Activities of Adam JARUBAS related to 2020/2043(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
A WTO-compatible EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (debate)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT towards a WTO-compatible EU carbon border adjustment mechanism
Amendments (20)
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Paris Agreement, the Green Deal and the goal of achieving climate neutrality by 2050; notes the lack of international climate effortssignificant divergence of climate efforts between different countries; underlines that EU climate policy must go hand in hand with increased economic growth and competitiveness for the European industry based on the principles of free and fair competition; believes that an EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (‘the mechanism’) cshould serve to incentivise international efforts to combat climate change, therefore asks the Commission to consider all available options while drawing up proposal for any such mechanism;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Acknowledges that the primary purpose of the carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) must be to enable internationally effective carbon pricing schemes, to mitigate the leakage dilemmaprovide a level playing field for decarbonisation costs by applying the adequate price for Indirect Carbon Influx (carbon footprint of goods consumed in the EU and produced in theird countext of the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS)ries) along with the 'polluter pays' principle and thereby reducing EU and global GHG emissions and to prevent distortions to competition and trade upholding competitiveness of European industries; stresses that the CBAM will help the EU to meet its climate targets while keeping a level playing field inon EU international tradel market for goods produced in EU and imported ones, with the aim of galvanising the rest of the world into taking climate action in line with Paris Agreement;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Underlines that the introduction of CBAM has to be based on a thorough Impact Assessment which takes into consideration the impact of CBAM on competitiveness of European exporters, the reaction of countries and suppliers outside the European Union and possible counter measures taken by affected third countries against European industries to ensure access to export markets
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Recalls that the EU economy is facing the biggest global economic crisis since the Great Depression with companies all over Europe hit especially hard; stresses that especially at this time EU climate policy must be aligned to economic growth and competitiveness for the European industry and SMEs; Emphasizes that, as a result of the EU's increased ambition on climate change, risk of carbon leakage increased consequently; Therefore urges the Commission to ensure full carbon- leakage protection in all its policies accordingly; Stresses, taking into account the reasons mentioned, that the CBAM must not replace existing carbon leakage measures under the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), which are competitiveness measures in character, but should work as an addition alongside them while not leading to double protection;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Underlines that international carbon pricing and fully competitive low-emission solutions would render the mechanism obsolete; stresses, therefore, that the EU needs to step up efforts in this respect; recalls that many technical solutions for mitigating CO2 are still at the pilot stage and far from being economically feasible; underlines that the Union’s increased climate ambition at the core of the Green Deal will increase the risk of carbon leakage in many industrial sectors;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Takes note of various prudent revenue estimates ranging from 5 to 14 billion EUR per year, depending on the scope and design of the new instrument; points out that while finally covering a vast majority of imports and thus providing higher revenues, as a starting point it should gradually cover certain sectors of economy chosen according to thorough Impact Assessment; highlights the fact that the EU budget is in any event uniquely suited to absorbing fluctuations of revenue or even long-term regressive effects;
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises that decentralised climate actions can lead to carbon leakage and a competitive disadvantage on international markets for the EU industry; urges the Commission, therefore, to implement the mechanism as a complementary tool to existing carbon measures to ensure full carbon-leakage protection and to consider the inclusion of export rebates in the mechanism;
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises that decentralisedasymmetrical climate actions can lead to carbon leakage and a competitive disadvantage on international markets for the EU industry; urges the Commission, therefore, to ensure full carbon-leakage protection and to consider the inclusion ofinclude export rebates in the mechanism;
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Recalls that the EU’s climate policy and industrial policy must go hand in hand, to avoid carbon and investment leakage and protect jobs; stresses that any mechanism must be embedded into our industry strategy, creating an incentive for industries to produce clean and competitive products, and avoid carbon leakage, without endangering trade opportunities.
