Canada Drops Decade-Old Duties on Chinese Solar Products While U.S. Keeps Its Own Trade Barriers

35,000+ smart investors are already getting financial news, market signals, and macro shifts in the economy that could impact their money next with our FREE weekly newsletter. Get ahead of what the crowd finds out too late. Click Here to Subscribe for FREE.

Canada has quietly removed a trade barrier that shaped its solar market for more than a decade. On September 17, 2026, the Canadian International Trade Tribunal rescinded its order covering certain photovoltaic modules and laminates from China, ending anti-dumping and countervailing duties rooted in a case that began in 2014 and produced its first injury finding in 2015.

The change creates a notable contrast with the United States, where several China-specific restrictions on solar products remain in place. Yet Canada’s decision is more complicated than a simple judgment that Chinese trade practices are no longer a concern. Only weeks earlier, Canadian border authorities had reached essentially the opposite conclusion on dumping and subsidies.

Canada’s Solar Duties Had Been in Place Since 2015

The trade case began after four Canadian manufacturers filed a complaint in October 2014 alleging that certain Chinese photovoltaic modules and laminates were being dumped and subsidized. The Canada Border Services Agency began collecting provisional duties in March 2015 and made final dumping and subsidy determinations that June. The Canadian International Trade Tribunal then concluded in July 2015 that the imports threatened injury to Canadian producers, establishing the basis for continued duties.

Those protections did not simply remain untouched for 11 years. Canada’s trade-remedy system periodically reviews measures to determine whether they are still justified. In March 2021, the CITT continued the solar order without amendment after an earlier expiry review. Another review began in February 2026. That process ultimately produced a very different outcome: on September 17, the tribunal terminated the review and rescinded the order, meaning the CBSA would stop collecting the anti-dumping and countervailing duties on the covered Chinese products.

The Original Dumping Case Involved Strikingly Large Margins

The numbers behind the original investigation help explain why the measures became significant. During the CBSA’s 2013-14 investigation period, the agency calculated that 100% of the subject Chinese imports it examined had been dumped. China represented 81.5% of total imports of the goods during that period, while the calculated overall dumping margin for Chinese imports was 124.4% of their export price.

Company-specific results varied dramatically. In its June 2015 final determination, the CBSA calculated dumping margins ranging from 9.3% for Renesola Jiangsu to more than 100% for several exporters. The rate used for exporters that did not receive individual treatment reached 154.4%, while countervailing amounts were also established to address subsidies. Those figures did not mean every future panel would automatically face a duty equal to those percentages; Canada’s system uses normal values and exporter-specific calculations. They nevertheless illustrate how seriously authorities viewed the pricing practices uncovered in the original case.

The CBSA Still Saw a Dumping Risk in 2026

What makes the September decision especially notable is what happened only a few months earlier. On July 2, the CBSA concluded its portion of the 2026 expiry review and determined that ending the order was likely to result in both the continuation or resumption of dumping and the continuation or resumption of subsidization. Its detailed reasons were published later that month.

The agency pointed to enormous Chinese manufacturing capacity and intensifying price competition. Information in the CBSA record indicated that Chinese photovoltaic production capacity in 2024 exceeded 200% of global demand. Chinese export volumes of wafers, cells and modules had increased even while their export values fell sharply. Separate OECD research published in 2026 described solar-cell and module manufacturing as the most heavily subsidized of 15 industrial sectors examined between 2005 and 2024. The OECD also estimated that Chinese companies had accumulated at least 80% of the global market across major stages of the solar value chain.

So Why Could the Tribunal Still End the Duties?

Canada’s trade-remedy system divides responsibility between two institutions. The CBSA examines whether dumping or subsidization is likely to continue or resume. The CITT separately addresses the domestic-industry side of the equation. An affirmative CBSA determination therefore does not automatically guarantee that an order will survive.

There is another important mechanism in Canadian law. Section 76.03 of the Special Import Measures Act allows the CITT to terminate an expiry review if, in its opinion, the review is not supported by domestic producers. Tribunal guidelines say that failure by Canadian producers to file notices of participation or participate substantially will generally be treated as an indication that support is lacking. The CITT’s September 17 public release did not provide detailed reasoning, and its full reasons were not yet publicly available when the decision was first reported. Solar-industry publication pv magazine characterized the termination as resulting from insufficient domestic-producer support. That makes the outcome different from a finding that Chinese dumping or subsidies had disappeared.

Importers Could Receive Money Back

For Canadian companies importing covered photovoltaic products, the change has an immediate financial consequence. The CBSA says anti-dumping and countervailing duties no longer apply to new releases of goods covered by the rescinded order. More unusually, eligible duties already paid on goods released on or after March 25, 2026, are being automatically refunded.

