US Keeps Anti-Dumping Duties on Wind Towers from India, Malaysia, Spain

The United States found on Nov. 4, 2026, that wind tower dumping would resume if its duties ended.

The U.S. Department of Commerce found on Nov. 4, 2026, that wind tower dumping from India, Malaysia and Spain would resume without duties.

The decision closes the first five-year review of three anti-dumping duty orders. An anti-dumping duty is an extra import tax on goods sold abroad below their normal price¹. Commerce found that dumping margins of up to 54.03% for India, 3.20% for Malaysia and 73.00% for Spain would likely return if the orders ended¹.

In short, nothing changes at the border today. Steel towers for large wind turbines from these three countries still carry anti-dumping duties, and a second agency must now give its own ruling.

What did Commerce decide on wind towers?

The decision appears in a notice from the International Trade Administration (ITA), the part of Commerce that runs trade cases. The notice was published in the Federal Register, the U.S. government’s daily journal, and applies from Nov. 4, 2026¹. It covers utility scale wind towers, the tall steel towers that hold up turbines on wind farms¹.

Commerce looked at one question. Would dumping start again, or go on, if the orders were revoked? Its answer was yes for all three countries¹.

The notice also states how large the dumping would likely be. It gives weighted-average dumping margins, which are the average gap between the U.S. price and the normal price¹. These reach 54.03% for India, 3.20% for Malaysia and 73.00% for Spain¹.

How large are the margins for each country?

The figures in the notice match the rates Commerce found when it first investigated these towers. In 2021, the ITA’s case page listed a 54.03% dumping rate for every named Indian exporter and for all other Indian makers². It listed 3.20% for Malaysia’s CS Wind Corporation and CS Wind Malaysia Sdn. Bhd., and for all other Malaysian makers².

The same page also gave lower "adjusted" rates. These subtract an amount for export subsidies already charged through a separate duty². The adjusted rate was 51.87% for India and 0.00% for Malaysia².

Spain’s figure of 73.00% is the highest of the three¹. The documents on file do not list the Spanish companies named in that first case.

The review notice does not set new deposit rates for shipments. It reports the size of the dumping that would likely return if the orders ended.

Why did Commerce keep the orders in place?

The law calls this a sunset review: a check every five years on whether a duty is still needed. Commerce started these reviews on July 2, 2026¹. On July 17, 2026, the U.S. industry told Commerce it wanted to take part¹.

The U.S. side filed full responses on Aug. 3, 2026¹. It took part both as a U.S. maker of wind towers and as an association whose members mostly make them¹. Commerce received no response from any foreign maker or exporter¹.

Because the foreign side stayed silent, Commerce ran a shorter, expedited review of 120 days¹. It told the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) on Aug. 24, 2026, that no foreign party had answered¹. Its full reasons are in a separate decision memo, which covers the likelihood of more dumping and the size of the margins¹.

Which towers and tariff codes are covered?

The notice says the orders cover wind towers from India, Malaysia and Spain¹. It refers readers to the decision memo for the full product description¹.

The ITC’s 2021 ruling on Spain names the U.S. tariff codes for these goods. Wind towers enter under subheadings 7308.20.00 and 8502.31.00 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States³.

The ITA’s import figures for India and Malaysia used one narrower code, 7308.20.0020².

How much trade did the duties reach?

Imports of these towers grew fast before the case began. ITA figures, drawn from U.S. Census Bureau data, show the jump².

Imports from India rose from 9 tonnes in 2018 to 18,460 tonnes in 2019². In 2020 they reached 103,856 tonnes, worth $136,987,429².

Imports from Malaysia went from 0 in 2018 to 14,875 tonnes in 2019². In 2020 they reached 67,232 tonnes, worth $114,733,847². The documents give no figures for Spain or for the years since the orders.

Who asked for the duties, and who is affected?

The case began with a complaint filed on Sept. 30, 2020². It came from the Wind Tower Trade Coalition, whose members are Arcosa Wind Towers Inc. of Dallas, Texas, and Broadwind Towers Inc. of Manitowoc, Wisconsin³. In the current reviews, the ITC accepted a response from the coalition and Ventower Industries LLC⁴.

The groups touched by the decision are these:

• U.S. importers of wind towers from the three countries still pay anti-dumping duty deposits at customs.
• Makers in India, Malaysia and Spain keep facing the duties in the U.S. market. None of them answered Commerce in this review¹.
• U.S. tower makers keep the protection the orders give them.

For now, the review leaves the cost of these imported towers where it was.

What other duties apply to these towers?

Anti-dumping duties are not the only extra tax on these goods. There are also countervailing duties, extra taxes that offset subsidies a foreign government gives its makers⁴.

The ITC’s reviews cover countervailing duty orders on towers from India and Malaysia⁴. In the 2021 case, Commerce set a subsidy rate of 2.25% for Vestas Wind Technology India Private Limited and for all other Indian makers². Several other Indian firms received 397.70%².

Commerce finished its own review of the Malaysian subsidy duty days before this decision. In a notice applicable from Nov. 2, 2026, it found that subsidies would likely continue if that order ended⁵. It put the likely rate at 6.43% for CS Wind Malaysia Sdn Bhd and for all others⁵.

When were the orders first issued?

Commerce first published the order on Spain on Aug. 16, 2021¹. The orders on India and Malaysia followed on Dec. 6, 2021¹.

Before that, the ITC found that imports from Spain sold below fair value hurt the U.S. industry³. It filed that ruling on Aug. 9, 2021³. For India and Malaysia, the ITA’s case calendar listed the final ITC rulings for late 2021².

What happens next at the trade commission?

The ITC must now make its own decision. It will judge whether ending the orders would likely bring back material injury, meaning serious harm to the U.S. industry, within a reasonably foreseeable time⁴. If it finds that harm likely, the orders would continue.

On Oct. 5, 2026, the ITC decided to hold expedited reviews rather than full ones⁴. Its staff report goes to parties on the protective order list on Jan. 7, 2027⁴. Written comments are due on or before Jan. 14, 2027⁴.

The ITC also found the reviews extraordinarily complicated⁴. It may therefore extend the review period by up to 90 days⁴. Until the ITC rules, importers keep paying deposits as before.

Key points on the wind tower duty review

The table below sums up the decision and the steps that follow.

Wind towers from the three countries keep entering the United States with anti-dumping duties in place. The next date in the case is Jan. 14, 2027, when comments to the ITC are due⁴.

Sources

1. ↩ Federal Register :: Utility Scale Wind Towers From India, Malaysia, and Spain: Final Results of the Expedited First Sunset Reviews of the Antidumping Duty Orders https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/11/04/2026-22530/utility-scale-wind-towers-from-india-malaysia-and-spain-final-results-of-the-expedited-first-sunset
2. ↩ Final Determination in Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty Investigations of Utility Scale Wind Towers from India and Malaysia https://www.trade.gov/faq/final-determination-antidumping-duty-and-countervailing-duty-investigations-utility-scale-wind
3. ↩ Federal Register :: Utility Scale Wind Towers From Spain; Determination https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/08/13/2021-17309/utility-scale-wind-towers-from-spain-determination
4. ↩ Federal Register :: Utility Scale Wind Towers From India, Malaysia, and Spain; Scheduling of Expedited Five-Year Reviews https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2026-22311
5. ↩ Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 209 (Friday, October 30, 2026) https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2026-10-30/html/2026-22245.htm