Skip to main content

The US Proposed Carbon Tariffs, WTO Scrutiny and China’s Responses

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 1843 Accesses

Abstract

There is a growing consensus that climate change has the potential to seriously damage our natural environment and affect the global economy, thus representing the world’s most pressing long-term threat to future prosperity and security. With greenhouse gas emissions embodied in virtually all products produced and traded in every conceivable economic sector, effectively addressing climate change will require a fundamental transformation of our economy and the ways that energy is produced and used. This will certainly have a bearing on world trade as it will affect the cost of production of traded products and therefore their competitive positions in the world market. This climate-trade nexus has become the focus of an academic debate (e.g., Bhagwati and Mavroidis 2007; Charnovitz 2003; Ismer and Neuhoff 2007; Swedish National Board of Trade 2004; The World Bank 2007; Zhang 1998, 2004, 2007a; Zhang and Assunção 2004), and gains increasing attention as governments are taking great efforts to implement the Kyoto Protocol and forge a post-2012 climate change regime to succeed it.

A similar version of this chapter has been previously published in International Economics and Economic Policy, Special Issue on “International Economics of Resources and Resource Policy”, Volume 7, Numbers 2–3/August 2010.

This chapter is built on the keynote address on Encouraging Developing Country Involvement in a Post-2012 Climate Change Regime: Carrots, Sticks or Both? at the Conference on Designing International Climate Change Mitigation Policies through RD&D Strategic Cooperation, Catholic University Leuven, Belgium, 12 October 2009; the invited presentation on Multilateral Trade Measures in a Post-2012 Climate Change Regime?: What Can Be Taken from the Montreal Protocol and the WTO? both at the International Workshop on Post-2012 Climate and Trade Policies, the United Nations Environment Programme, Geneva, 8–9 September 2008 and at Shanghai Forum 2009: Crisis, Cooperation and Development, Shanghai, 11–12 May 2009; the invited presentation on Climate Change Meets Trade in Promoting Green Growth: Potential Conflicts and Synergies at the East-West Center/Korea Development Institute Conference on Climate Change and Green Growth: Korea’s National Growth Strategy, Honolulu, Hawaii, 23–24 July 2009; the invited presentation on NAMAs, Unilateral Actions, Registry, Carbon Credits, MRV and Long-term Low-carbon Strategy at International Workshop on Envisaging a New Climate Change Agreement in Copenhagen, Seoul, 13 November 2009; and the invited panel discussion on Green Growth, Climate Change and WTO at the Korea International Trade Association/Peterson Institute for International Economics International Conference on the New Global Trading System in the Post-Crisis Era, Seoul, 7 December 2009. It has benefited from useful discussions with the participants in these meetings. That said, the views expressed here are those of the author. The author bears sole responsibility for any errors and omissions that may remain.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See Reinaud (2008) for an excellent review of practical issues involved in implementing unilateral EAR.

  2. 2.

    H.R. 2998, available at: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname111_cong_billsamp;docidf:h2998ih.txt.pdf.

  3. 3.

    This is in line with the IBEW/AEP proposal, which requires US importers to submit allowances to cover the emissions produced during the manufacturing of those goods 2 years after USA starts its cap-and-trade program (McBroom 2008).

  4. 4.

    To be consistent with the WTO provisions, foreign producers could arguably demand the same proportion of free allowances as US domestic producers in case they are subject to border carbon adjustments.

  5. 5.

    In a second-best setting with pre-existing distortionary taxes, if allowances are auctioned, the revenues generated can then be used to reduce pre-existing distortionary taxes, thus generating overall efficiency gains. Parry et al. (1999), for example, show that the costs of reducing US carbon emissions by 10% in a second-best setting with pre-existing labor taxes are five times more costly under a grandfathered carbon permits case than under an auctioned case. This is because the policy where the permits are auctioned raises revenues for the government that can be used to reduce pre-existing distortionary taxes. By contrast, in the former case, no revenue-recycling effect occurs, since no revenues are raised for the government. However, the policy produces the same tax-interaction effect as under the latter case, which tends to reduce employment and investment and thus exacerbates the distortionary effects of pre-existing taxes (Zhang 1999).

  6. 6.

    As part of its comprehensive strategy to control CO2 emissions and increase energy efficiency, a carbon/energy tax has been proposed by the CEC. The CEC proposal is that member states introduce a carbon/energy tax of US$ 3 per barrel oil equivalent in 1993, rising in real terms by US$ 1 a year to US$ 10 per barrel in 2000. After the year 2000 the tax rate will remain at US$ 10 per barrel at 1993 prices. The tax rates are allocated across fuels, with 50% based on carbon content and 50% on energy content (Zhang 1997).

  7. 7.

