US, Saudi Arabia, others stop proposed global fee on shipping emissions


This recording was made using enhanced software.

Summary

Shipping emissions regulation

The United States blocked an international deal aimed at establishing emission reduction targets in the shipping industry, citing concerns that it would raise consumer prices.

International response

Environmental groups and supporters of the deal expressed their determination to revive the agreement, even with the delay.

Economic implications

There's concerns from U.S. officials that the deal's associated fees for exceeding emissions limits would function as a tax.


Full story

The U.S. successfully blocked the passage of a deal that would’ve established internationally mandated emission reduction targets in the shipping industry. American leadership felt the deal would’ve raised prices for consumers due to projected fees that fleet owners said could reach hundreds of billions of dollars annually.

Deal blocked

The International Maritime Organization (IMO) got the IMO Net-Zero Framework approved in April after 10 years of negotiations. The goal was to reduce fossil fuel usage in the shipping industry and limit emissions. Shipping represents 3% of all global emissions.

President Donald Trump, Saudi Arabia and several other countries sought to end the deal over costs.

During a meeting on Friday, Saudi Arabia called a vote to adjourn the meeting for one year. More than half the countries agreed, including several that had originally been in favor of the deal.

That included island nations like the Bahamas and Antigua. They told the BBC they rely on the U.S. for trade and received pressure from the Trump administration to change their vote.

QR code for SAN app download

Download the SAN app today to stay up-to-date with Unbiased. Straight Facts™.

Point phone camera here

Trump threatened tariffs, the withdrawal of visa rights and more against countries that voted in favor of the deal. The president made his feelings about it clear on social media Thursday.

“The United States will NOT stand for this Global Green New Scam Tax on Shipping, and will not adhere to it in any way, shape, or form,” Trump wrote. “We will not tolerate increased prices on American Consumers OR, the creation of a Green New Scam Bureaucracy to spend YOUR money on their Green dreams.”

Reaction to the vote

Those in support of the deal seemed determined to get it back on track, even if it takes a year.

“What matters now is that countries rise up and come back to the IMO with a louder and more confident ‘yes’ vote that cannot be silenced,” Anaïs Rios, shipping policy officer for Seas At Risk, said. “The planet and the future of shipping does not have time to waste.”

One supporter also seemed hopeful about keeping the deal alive, even as she blamed the U.S.

“The delay leaves the shipping sector drifting in uncertainty,” Alison Shaw, IMO Manager at Transport & Environment, a Brussels-based environmental nongovernmental organization, said. “But this week has also shown that there is a clear desire to clean up the shipping industry, even in the face of U.S. bullying.”

Back stateside, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio celebrated the decision.

“This is another HUGE win for @POTUS,” Rubio wrote on X. “Thanks to his leadership, the United States prevented a massive UN tax hike on American consumers that would have funded progressive climate pet projects. Our country will continue to lead the way and put America FIRST.”

IMO Net-Zero Framework

The goal of the measure was to get the shipping industry to net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by roughly 2050. The way they planned on getting there was to set a marine fuel standard that would get stricter over time.

The deal would also set fees for emissions above the allowed limits. In essence, it would be a tax on countries that break the rules.

It would have made shipping the first industry to adopt internationally mandated targets to reduce emissions.

According to recent data, Greece, which also voted against the deal, is the country with the highest emissions from global shipping. It’s followed by Japan and the U.S.

The cost

The Mediterranean Shipping Company (MSC) led the market for shipping companies in total imports to the U.S. in 2024. That’s followed by Maersk Line and Compagnie Maritime d’Affretement, or CMA.

MSC is a privately held company, so its revenue is unclear, but the other two brought in a combined $99.58 billion last year.

Despite that, Trump and other administration officials were concerned that added costs from a tax would be passed on to American consumers at a time when inflation is already an issue.

The fees associated with the proposal, according to a conglomerate of shipping companies, would have cost them an estimated $20 to $30 billion annually by 2030. They said in a letter to the IMO that the cost would increase to $300 billion by 2050 if global fleets missed the targets by only 10%, according to industry site GCaptain.com

Prices have gone up across the country, in part due to Trump’s ongoing trade wars from tariffs.

Cole Lauterbach (Managing Editor) and Cassandra Buchman (Weekend Digital Producer) contributed to this report.
Tags: , , , , ,

SAN provides
Unbiased. Straight Facts.

Don’t just take our word for it.


Certified balanced reporting

According to media bias experts at AllSides

AllSides Certified Balanced May 2025

Transparent and credible

Awarded a perfect reliability rating from NewsGuard

100/100

Welcome back to trustworthy journalism.

Find out more

Why this story matters

The decision by the United States and Saudi Arabia to block an international shipping emissions agreement at the International Maritime Organization highlights debates over economic impacts, climate change policy and the influence of major economies in global regulation efforts.

Climate regulation

Proposed shipping industry emissions standards sparked debate on reducing global emissions, with supporters emphasizing the urgency of climate action and opponents, including the United States, citing concerns over economic consequences.

Economic impact

U.S. leaders argued that mandatory emissions reductions and potential taxes on shipping would raise consumer prices, drawing attention to the tension between environmental policy and economic priorities.

International pressure

Reports indicate that island nations faced pressure from the United States regarding their votes, illustrating the role of diplomatic influence and political leverage in shaping international agreements.

Get the big picture

Synthesized coverage insights across 113 media outlets

Behind the numbers

Shipping accounts for about 3% of global greenhouse gas emissions, with estimates suggesting this could rise to 17% by 2050 without regulation. The proposed carbon fee could have generated $11-$15 billion annually for clean fuel and transition funding, but carriers say it would be much more.

Context corner

The shipping industry operates globally and is often exempt from national climate regulations, making international agreements essential for emissions control. The IMO is uniquely positioned to set regulations but faces geopolitical pressures affecting decision outcomes.

Diverging views

Articles in the left category emphasize the risk to climate goals and accuse the US of 'bullying' and undermining climate action, while articles in the right category highlight concerns over economic impact and frame the US decision as protecting consumer and national interests.

SAN provides
Unbiased. Straight Facts.

Don’t just take our word for it.


Certified balanced reporting

According to media bias experts at AllSides

AllSides Certified Balanced May 2025

Transparent and credible

Awarded a perfect reliability rating from NewsGuard

100/100

Welcome back to trustworthy journalism.

Find out more

Media landscape

Click on bars to see headlines

113 total sources

Key points from the Left

No summary available because of a lack of coverage.

Report an issue with this summary

Key points from the Center

No summary available because of a lack of coverage.

Report an issue with this summary

Other (sources without bias rating):

Powered by Ground News™

Daily Newsletter

Start your day with fact-based news

Start your day with fact-based news

Learn more about our emails. Unsubscribe anytime.

By entering your email, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and acknowledge the Privacy Policy.