“Adverse facts available” is a shift of burden of proof adopted by the US Department of Commerce and is liberally used in CVD investigations against China. By the excuse of “China’s failure to cooperate to the best of its capacity”, positive findings of subsidy could be established in spite of the lack of affirmative evidence and unfavorable substantive rules. In two CVD investigations against China’s clean energy products in 2012, “adverse facts available” was adopted in order to circumvent the substantive rules of public body determinations, electricity and land subsidies and export credit subsidies. It’s difficult to get effective remedies under DSB because there’s no detailed rule governing the use of “AFA”, and that WTO dispute settlement decisions only apply at a case-by-case level. Moreover, owing to the passive attitude of US courts, domestic redress in the US also proved fruitless. The solution of this problem, on the one hand, lies in the global cooperation of countries who have come to a mutual understanding about the harms of AFA proliferation, and on the other hand, lies in the clean energy sector itself. The abuse of AFA stems from the escalation of trade conflicts. Consequently, if possible, a solution to this scramble by negotiation is more effective than an outright trade war.