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Suggests a progressive mechanism that first includes sectors with the highest risk of carbon leakage before being enlarged over time; stresses that this should not lead to internal market distortionHighlights the role such a mechanism could play, if balanced and appropriately implemented, in energy intensive industries, such as steel, cement and aluminium, given the experienced trade exposure of those sectors and their participation in the ETS; Suggests a progressive mechanism that first includes sectors with the highest risk of carbon leakage before being enlarged over time if deemed appropriate; considers it necessary that the scope of the mechanism covers as a large part of the carbon footprint of a product as possible, i.e. through the inclusion of emissions from energy in production; stresses that this should be done considering their respective value chains and not lead to internal market distortions notably on downstream markets; recalls that determining the carbon footprint of a product includes several insecurities and that the mechanism should not contribute to an undue regulatory burden for importing companies especially SMEs;
Amendment 60 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Suggests a progressive mechanism that first includes sectors with the highest risk of carbon leakage before being enlarged over time; stresses that this shoulsuch mechanism should be applied to all third countries without a carbon trading scheme ideally linked to the EU ETS or equivalent carbon pricing mechanism and not lead to internal market distortions;
Amendment 67 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses the need to limit international retaliation measures against the EU caused by the mechanism; urges the Commission to make the mechanism World Trade Organization-compatible ongly emphasises that the success of European SMEs and Hidden Champions depends on access to global markets. Therefore, calls on the Commission to base any legislative proposal on a thorough impact assessment, which takes into consideration the impact of possible counter measures taken by affected third countries against European industries Stresses the need to limit and possibly avoid international retaliation measures against the EU caused by the mechanism; urges the Commission to make the mechanism compatible with the WTO acquis and provisions in the Union’s free trade agreements and to take a multilateral approach to its design; underlines the need to deduct costs incurred from carbon taxes, emissions rights under cap-and- to take a multilateral approach to its desrade schemes or equivalent climate mitigation measures, including those of a regulatory rather than a fiscal nature, in the country of production from payments at import under the mechanism and to avoid any discrimination based on origin;
Amendment 70 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Expresses its deep concern over the erosion of the multilateral trading system and the effects from increased trade barriers and trade conflicts for the competitiveness of the EU industry; stresses that the introduction of a mechanism must not contribute to an increased insecurity in this regard; recognises that in order for the European industry to be competitive, it needs access to global supply chains for sourcing and further processing and to global markets; calls on the Commission to actively engage with trade partners’ governments to ensure a continued dialogue with trade partners’ governments on this initiative; Underlines that trade policy can and should be used to promote a positive environmental agenda and to avoid major differences in environmental ambition between the EU and the rest of the world, but this should be done in proportional and balanced ways, be evidence based and not be used as a cover for protectionism;
Amendment 76 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Emphasises that while the purpose of the mechanism must be to contribute to lower carbon emissions globally and limit carbon leakage, the design should contribute to a level playing field for the European industry both on European and in international markets in line with the Industry Strategy; highlights the need for specific attention to maintaining the availability of inputs in the supply chains and competitiveness of downstream manufacturing industries;
Amendment 79 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. Emphasises that the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) is and should remain the key market based instrument to cost-effectively reduce CO2 emissions this includes the system of free allowances; asks the Commission to consider any design options that allow the existing carbon leakage measures to co- exist with the mechanism while not leading to double protection; therefore takes the view that the mechanism should co-exist together with the free allocation of allowances for certain sectors; the phasing out of existing carbon leakage measures could cause a loss of competitiveness of companies in the single market and globally; stresses the need for equally effective measures if existing measures are to be phased out.
Amendment 90 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines that the resources incurred by the mechanism are to be considered EU own resources; is convinced that these resources must be used for climate measuresmust not create distortions based on the Member State of import but help level the global playing field between competing industries and for low carbon investment and industrial manufacturing transformation;
Amendment 105 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to conduct an in-depth impact assessment of different mechanisms and designsalternatives before presenting a legislative proposal; including regulatory climate standards for imported products and the compatibility with EU ETS’s free allocation of allowances, to incentivise international climate action and prevent carbon leakage before presenting a legislative proposal.
Amendment 111 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Calls on the Commission to intensify its efforts for global CO2 pricing and facilitating trade in climate and environmental protection technologies for instance through trade policy initiatives such as the WTO Environmental Goods Agreement; stresses that the Union can play a pioneering role with ambitious energy and sustainability chapters in its trade agreements.
Amendment 116 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Calls on the Commission to also consider alternative measures and to thoroughly demonstrate the added value of a carbon border adjustment mechanism; considers that a digital product passport, well designed and synchronised with existing systems, business standardisation bodies and global standards could help in this process; in the post-COVID-19 economy, carbon prices may prove to be too unstable to support effective industrial decarbonisation; therefore, there is a need for product policies to push forward new standards on low-carbon, resource- efficient products to secure the transition to a sustainable economy.