in the India antidumping case, an affirmative critical circumstances finding reaches entries made months before the determination.

The rates, case by case

In the India countervailing duty investigation (case C-533-943), Commerce set Mundra Solar Energy Limited and Mundra Solar PV Limited at 126.09 percent, each based on adverse facts available, with an All-Others rate of 126.09 percent.

In the India antidumping investigation (case A-533-942), Mundra Solar PV Limited, Mundra Solar Energy Limited, Kowa Company Ltd, and Premier Energies Photovoltaic Private Limited each received a weighted-average dumping margin of 123.04 percent on adverse facts available. The All Others margin is also 123.04 percent.

In the Lao People's Democratic Republic countervailing duty case (C-553-004), Solarspace Technology (Laos) Sole Co. Ltd received 82.03 percent, Vietnam Sunergy Joint Stock Company received 153.67 percent on adverse facts available, and the All Others rate is 82.03 percent.

In the Indonesia countervailing duty case (C-560-847), PT Blue Sky Solar Indonesia received 173.70 percent on adverse facts available, PT REC Solar Energy Indonesia received 73.20 percent, and the All Others rate is 73.20 percent.

The number most importers will get wrong

The India antidumping notice prints two columns, and confusing them is an expensive mistake. The first is the weighted-average dumping margin: 123.04 percent. The second is the cash deposit rate adjusted for subsidy offsets: 107.17 percent.

The cash deposit rate is what CBP will actually collect at entry, because when antidumping and countervailing duty orders cover the same merchandise, the antidumping cash deposit is reduced to avoid double-counting export subsidies already captured in the countervailing duty rate. An importer who reserves against the 123.04 percent headline will over-reserve; one who models only the countervailing duty side will badly under-reserve. Both numbers are real, and they do different jobs. Getting the entry-level math right is ordinary customs defense work, and it is worth doing before the first entry summary rather than after a rate advance notice.

Critical circumstances reach back to January 28, 2026

Commerce continued to find that critical circumstances exist with respect to Mundra Solar Energy, Mundra Solar PV, Kowa, and Premier Energies. Under section 735(c)(4)(A) of the Act, suspension of liquidation continues for their applicable entries that were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after January 28, 2026 — which the notice identifies as 90 days before the publication date of the preliminary determination.

That retroactivity is the part that catches importers by surprise. A container that cleared in February 2026, invoiced and installed long ago, can still be reached. If your entries fall inside that window, the exposure already exists; the only open questions are how large it is and whether the entries are correctly identified.

Why the All Others rate is the one to watch

Most importers never appear by name in a Commerce determination. They buy from suppliers who were not mandatory respondents, which means they pay the All Others rate. Here the All Others rates are 126.09 percent and 123.04 percent for India, 82.03 percent for Laos, and 73.20 percent for Indonesia.

What makes this set unusual is how close the All Others rates sit to the adverse-facts rates. When a mandatory respondent refuses to cooperate, the resulting adverse rate can drive the rate that every unnamed supplier's merchandise carries. Importers with no involvement in the proceeding, and no ability to influence whether a foreign producer cooperated, end up absorbing the consequence.

What California importers should do now

Start with entry data rather than with the supplier's reassurance. Pull every entry of crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells and modules from these three countries, identify the producer and exporter of record for each, and match them against the company names in the notices. A supplier's country of assembly is not the same question as the country of origin for duty purposes, and module assembly in a third country does not automatically move the origin.

Next, confirm classification. Duty exposure follows the tariff line, and a misclassification will either hide exposure or create it where none exists — which is why tariff classification review belongs at the front of this analysis, not the end.

Then review contracts. Who bears the duty under your supply agreements, what the delivered-duty-paid terms actually say, and whether force majeure or change-in-law clauses are triggered are commercial questions with immediate cash consequences. Finally, evaluate whether participating in future administrative reviews is worth it: the rate you pay today is a deposit, and the rate ultimately assessed is set in a review.

Importers facing an antidumping or countervailing duty exposure of this size generally benefit from early antidumping defense analysis, and West Coast importers clearing through Los Angeles and Long Beach should expect these entries to draw scrutiny. A California customs attorney can help sequence entry review, supplier verification, and any scope question in the right order.

Where this goes next

Final Commerce determinations are not the end of the road. Orders issue, cash deposits begin, administrative reviews follow on the anniversary of the order, and scope and circumvention questions tend to arrive once trade patterns shift. Determinations can also be challenged at the U.S. Court of International Trade by parties with standing, within the statutory deadlines.

The practical posture for an importer is neither panic nor waiting. It is documentation: know which entries are affected, know which rate applies to each, and know the date from which liquidation is suspended. That work does not get cheaper by being deferred.

This article is general information about a published Federal Register determination and is not legal advice. Rates, deadlines, and case numbers change, and the application of a trade remedy order depends on facts specific to each importer and entry. No outcome is promised or guaranteed. Consult qualified counsel about your own situation.

Contact Trembach Law Firm at (818) 514-7680 for a confidential consultation.

Trembach Law Firm | 27001 Agoura Road, Suite 350, Calabasas, CA 91301