Should Commerce divide the silicon market according to users?

Now that Dow Corning was successful in getting the EU to consider dividing the silicon market up according to end use, via the aluminum content, the question is whether the US government has been asked to reconsider its policy to treat silicon as one commodity?

The argument is old—the silicon consumers, chemical manufacturers and aluminum producers, are wildly different. While there is some overlap in the quality of silicon they purchase, how they buy is quite dissimilar. The aluminum buyers reply on a variety of pricing mechanism, i.e., spot, quarterly and annual, while the chemical buyers look for long-term, i.e., at least annual contracts. And, since the chemical buyers are not spot buyers, their prices are not reflected in the indexes.

“A 5-mt sale to a secondary aluminum producer could affect a 5,000 mt shipment to a chemical producer,” one seller said. “They are not represented in the pricing indexes. Still, using the indexes for pricing was their decision.”

Leave a Reply

4 Comments on "Should Commerce divide the silicon market according to users?"

Notify of
avatar
Mighty hormiga
Guest

Trade defense is based upon the product definition and not on how the product is priced or negotiated t . In general terms silicon metal is defined as 99% Si with max 4% Fe . Product used by chemical and aluminium industry is completely interchangeable and thus ,there is no place /no need to open an specific tariff code

wpDiscuz