Activities of Bogdan RZOŃCA related to 2020/2043(INI)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION towards a WTO-compatible EU carbon border adjustment mechanism
Amendments (10)
Amendment 12 #
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 dilemma in the context ofpromote global climate ambition with regard to reducing emissions, compliment the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) and to prevent distortions to competition and trade; stresses that the CBAM will help the EU to meet its climate targets while keeping a level playing field in international trade, with the aim of galvanising the rest of the world into taking and remaining open to multilateral approaches that contribute effectively to global climate action in line with the Paris Agreement;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Believes that the main aim of the carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) should be to support the EU’s green objectives by fighting carbon leakageglobal GHG emissions, enabling just transition and pursuing the key objective of the strategic resilience of the EU;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Underlines the importance of designing, from the outset, the CBAM in a WTO-compliant manner, including ensuring non-discrimination of foreign exporters; notes that should new own resources be vulnerable to legal challenge they threaten the ability of the EU to appropriately and prudently engage in budgetary planning;
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Proposes that - to achieve the WTO requirements of non-discrimination of foreign exporters - the CBAM be implemented as an extension ofcomplementary mechanism to the EU emissions trading system (EU ETS), which wouldfor example by requireing importers to purchase allowances similar to the ETS for the volume of carbon emissions incorporrelated into their products; notes that the mechanism should ensure a single carbon price, both for domestic producers and importers;
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the fact that the CBAM, if used as a basis for an own resource, would bring the revenue side of the EU budget into closer alignment with strategic policy objectives such as delivering a just transition, supporting the European Green Deal, the fight against climate change and facilitating the growth of the circular economy, and that it would thereby help to generate co- benefits, incentives and EU added value;
Amendment 38 #
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; highlights the fact that the EU budget is in any event uniquely suited to absorbing fluctuations of revenue or even long-term regressive effects; considers that it may be beneficial to phase the implementation of the CBAM, beginning with pilot sectors, such as steel, cement, fertilisers and electricity, prior to broader application to all imports; further considers that this may allow for an assessment of the economic impact across the Member States, and for corrective action in the event that disproportionate negative impacts are felt in any European region;
Amendment 50 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Urges that the proposed CBAM eventually apply to all imports in order to avoid distortion in the internal market, starting with a few pilot sectors, such as steel, cement, fertilizers and electricity;
Amendment 58 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recommends that a design be introduced that measures the carbon content of imports through their basic materials composition (as outlined in the proposal from the European Economic and Social Committee); recalls that this feasible approximation would weigh each basic material covered by the EU ETS and multiply it by its carbon intensity value – which ideally should be defined at country levelimposes CBAM on any carbon footprint of imports above an EU benchmark; stresses, however, that importers who are more carbon efficient should be allowed to demonstrate the specific carbon intensity of their products;
Amendment 72 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Requests that the implementcalculation of the CBAM should lead to the progressive phasing out of be reconciled withe free allocation of allowances, following an appropriate transition period, since the mechanismsince this approach would ensures that EU producers and importers would have to deal with the same carbon costs in the EU market; notes that this phasing out should be coupled in parallel with the introduction of export rebates in order to maintain strong decarbonisation incentives, while ensuring a level playing field for EU exportapproach would avoid the problems with the WTO-consistency of export rebates;
Amendment 93 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Stresses that introduction of measures utilising indirect tax policy have to be taken with due regard to the economic and social impact and the specifics of national economies of Member States and, foresee appropriate transitional period, to ensure a smooth transition and avoid economic shocks;