UN’s global shipping carbon tax threatens U.S. economy — Trump officials mount last-ditch effort to block it

• The UN’s International Maritime Organization (IMO) is set to impose a carbon tax on shipping fuel, ranging from 19 to 150 per ton of CO2 emissions, potentially doubling fuel costs for cargo ships.
• The Biden administration backed the 2023 IMO GHG Strategy, but Trump officials are now fighting to block enforcement, warning it will worsen inflation and hurt working-class families.
• The U.S., as the world’s largest importer, would bear the heaviest burden, raising prices on food, fuel and clothing—while China, the top shipbuilder, stands to benefit.
• The Trump administration is threatening tariffs, visa bans and port fees against nations supporting the tax, while pushing for Senate approval before any UN tax takes effect.
• Critics argue the tax is not about climate but globalist control, designed to weaken U.S. economic sovereignty while enriching UN bureaucracies.

The United Nations, through its International Maritime Organization (IMO), is on the verge of imposing a carbon tax on shipping emissions—a move that could double fuel costs for cargo vessels and send consumer prices soaring on everything from groceries to gasoline. With the U.S. as the world’s largest importer, American families would bear the brunt of this regulatory overreach, worsening inflation and economic instability. The Biden administration previously endorsed the IMO’s “net-zero” shipping plan, but now, Trump officials are mounting a fierce resistance, warning that the policy is less about climate and more about globalist control.

How the UN’s carbon tax would hit American wallets

The proposed carbon levy, set at 19 to 150 per ton of CO2 emissions, would force shipping companies to pass costs onto consumers, driving up prices for essential goods. Analysts predict fuel costs could double, adding hundreds of billions in expenses to global trade. Since the U.S. imports more goods than any other nation, the economic fallout would be disproportionately severe, hitting working-class families hardest.

Meanwhile, China—the world’s largest shipbuilder—stands to profit from the new regulations, as demand for “green-compliant” vessels surges. Critics argue the tax is another example of global elites leveraging climate policy to redistribute wealth and weaken U.S. sovereignty.

Trump’s last-ditch effort to stop the tax

The Trump administration is deploying an aggressive strategy to block the IMO’s carbon tax, including:

• Threatening trade sanctions against nations that support the measure
• Demanding Senate ratification before any UN tax is enforced
• Pushing for an “explicit adoption” rule, requiring countries to reaffirm support before implementation

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has called the plan a “European-led neocolonial export” of climate regulations, warning that it would entrench unpopular policies before voters can reject them. The administration is also rallying opposition from Brazil, Saudi Arabia and other nations concerned about rising consumer costs.

Climate policy or global power grab?

The IMO’s carbon tax is framed as an environmental measure, but critics see it as a stealth wealth transfer to UN bureaucracies. The proposed “Net Zero Fund” would collect billions annually, with vague promises to support “green shipping innovation” and “climate justice” in developing nations—raising concerns about corruption and mismanagement.

Historically, UN-led climate policies have prioritized centralized control over national sovereignty, and this tax follows the same pattern. With global inflation already surging, the additional financial burden could destabilize economies while doing nothing measurable to reduce global temperatures.

A fight for economic freedom

The UN’s shipping carbon tax is not just another climate policy—it’s a direct assault on U.S. economic independence. By driving up costs for businesses and consumers, it would weaken America’s position in global trade while empowering unelected globalists to dictate financial policy.

The Trump administration’s resistance marks a critical stand against taxation without representation. If successful, it could halt the UN’s power grab and protect American families from another wave of inflation. But if the IMO pushes forward, the U.S. may face a stark choice: submit to globalist control or withdraw entirely from the organization.

One thing is clear—this battle is far from over.

Sources for this article include:

ClimateDepot.com

EENews.net

WSJ.com