That cutoff matters. Imports released before March 25 are not eligible for refunds simply because the order was later rescinded, and assessments involving those earlier shipments can continue. There is real money involved, even though subject imports had fallen substantially. CBSA enforcement records show approximately C$3.85 million in anti-dumping and countervailing duties were assessed on the covered Chinese products during 2023, 2024 and 2025 combined. Reported subject-import volumes dropped from 56,603 units in 2023 to 4,369 in 2024 before rising to 6,284 in 2025, illustrating how restricted this particular import channel had become.

Canada’s Solar Market Is Growing, but Manufacturing Is Complicated

The domestic picture has also changed considerably since the original case. The CBSA noted during its 2026 review that Heliene, one of the companies involved in the original complaint, had initially manufactured modules in Canada largely for Ontario’s former feed-in-tariff market. As that demand declined, the company increasingly served the United States. According to the CBSA’s review record, Heliene was not presently manufacturing the subject goods in Canada, although it maintained that it could restart Canadian production if market conditions improved.

At the same time, demand for solar generation is far from disappearing. The Canadian Renewable Energy Association reported that Canada had more than 5 GW of installed solar capacity by the end of 2025. While only 57 MW of new utility-scale solar came online during 2025, the association expects substantially more renewable construction in the years ahead and projects between 17 GW and 26 GW of additional solar deployment by 2035. That creates a recurring policy tension: cheaper imported equipment can help project economics, while domestic manufacturing objectives favour resilient local supply chains.

The United States Is Taking a Different Approach to Chinese Solar Imports

South of the border, China-specific solar trade remedies remain firmly in place. In May 2026, the U.S. International Trade Commission completed a five-year review of existing anti-dumping and countervailing duty orders covering crystalline-silicon photovoltaic products from China. The commission determined that revoking the orders would likely lead to the continuation or recurrence of material injury, so the measures remained in force.

Those orders sit alongside Section 301 tariffs aimed at Chinese products. The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative increased the tariff on Chinese solar cells, whether or not assembled into modules, to 50% as part of its 2024 modifications to the China Section 301 regime. Washington later raised Section 301 tariffs on specified Chinese solar wafers and polysilicon to 50%, effective January 1, 2025. The United States therefore continues to maintain multiple layers of China-focused solar restrictions even after one broader solar safeguard expired.

Washington Is Preparing Another Solar Trade Barrier

One U.S. solar measure did end recently. The global Section 201 safeguard on imported crystalline-silicon solar cells and modules, introduced during President Donald Trump’s first administration and later extended, expired in February 2026. That expiration might have suggested a broader move toward easier solar imports. Instead, Washington has been replacing parts of the old framework with different protections.

In August 2026, President Trump issued a Section 232 proclamation covering polysilicon and downstream products. The measure calls for a 15% tariff on covered polysilicon derivatives together with a minimum-import-price system intended to protect U.S. production. The White House said the new framework would take effect 120 days after the proclamation, placing implementation in early December 2026. The administration specifically described the measure as replacing the narrower solar safeguard that had expired in February. As a result, the U.S. solar trade regime is changing rather than simply disappearing, with industrial capacity and supply-chain security playing an increasingly prominent role.

The Move Comes During a Broader Canada-China Trade Reset

The solar decision also arrives during a noticeable shift in Canada-China commercial relations, although the two developments should not be treated as the same policy action. In January 2026, Canada and China announced a preliminary arrangement covering several bilateral trade disputes. Canada agreed to allow an initial annual quota of 49,000 Chinese electric vehicles to enter at the standard 6.1% most-favoured-nation tariff rate instead of the previous 100% surtax applied to those quota-covered vehicles.

The same Canadian government backgrounder said Ottawa would not proceed with previously proposed tariffs on certain Chinese solar products and semiconductors. That political decision concerned tariffs contemplated in the 2024 Fall Economic Statement. The September removal of the decade-old photovoltaic anti-dumping and countervailing duties came through the separate CITT process under the Special Import Measures Act. No public CITT statement has established that its decision was directed by, or formally connected to, the wider diplomatic arrangement. Even so, the combined changes leave Canada and the United States moving in distinctly different directions on several parts of their commercial relationship with China.

This Options Discord Chat is The Real Deal

While the internet is scoured with trading chat rooms, many of which even charge upwards of thousands of dollars to join, this smaller options trading discord chatroom is the real deal and actually providing valuable trade setups, education, and community without the noise and spam of the larger more expensive rooms. With a incredibly low-cost monthly fee, Options Trading Club (click here to see their reviews) requires an application to join ensuring that every member is dedicated and serious about taking their trading to the next level. If you are looking for a change in your trading strategies, then click here to apply for a membership.