- within Transport topic(s)
- in United States
- within Transport, Government, Public Sector, Litigation and Mediation & Arbitration topic(s)
As the International Maritime Organization (IMO) prepares to vote this week (October 14-17, 2025) on final adoption of a mandatory Net-Zero Framework (NZF) for reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the global shipping sector, the United States has reiterated its profound disagreement with the NZF. In a joint statement by Secretary of State Rubio, Secretary of Energy Wright, and Secretary of Transportation Duffy entitled "Taking Action to Defend America from the UN's First Global Carbon Tax – the International Maritime Organization's (IMO) "Net-Zero Framework," the US has leveled specific threats against any countries that vote to adopt the proscriptive mandates of the NZF at this week's meeting of the IMO Maritime Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) Second Extraordinary Session (MEPC /ES.2).
The high-profile animosity of the US to the NZF dates back to the MEPC's 83rd Session (MEPC 83) in April 2025, during which the US delegation dramatically walked out of deliberations in protest of the proposed NZF framework. Notwithstanding this unusual diplomatic maneuver, the proposed NZF was adopted by simple majority vote in MEPC 83 (63 countries approving, 16 rejecting and 24 abstaining), setting forth a two-prong framework for meeting the IMO's goal of net-zero carbon reduction from international shipping by 2050:
- A global fuel standard that requires ships to gradually reduce how polluting its ship fuel can be (i.e. how much greenhouse gas is emitted for each unit of energy used, across a fuel's life cycle); and
- A pricing mechanism with set prices on the GHG ships emit, to encourage the industry to lower emissions to comply with the global fuel standard.
Shortly after the April vote, the US expressly formalized what the delegation's walkout had implicitly symbolized in an August 2025 statement from the same triumvirate (Secretaries Rubio, Wright and Duffy) reemphasizing the US's fundamental opposition to the NZF: "Whatever its stated goals, the proposed framework is effectively a global carbon tax on Americans levied by an unaccountable UN organization. These fuel standards would conveniently benefit China by requiring the use of expensive fuels unavailable at global scale ... Our fellow IMO members should be on notice that we will look for their support against this action and not hesitate to retaliate or explore remedies for our citizens should this endeavor fail."
And now, ahead of this week's vote to codify the NZF as a final, mandatory framework, the US has doubled down with a specifically enumerated range of punitive sanctions that may be levied against any countries that vote to approve the NZF:
- Pursuing investigations and considering potential regulations [both ostensibly via the Federal Maritime Commission] to combat anti-competitive practices from certain flagged countries and potential blocking vessels registered in those countries from US ports;
- Imposing visa restrictions including an increase in fees and processing, mandatory re-interview requirements and/or revisions of quotas for C-1/D maritime crew member visas;
- Imposing commercial penalties stemming from US government contracts including new commercial ships, liquified natural gas terminals and infrastructure, and/or other financial penalties on ships flagged under nations in favor of the NZF;
- Imposing additional port fees on ships owned, operated, or flagged by countries supporting the framework; and
- Evaluating sanctions on officials sponsoring activist-driven climate policies that would burden American consumers, among other measures under consideration.
Notably, the above list of potential retributive measures for NZF support came on the same day that the Office of the US Trade Representative issued amendments to its Section 310 Action ("China's Targeting of the Maritime, Logistics, and Shipbuilding Sectors for Dominance"). These dual efforts emphasize the Trump Administration's broad-spectrum focus on leveraging the maritime sector as a means of implementing its policy interests at the international level.
The prior April vote for preliminary approval of the NZF was opposed by 16 countries, consisting of Saudi Arabia, on behalf of the delegations of Bahrain, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Malaysia, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, the Russian Federation, Thailand, the United Arab Emirates, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) and Yemen. Prominent among the 63 approving nations were the European Union, China, Japan, Brazil and India.
Heading into this week's decisive approval vote, which will require a ⅔ majority (unlike the prior, preliminary April vote which only required a simple authority), prognosticators have anticipated that the approval block will retain the high-profile nations from April, as well as Canada, the UK, South Korea, Singapore, Chile, and others.
However, it remains to be seen whether and how the US's eleventh-hour ultimatum — forcing those who approve to pay (directly or indirectly) — may affect the voting on what would be an industry-redefining mandate.
President Trump has made it clear that the United States will not accept any international environmental agreement that unduly or unfairly burdens the United States or harms the interests of the American people. Next week, members of the IMO will vote on the adoption of a so-called NZF aimed at reducing global carbon dioxide gas emissions from the international shipping sector. This will be the first time that a UN organization levies a global carbon tax on the world...We will fight hard to protect our economic interests by imposing costs on countries if they support the NZF. Our fellow IMO members should be on notice.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