    See Genasci (2008) for discussion on complicating issues related to how to rebate exports under a cap-and-trade regime.

  8. 8.

    President Obama was quoted as saying that “At a time when the economy worldwide is still deep in recession and we’ve seen a significant drop in global trade, I think we have to be very careful about sending any protectionist signals out there. I think there may be other ways of doing it than with a tariff approach” (Broder 2009).

  9. 9.

    UNDESA (2009) projects that China’s population would peak at 1,462.5 millions around 2030, while India’s population would be projected to be at 1,484.6 millions in 2030 and further grow to 1,613.8 millions in 2050.

References

  • Berger JR (1999) Unilateral trade measures to conserve the world’s living resources: an environmental breakthrough for the GATT in the WTO sea turtle case. Columbia J Environ Law 24:355–411

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhagwati J, Mavroidis PC (2007) Is action against US exports for failure to sign Kyoto Protocol WTO-legal? World Trade Rev 6:299–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bounds A (2006) EU trade chief to reject ‘green’ tax plan. Financial Times, 17 Dec. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9dc90f34-8def-11db-ae0e-0000779e2340.html?nclick_check=1

  • Bovenberg AL, Goulder LH (2002) Addressing industry-distributional concerns in U.S. climate change policy. Unpublished manuscript, Department of Economics, Stanford University

    Google Scholar 

  • Broder J (2009) Obama opposes trade sanctions in climate bill. New York Times, 28 Jun. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/29/us/politics/29climate.html?_ramp;2amp;scpamp;1amp;sqamp;obama%20opposes%20trade%20sanctionsamp;stamp;cse

  • Charnovitz S (2003) Trade and climate: potential conflicts and synergies. In: Pew Center on Global Climate Change (ed) Beyond Kyoto – advancing the international effort against climate change. Pew Center on Global Climate Change, Arlington

    Google Scholar 

  • Doyle A (2009) U.S. praises China’s climate efforts; urges more. Reuters, 29 Mar. http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSTRE52S1WP20090329

  • Dröge S (2009) Tackling leakage in a world of unequal carbon prices. Synthesis report. Climate Strategies, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • EIA (2004) International energy outlook 2004. U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2008) Proposal for a directive of the European parliament and of the council amending directive 2003/87/EC so as to improve and extend the greenhouse gas emission allowance trading system of the community. COM(2008) 16 final, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • Genasci M (2008) Border tax adjustments and emissions trading: the implications of international trade law for policy design. Carbon Climate Law Rev 2:33–42

    Google Scholar 

  • General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT, 1987) United States – taxes on petroleum and certain imported substances. Report of the Panel, adopted on 17 Jun, L/6175, BISD 34S/136, Geneva. http://www.wto.org/english/res_e/booksp_e/analytic_index_e/introduction_01_e.htm

  • General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT, 1990) Thailand – restrictions on importation of and internal taxes on cigarettes. Report of the Panel, DS10/R, adopted on 7 Nov, BISD 37S/200, Geneva.http://www.wto.org/english/res_e/booksp_e/analytic_index_e/introduction_01_e.htm

  • General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT, 1994) United States: restrictions on the imports of tuna. Report of the Panel (not adopted), DS29/R, 16 Jun, Geneva. http://www.wto.org/english/res_e/booksp_e/analytic_index_e/introduction_01_e.htm

  • Haverkamp J (2008) International aspects of a climate change cap and trade program. Testimony before the Committee on Finance, U.S. Senate, 14 Feb. http://finance.senate.gov/hearings/testimony/2008test/021408jhtest.pdf

  • Hollinger P (2009) Sarkozy renews carbon tax call. Financial Times, 11 Sept

    Google Scholar 

  • Houser T, Bradley R, Childs B, Werksman J, Heilmayr R (2008) Leveling the carbon playing field: international competition and U.S. climate policy design. Peterson Institute For International Economics and World Resources Institute, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • International Energy Agency (IEA) (2007) World energy outlook 2007. International Energy Agency, Paris

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • International Energy Agency (IEA) (2009) World energy outlook 2009. International Energy Agency, Paris

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ismer R, Neuhoff K (2007) Border tax adjustment: a feasible way to support stringent emission trading. Eur J Law Econ 24:137–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McBroom M (2008) How the IBEW-UWM-Boilermakers-AEP international proposal operates within climate legislation.17 Jun. http://www.wita.org/index.php?tg=fileman&idx=viewfile&idf=189&id=4&gr=Y&path=&file=WITA-+Climate+Change+-+Overview+of+IBEW-AEP+Proposal+(June+17%2C+2008).pdf

  • Ministry of Commerce of China (MOC of China, 2009) A statement on “carbon tariffs”. 3 Jul, Beijing. http://www.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/ae/ag/200907/20090706375686.html

