By Eric Huang.    

On July 14, 2021, the European Union officially introduced the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), mandating that carbon-intensive products imported into the EU must acquire certificates (CBAM Certificates) to sell in the European market. Meanwhile, the United States' "Clean Competition Act" (CCA), imposing carbon tariffs on imported goods, has been scheduled for discussion. If successfully enacted, it poses another concern for businesses. The US CCA and the EU CBAM are distinct yet interrelated policies both aimed at addressing climate change and reducing carbon emissions. CCA refers to the US's Carbon Pollution Reduction Goals, while CBAM is the EU's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism. While both target carbon emission reduction, significant differences exist in their design, implementation, and impact.

Let's begin by examining the United States' Carbon Pollution Reduction Goals (CCA). The US has been actively addressing climate change, with CCA being a crucial policy tool. This initiative aims to achieve climate goals by reducing greenhouse gas emissions such as carbon dioxide and other pollutants. CCA seeks to encourage emission reduction among businesses by setting emission limits or carbon pricing and incentivizing investments in clean energy and low-carbon technologies.

On the other hand, the EU's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) operates differently. Its primary objective is to ensure that goods imported into the EU comply with the EU's greenhouse gas emission standards and prevent carbon leakage. The mechanism imposes carbon tariffs on imported goods calculated based on their carbon footprint and the carbon allowances required internally within the EU. This measure aims to ensure that the production of imported goods does not unfairly compete with EU internal businesses due to lower emission standards in their places of production.

From a policy design perspective, CCA and CBAM focus on different aspects and employ different methods. CCA primarily concentrates on domestic greenhouse gas reduction by leveraging internal carbon markets and regulations. In contrast, CBAM centers on the carbon border, ensuring that imported goods' production aligns with EU environmental standards while safeguarding EU businesses from external product competition.

The implementation and impact of these two systems also differ. CCA directly affects US domestic enterprises and markets by influencing decision-making and behavior through internal carbon markets and restrictions. Conversely, CBAM might have a more direct impact on the EU's import trade, particularly for export-dependent countries and enterprises relying on the EU market. This could lead to increased import prices and potentially trigger trade disputes and international tensions.

Despite their differing focuses and methods, these policies share common ground. Both aim to drive greenhouse gas emission reductions and promote cleaner, more sustainable production, and consumption patterns. This reflects a global collective concern for addressing climate change and reducing carbon footprints, employing different approaches and strategies among nations to achieve this shared goal.

In conclusion, CCA and CBAM represent two distinct approaches to addressing climate change and reducing carbon emissions. They each possess unique designs and impacts, yet both signify the global effort in seeking solutions to combat climate change. Moving forward, as global climate change issues intensify, these policies and related measures will continue to draw attention and exert significant influence on the international political and economic landscape.

Appreciate if you could share TGL Blog among your friends who are interested in first-hand market information of supply chain and updated economic incidents.