India, Indonesia, Laos Solar Tariffs 2026

Last updated October 17, 2026 (Originally published September 7, 2026):

Oct 17: FAQ updated for the Ethiopia and Korea circumvention cases. Oct 14: the USITC voted yes on injury; Commerce orders are expected on Nov 2. Sep 11: final Commerce rates added.

Quick Answer

Why This Matters for EPCs

India, Indonesia, and Laos together supplied about $1.54 billion in solar products to the US market in 2024, real, current supply, not a niche corner of the market. If your sourcing touches any of these three countries, or a module assembler using their cells, this is a live risk, not a distant one: final rates are set, the USITC has voted yes, and orders are expected on November 2.

What This Case Actually Is

Trade lawyers call this "Solar IV," the fourth in a recognizable sequence of US trade actions against imported solar cells: Solar I targeted China in 2012, Solar II added Taiwan in 2015, Solar III hit Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam through a circumvention inquiry in 2023 and new orders in 2025. This one, filed July 17, 2025 by the Alliance for American Solar Manufacturing and Trade, whose members include Hanwha Q Cells USA, First Solar, and Mission Solar Energy, targets crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not assembled into modules, from India, Indonesia, and Laos.

The petition named 43 producers or exporters in India, 54 in Indonesia, and 8 in Laos. The scale of what's being targeted is real: solar product imports from these three countries totaled $1.54 billion in 2024, $792.6 million from India, $415.2 million from Indonesia, $335.7 million from Laos (Commerce fact sheet, Census data), a dramatic rise from a fraction of that just two years earlier.

Final Rates (Commerce, September 11, 2026)

Final dumping margins

Final subsidy rates

These are the final rates in Commerce's September 11, 2026 fact sheet. The dumping margin and the subsidy rate are separate duties. For India, 123.04% plus 126.09% gives 249.13%, the combined figure trade press cites. Commerce's cash deposit rate adjusts the dumping side for subsidy offsets, to 107.17%, so the cash deposit total for India is 233.26%. Rates marked with an asterisk are based on facts available with adverse inferences.

The Scope Question: What Actually Gets Covered

This is the detail most coverage glosses over, and it changes how you should think about exposure. Coverage is determined by where the cell was made, not where the module was assembled. A module assembled in Vietnam using cells manufactured in Indonesia would be subject to these duties. A module assembled in Indonesia using cells manufactured in Vietnam would not be. Tandem cells combining crystalline silicon with perovskite or other materials are also covered, consistent with how Commerce has scoped prior solar cases.

Practically, this means the country printed on a module's country-of-origin label isn't the determining factor, the cell's actual manufacturing origin is. Verifying a supplier's module assembly location alone doesn't confirm duty-free status if the underlying cells came from a covered country.

Timeline

What's Still Genuinely Uncertain

The USITC voted yes on injury on October 14, 2026. It made one affirmative determination across all six investigations, and its news release says Commerce will issue orders on imports from India, Indonesia and Laos. Five commissioners voted yes and one did not participate. Commerce is expected to issue the orders on November 2. That date comes from Commerce's schedule, not from the USITC release. The USITC report (Publication 5804) is due by November 23 and will set out its reasoning. What remains open is deposit timing for each entry. Confirm it with customs counsel.

What EPC Teams Should Do Now

Common Mistakes to Avoid

• Assuming the September 11 determination settles deposit timing. The USITC voted yes on October 14, 2026, but orders are expected on November 2 and deposit timing for each entry needs customs counsel.
• Judging exposure by a module's country-of-origin label alone. Coverage follows cell manufacturing origin, not assembly location.
• Mixing up the rate types. India's 123.04% is the dumping margin and 126.09% is the separate subsidy rate. The two are added, and Commerce's cash deposit rate adjusts for subsidy offsets.
• Assuming all suppliers in a covered country face the same rate. Firm-specific rates vary substantially, subsidy rates run from 73.20% to 173.70% across the three countries.
• Waiting for final orders before adjusting sourcing conversations. Final rates are known, the USITC has voted yes, and orders are expected on November 2.

Where Reslink Fits In This Conversation

A client asking whether their project's module pricing is about to change needs a real answer built on the specific supplier's actual cell origin, not a general country-level assumption. Reslink's proposal workflow lets you model project economics against the confirmed current rates for a specific supplier relationship, and rebuild that model quickly once Commerce issues the orders, so a client sees where their actual exposure sits rather than a headline percentage that may not apply to their specific supply chain.

See the full mobile design-to-proposal workflow → Book a demo

Frequently Asked Questions

Q1. Does this affect modules already installed or under contract before these duties took effect?

Not settled yet. AD/CVD duties generally apply to entries of merchandise from the point cash deposits begin, so confirm the exact entry date rules with trade counsel for any shipment already in transit or under contract.

Q2. Are these the only duties that apply, or do others stack on top?

Other duties can apply separately. The Section 201 safeguard on solar cells and modules expired on February 6, 2026. It applied to many origins but excluded several, including Indonesia. Country-specific tariffs and other trade measures may also apply independently, worth checking a specific shipment's full duty exposure rather than assuming AD/CVD is the only cost.

Q3. Why did India's mandatory respondents withdraw from the AD investigation?

Commerce's September 11 fact sheet marks India's final dumping margin of 123.04% as based on facts available with adverse inferences. The reasons the Indian respondents did not take part are not clear from public reporting.

Q4. Could other countries face a similar case next?

Analysts have flagged this as a real pattern: prior cases pushed production toward new countries, which then draw fresh scrutiny once volumes rise. Two are now on record. Commerce opened a circumvention inquiry on solar cells and modules from Ethiopia on July 17, 2026, with a preliminary determination scheduled for about December 14, 2026 unless extended. A separate request covering South Korea was filed on June 18, 2026, and its initiation status was not confirmed when this page was updated. See our Ethiopia circumvention inquiry guide.

Q5. Is this the same as the Section 232 polysilicon tariffs already covered on this site?

No, separate and stacking, see our Section 232 Polysilicon Tariffs guide for the full mechanics. Section 232 applies broadly by product classification regardless of country, and specifically excludes raw polysilicon from its ad valorem component. This AD/CVD case applies to finished cells and modules by specific country and company. A product could be subject to both simultaneously.

You May Also Like

• US Solar Tariffs 2026: Section 232 Polysilicon Guide
• FERC Interconnection Reform 2026: EPC Guide
• Ethiopia Solar Circumvention Inquiry: Confirmed vs Open for US EPCs

Sources

• U.S. Department of Commerce (Primary): trade.gov, preliminary CVD determination fact sheet, February 24, 2026, confirms company-specific and "all others" rates for India, Indonesia, and Laos
• U.S. Department of Commerce (Primary): trade.gov, preliminary AD determination announcement, April 23, 2026, confirms the affirmative preliminary finding and petitioner details
• Federal Register: federalregister.gov, CVD investigation initiation notice, confirms the 43/54/8 producer count by country and the injury-finding basis for initiation
• White & Case LLP: whitecase.com, confirms the tandem cell scope inclusion and CSPV cell definition consistent with prior Solar cases
• Lexology: lexology.com, confirms the cell-origin-versus-assembly-location scope mechanism with the Vietnam/Indonesia worked example
• U.S. Department of Commerce (Primary): trade.gov, final determinations fact sheet, September 11, 2026, final dumping margins, subsidy rates, 2024 import statistics.
• USITC (Primary): news release 26-147, October 14, 2026, affirmative injury determination, investigation numbers 701-TA-772-774 and 731-TA-1756-1758.