Abstract:Discussions about unilateral trade measures as a means to combat climate change have become quite fashionable notwithstanding warnings against unilateralism and protectionism from the leaders of G-8 and G-20 in times of an economic crisis. A system of ‘border tax adjustment’ on imports is suggested in order to countervail the cost of domestic emission trading systems. The proponents argue that without such measures, a country having adopted an emission trading system would not only lose economically but also environmentally. The standard reason given to justify this argument is the notion of carbon leakage, namely, the danger that energy-intensive production would move from countries with domestic policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions based on a carbon price for emitters to regions that do not have a binding and costly regulatory CO2 regime. Recently, the discussions have been fuelled by the Waxman/Markey Bill, adopted on 26 June 2009 by the House of Representatives and by a French non-paper, presented at the informal EU Environment Council held in July 2009. These two initiatives aim to establish, in the context of a domestic emission trading system, a system of ‘border tax adjustment’ against some imports from some countries, namely, those that are seen as not contributing enough in the fight against climate change. The revised European ETS Directive does not provide for border measures. It instructs the European Commission to submit a report to the Council and the European Parliament no later than 30 June 2010 assessing whether energy-intensive sectors are exposed to a significant risk of carbon leakage and explicitly outlines the inclusion of imports in the European Union’s ETS system as one of several actions. The joint WTO-UNEP paper on trade and climate change has been widely regarded as a justification from a legal point of view of such measures. While there are many proponents for such measures, there remains a considerable amount of skepticism; politicians, business organizations, and scholars have warned against such an approach. The following short note will discuss the feasibility of ‘border tax adjustment’ in relation to domestic climate change legislation as well as some WTO legal aspects along the following questions: (1) Are there target countries for border measures? (2) Would border measures help to combat climate change and could they be administered without too much bureaucracy? (3) How should border measures be qualified under General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)?

Mitigating Carbon Leakage: Combining Output-Based Rebating with a Consumption Tax

The economics of carbon leakage mitigation policies

Optimal Energy Taxes and Subsidies under a Cost-Effective Unilateral Climate Policy: Addressing Carbon Leakage

Opimal Unilateral Climate Policy with Carbon Leakage at the Extensive and the Intensive Margin

Border Tax Adjustment to Combat Carbon Leakage: A Myth

Alleviating Adverse Implications of EU Climate Policy on Competitiveness: The Case for Border Tax Adjustments or the Clean Development Mechanism?

Carbon Tax vs. Carbon Cap-and-Trade: Implementation of carbon border tax in cross-regional production

Between a Rock and a Hard Place: A Trade-Theory Analysis of Leakage Under Production- and Consumption-Based Policies

The Economics of Border Carbon Adjustment: Rationale and Impacts of Compensating for Carbon at the Border

Complementary taxation of carbon emissions and local air pollution

Accounting for Carbon Pricing in Third Countries Under the EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism

Optimal unilateral climate policy with carbon leakage at the extensive and the intensive margins

Is there a case for carbon-based border tax adjustment? An applied general equilibrium analysis

Export Rebates and the EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism: WTO Law and Environmental Objections

EU in Search of a Wto-Compatible Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism

Optimal pricing for carbon dioxide removal under inter-regional leakage

Carbon Leakage, Consumption, and Trade

Border carbon adjustment (BCA) and heterogeneous firms trade

DESIGNING A GLOBALLY ACCEPTABLE CARBON TAX SCHEME TO ADDRESS COMPETITIVENESS AND LEAKAGE CONCERNS

The Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism is Inefficient in Addressing Carbon Leakage and Results in Unfair Welfare Losses

Could the EU carbon border adjustment mechanism promote climate mitigation? An economy-wide analysis