3 ms·
Well, that would be a bit of a misrepresentation on roofer Bill Keith's part if true. Are you sure? In May, there was an actual 31% tariff placed by the US Co
by kjhughes 14y ago
Well, that would be a bit of a misrepresentation on roofer Bill Keith's part if true. Are you sure?
In May, there was an actual 31% tariff placed by the US Commerce Department on Chinese solar panels:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/18/business/energy-environment/us-slaps-tariffs-on-chinese-solar-panels.html http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/18/business/energy-environmen...
- jordanb 14y agoI'm not sure. But I was confused about how an "import policy" could result in him being "fined as much as 250 percent on his solar panels." That didn't seem like the result of any sort of tariff I've ever seen. So I went to his website, saw the tax credit advertisement, figured that might have something to do with it and googled it. And while your linked 31% tariff may be the "tough import policy" referenced in the article, I'm still having trouble understanding how that turns into a 250% fine.
- kjhughes 14y agoSomething does seem off there, but maybe it's sloppy reporting. The article states: Unless he can show specific manufacturing documentation by August 29, Keith said he could be fined as much as 250 percent on his solar panels -- an effective rate of $270,000. Besides the 250% "fine", the dangling $270,000 reference (and calling it a 'rate') is confusing.