Before this year, few knew the name Auxin Solar.
Even industry insiders weren't familiar with the San Jose-based manufacturer of about 150 MW of solar modules each year.
But the company's trade petition to the U.S. Department of Commerce, and the agency's subsequent investigation, have upended the industry, and made the company a target of the largest renewable energy trade groups in the country.
Auxin Solar alleged unfair trade practices involving more than a dozen Chinese companies. Credit: Auxin SolarThe Biden administration has likewise been accused of turning its back on renewable energy and climate change ambitions just for taking up the case.
So what led this relatively small solar module manufacturer to become the face of a trade fight that threatens its own survival?
Auxin Solar CEO Memun Rashid gave his first extensive interview since filing the tariff petition on the Factor This! podcast, a new podcast from Renewable Energy World designed specifically for the solar industry debuting on May 9. Subscribe wherever you get your podcasts.
The decision was made to file the AD/CVD petition after a previous petition was rejected by Commerce because a group of anonymous U.S. solar module manufacturers refused to identify themselves. Auxin was not involved in that petition, Rashid said, but the company was disappointed when it failed.
The Trump administration's Section 201 tariff and quota on imported solar cells in 2018 had a positive impact on Auxin's business -- but something changed in the last few quarters.
"We want to make sure investing in American manufacturing is a safe bet. That's what this is all about," Rashid said. "Once we saw the data (regarding solar modules produced in Southeast Asia), it looked very suspicious."
Rashid said people may not be aware of his company, despite it forming in 2008, because Auxin produces solar modules for other companies as a contractor. Auxin Solar produced highly-customizable solar modules and produced some of the first bifacial solar modules in the U.S.
As a relative unknown, Auxin Solar has faced accusations that a larger domestic manufacturer is propping up the tariff campaign from behind the scenes to avoid retribution.
"Yeah, I've heard that. It's quite offensive for me to have heard that we're not a new kid on the block. But folks who make those accusations should do some research," Rashid told Renewable Energy World's John Engel in an interview for the Factor This! podcast.
He said that taking the risk associated with being the face of the AD/CVD petition has already resulted in psychological and financial retaliation. Key members of the Auxin Solar staff are receiving articles and social media posts disparaging the company from friends and family, and some companies no longer want to be associated with the Auxin Solar name.
Even the Auxin Solar servers have been hacked since filing the petition, Rashid added. "This is our effort to try to do the right thing. It could very well lead to our demise."
Solar tariff timeline
2012: Obama administration implements anti-dumping and countervailing duty rules based on Chinese solar manufacturers, linking the AD/CVD to the origin of the cells, not the module. Cells were offshored out of China, primarily to Thailand, while modules were still produced in China with components subsidized by the Chinese government.
2015: Obama administration adds follow-up AD/CVD against China and AD against Taiwan to address the cell/module workaround. AD/CVD is attached to the solar module's origin, regardless of where the cell is produced.
2018: Trump administration establishes Section 201 safeguard and quota. Tariff rate is implemented on all solar module imports, regardless of origin, with a duty-free importation of 2.5 GW of cells for domestic module manufacturing.
2022: Biden administration extends Trump-era Section 201 safeguards for another four years, but expands the cell import quota to 5 GW and exempts bifacial solar modules.
Rashid said that opponents to its trade petition "have done a pretty good job of associating our name with just negative connotations of tariffs or whether it's a bad impact for the adoption of renewable energy, our jobs in the solar industry. So they've done a pretty good job… it has had a negative impact."
The Solar Energy Industries Association, which has aggressively fought the latest AD/CVD case, has called Auxin's petition "frivolous" and abusing U.S. trade laws to benefit a single company.
Subscribe today to the all-new Factor This! podcast from Renewable Energy World. This podcast designed specifically for the solar industry launches May 9th with a deep-dive breakdown of the Auxin Solar tariff petition, including the impact to PPA markets and corporate net-zero targets. Three-quarters of solar companies responding to a SEIA survey reportedly said that panel deliveries have been cancelled or delayed in the days since the U.S. Commerce Department took up the petition.
SEIA said in a press release that more than 90% of the 200 companies that responded to its survey said that the Commerce Department’s actions are having a “severe or devastating impact” on their bottom line.
The industry trade group said that all market segments — residential, commercial, community solar, and utility-scale solar — “overwhelmingly reported” devastating or severe impacts from the investigation. Survey respondents included SEIA members and non-members.
“This investigation is based on a meritless trade case that is hammering the solar industry in real-time and diminishing our efforts as a country to tackle climate change,” said Abigail Ross Hopper, SEIA’s president and CEO, in a statement sent to Renewable Energy World. “This is yet another attempt to abuse U.S. trade laws and cause serious economic harm to the American solar industry and its 230,000 workers, shockingly, all at the behest of a single company,” Hopper said.
Despite the threat to his company's survival, Rashid said he won't stop until the "entire supply chain" is reshored to the U.S. That may be a tall order.
A Department of Energy report on the state of clean energy supply chains found that the solar PV supply chain remains heavily reliant on China, but opportunities exist to embolden domestic manufacturing.
Chinese producers control 83% of global capacity for polysilicon production, 96% for wafers, 79% for cells, and 70% for modules, according to the Ultra Low Carbon Solar Alliance.
The DOE report said incentives could offset the higher cost of solar PV manufacturing in the U.S., which can be 30-40% higher.
Rashid said he supports the proposed federal Solar Energy Manufacturing for America (SEMA) Act that would provide incentives for domestic production of the entire solar supply chain.
The bill passed the U.S. House but is still waiting for approval by the Senate. The SEMA Act, and steps to form a domestic solar supply chain in the U.S., is the topic of Episode 3 of the Factor This! podcast. Subscribe here.
