The following letter was submitted in response to ‘A Different Trade Tactic,’ published in the June 2012 issue of Solar Industry.
To The Editor:
Did someone notice that the [anti-dumping] penalty happened to coincide with the investment tax credit (ITC) and then propose the alternative of nixing the credit as opposed to imposing the tariff?
More to the point, what was the tariff level based on – the ITC or the considered subsidy level? Is it the tail wagging the dog or the other way around?
Limiting the ITC to domestic-content-based product is a penalty that has a shelf life limited to the duration of the incentive, which no doubt will be on the chopping block after November's election if the political pendulum reverses its direction.
No market is ‘free’ when the revenuers reign or the subsidizers subsidize. In a perfect world, quality and performance would determine the outcome. In a world layered with conditional legislative subsidies and incentives, the product is subliminated to the maneuver.
I envision a world of energy that stands independent of tax breaks, incentives or government intervention on either the supply or demand side. Take the gloves off of oil, coal and gas and renewables and stand back. Then again, chaos has a certain attraction, doesn't it?
Kerry T. Kalarney
Green Place Ranch
Sundance Solar Designs LLC
Olathe, Colo.
—
Editor's note: To submit your own contribution to Viewpoints, email Jessica Lillian at jlillian@solarindustrymag.com.
