United States Expresses DisApproval Towards Net-Zero Shipping Sector Framework Supported by India and China
Published on August 13, 2025
The US has rejected the International Maritime Organization's (IMO) proposal for a global carbon tax on the shipping industry, a move that could jeopardize international efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the sector.
In April, India and 62 other countries voted in favour of the world's first global carbon tax on the shipping industry by the United Nations' shipping agency. However, the US has expressed its opposition to the proposal, citing potential harm to American interests.
Container shipping expert Lars Jensen has stated that the US's position on the IMO proposal is not surprising. The US has voiced concerns over the framework imposing what they call a "global carbon tax on Americans" through international regulation.
The US believes the proposed fuel standards would unfairly burden American shipping and energy industries, raise costs for US consumers, and favor China by imposing expensive fuel mandates not widely available globally. US officials argue that the framework precludes the use of lower-emission fuels where the US leads, such as liquified natural gas (LNG) and biofuels.
The IMO's proposal was first voiced at the MEPC meeting in April of the current year, during which the US delegation was absent. The Net-Zero Framework is aimed at reducing global greenhouse gas emissions from the international shipping sector.
The implications of the US opposition are significant for other countries and industries. The US rejection jeopardizes the overall adoption of the IMO Net-Zero Framework, which requires two-thirds approval among member states. Without US support, reaching this threshold is at risk, potentially stalling or derailing global decarbonization efforts in maritime shipping.
Other countries supporting the framework could face US retaliation or trade conflict if they push ahead, as US officials have warned they would respond strongly to any adoption of the measures perceived to harm US interests. If the framework is implemented without US participation, it could create regulatory fragmentation, compliance complexities, and trade disruptions within the global shipping sector, affecting import-export operations, freight forwarding, and logistics worldwide.
Industries dependent on maritime transport outside the US could see increased costs from compliance fees and fuel price hikes, altering supply chain economics. However, the framework aims at reducing greenhouse gas emissions across the sector, so it reflects a broader push by many countries to align shipping with climate goals starting 2027.
The US's call for technological neutrality emphasizes a preference for allowing multiple fuel types (LNG, biofuels, and future innovations) rather than a framework mandating costly, less available fuels. This stance could influence the types of clean technologies developed and adopted globally.
Starting in 2028, ships will either have to shift to lower-emission fuels or pay a fee for the pollution they generate under the new framework. The US Department of Energy sees the proposed framework as a global carbon tax levied by the UN, which they deem unaccountable. The US Department of Energy has issued a strongly-worded statement against the adoption of the Net-Zero Framework.
The US has threatened to retaliate or explore remedies for its citizens if the Net-Zero Framework is adopted. The US has stated it would not accept any international environmental agreement that burdens the country or harms the interests of the American people. The US delegation did not participate in negotiations and was absent during voting in April.
The proposed framework would require the use of expensive fuels, benefiting China and potentially precluding the use of proven technologies like LNG and biofuels. The US opposition is a direct consequence of concerns over climate change policy design and impact on US competitiveness. It poses risks of delaying or fracturing international efforts to reduce shipping emissions, with substantial effects on global trade and climate strategy.
[1] News Article 1 [2] News Article 2 [3] News Article 3 [4] News Article 4 [5] News Article 5
- The US's rejection of the International Maritime Organization's (IMO) proposed global carbon tax on the shipping industry has cast a shadow over international efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
- In an editorial, industry experts have expressed their concern over the US's opposition to the IMO's Net-Zero Framework, arguing that it could jeopardize the global decarbonization of maritime shipping.
- The energy sector's opinion regarding the US's stance on the IMO proposal is divided. Some applaud the bid to protect American industries, while others criticize the disregard for environmental science and climate-change policy-and-legislation.
- Subscription-based news platforms are reporting increased interest in the US-IMO dispute, as the outcome could significantly impact the shipping industry and the broader economy.
- While the US has voiced its opposition to the IMO's proposal, European countries, along with India and several other nations, continue to push for the adoption of the Net-Zero Framework.
- In light of the US opposition, environmental-science activists call for greater policy-and-legislation focused on reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the shipping sector, urging countries not to capitulate to US pressure.
- Amid the heated political debate, it is essential to consider the implications of the US's actions on general-news issues such as climate change, international relations, and trade agreements.
- The US's position on the IMO proposal underscores the long-standing tension between climate-change policy and the interests of the shipping industry, reflecting the complexities of balancing economic growth, energy use, and the environment.