  • Morris MG, Hill ED (2007) Trade is the key to climate change. The Energy Daily, vol 35, 20 Feb

    Google Scholar 

  • National Bureau of Statistics of China (2008) China statistical yearbook 2008. China Statistics Press, Beijing

    Google Scholar 

  • Parry Ian WH, Williams RC III, Goulder LH (1999) When can carbon abatement policies increase welfare? The fundamental role of distorted factor markets. J Environ Econ Manage 37:52–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reinaud J (2008) Issues behind competitiveness and carbon leakage: focus on heavy industry. IEA Information Paper, IEA/OECD, October, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Reuters (2009) China says “carbon tariffs” proposals breach WTO rules. New York Times, 3 Jul. http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2009/07/03/world/international-uk-china-climate.html?ref=global-home

  • Samuelsohn D (2007) Trade plan opposed by China, Brazil and Mexico. Greenwire, 26 Sept. http://www.earthportal.org/news/?p=507

  • Swedish National Board of Trade (2004) Climate and trade rule – harmony or conflict? Swedish National Board of Trade, Stockholm

    Google Scholar 

  • Talley I (2009) Senate to put off climate bill until spring. Wall Street Journal, 18 Nov. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125850693443052993.html

  • The Economist (2008) Pollution law: trading dirt. 7 Jun

    Google Scholar 

  • The World Bank (2007) International trade and climate change: economic, legal and institutional perspectives. The World Bank, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • UNDESA (2009) Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations. World population prospects: the 2008 revision. http://esa.un.org/unpp

  • Wang X, Voituriez T (2009) Can unilateral trade measures significantly reduce leakage and competitiveness pressures on EU-ets-constrained industries? the case of China export taxes and vat rebates. Working Paper, Climate Strategies, Cambridge, United Kingdom

    Google Scholar 

  • Werksman J, Houser T (2008) Competitiveness, leakage and comparability: disciplining the use of trade measures under a post-2012 climate agreement. Discussion Paper, World Resources Institute, December, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • World Trade Organization (WTO), United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) (2009) Trade and climate change: WTO-UNEP report. WTO-UNEP, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • World Trade Organization (WTO) (1998) United States – import prohibition of certain shrimp and shrimp products. Report of the Appellate Body, WT/DS58/AB/R. World Trade Organization, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • World Trade Organization (WTO) (2001) United States – import prohibition of certain shrimp and shrimp products, recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by Malaysia. Panel report, WT/DS58/RW, adopted on 21 Nov. World Trade Organization, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang ZX (1997) The economics of energy policy in China: implications for global climate change. New horizons in environmental economics series. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang ZX (1998) Greenhouse gas emissions trading and the world trading system. J World Trade 32:219–239

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang ZX (1999) Should the rules of allocating emissions permits be harmonised? Ecol Econ 31:11–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang ZX (2000) Can China afford to commit itself an emissions cap? An economic and political analysis. Energy Econ 22:587–614

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang ZX (2003) Why did the energy intensity fall in China’s industrial sector in the 1990s? The relative importance of structural change and intensity change. Energy Econ 25:625–638

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang ZX (2004) Open trade with the U.S. without compromising Canada’s ability to comply with its Kyoto target. J World Trade 38:155–182

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang ZX (2007a) Doing trade and climate policy together. In: Najam A, Halle M, Meléndez-Ortiz R (eds) Trade and environment: a resource book. International Institute for Sustainable Development/International Center for Trade and Sustainable Development, Canada/Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang ZX (2007b) Why has China not embraced a global cap-and-trade regime? Climate Policy 7:166–170

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang ZX (2008) Asian energy and environmental policy: promoting growth while preserving the environment. Energy Policy 36:3905–3924

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang ZX (2009a) Multilateral trade measures in a post-2012 climate change regime?: what can be taken from the Montreal Protocol and the WTO? Energy Policy 37:5105–5112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang ZX (2009b) How should China respond to the U.S. proposed carbon Tariffs? Int Petroleum Econ 17:13–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang ZX (2010) Is China a Christmas tree to hang everybody’s complaints? Putting its own energy-saving into perspective. Energy Econ 32:S47–S56

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang ZX, Assunção L (2004) Domestic climate policy and the WTO. World Econ 27:359–386

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to ZhongXiang Zhang .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Physica-Verlag HD

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Zhang, Z. (2011). The US Proposed Carbon Tariffs, WTO Scrutiny and China’s Responses. In: Bleischwitz, R., Welfens, P., Zhang, Z. (eds) International Economics of Resource Efficiency. Physica-Verlag HD. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7908-2601-2_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics