2020/2043(INI) | [ParlTrack]

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)

-1. Whereas the Article XX of the GATT allows WTO members to implement measures that are necessary to protect human, animal or plant life or health (b), or natural resources (g);

Amendment 10 #

Draft opinion
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 efforts; believes that, if carefully designed within a comprehensive policy package and accompanied by stronger action in multilateral coordination, an EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (‘the mechanism’) could incentivise international efforts to combat climate change;

Amendment 100 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission to conduct an impact assessment of different mechanisms and designs, including a Charge on Added Emissions or similar carbon charges, to incentivise international climate action and prevent carbon leakage before presenting a legislative proposal. ; stresses that this study should carefully assess the cross- border effects of the mechanism and its potential burden on neighbouring countries and international partners, especially developing countries; calls on the Commission to come forward with initiatives for minimising the burden on international partners through information and cooperation, thus reinforcing EU leadership in the global fight against climate change;

Amendment 101 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission to conduct an thorough impact assessment ofn different mechanisms and designs ~~to incentivis~~, including a carbon tax on consumption and carbon footprint requirements in public procurement, before presenting a legislative proposal in order to evaluate in how far they incentivize international climate action and prevent carbon- leakage ~~before prese~~; the assessment should also analyse the possibility to transitionally maintain~~g a legislative proposal.~~ free allowances under the ETS and/or electricity price compensation while slowly phasing in the mechanism;

Amendment 102 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission to conduct an impact assessment of different mechanisms and designs to incentivise international climate action and prevent carbon leakage before presenting a legislative proposal, taking into consideration the risk of relocation of companies, of strategic sectors, of unfair competition from member states and third countries. Carry out an in-depth analysis of the compatibility with the multilateral system included in the provisions of the World Trade Organization.

Amendment 103 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission to conduct an in-depth impact assessment o~~f different~~n the environmental impacts of the different forms of possible mechanisms; a~~nd designs to incentivise international climate action and prevent carbon leakage before presenting a~~dvises the Commission to take the environmental criterion as the leading factor in the choice of the form of the mechanism; calls on the Commission to make the results of the impact assessment publicly available as soon as it is possible, and before the publication of its legislative proposal.;

Amendment 104 #

Klemen GROŠELJ, Andrus ANSIP, Christophe GRUDLER, Martina DLABAJOVÁ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission to conduct an impact assessment, which covers the impact of the mechanism on each Member State, of different mechanisms and designs to incentivise international climate action and prevent carbon leakage before presenting a legislative proposal; stresses the need to take the competitiveness of the EU industry in consideration whilst carrying out the impact assessment.

Amendment 105 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission to conduct an in-depth impact assessment of different mechanisms and ~~designs~~alternatives 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 106 #

7. Calls on the Commission to conduct an impact assessment of different mechanisms and designs to incentivise international climate action and prevent carbon leakage before presenting a legislative proposal.; calls on the Commission, in its impact assessment, to identify measures for sectors where the risk of carbon leakage is highest;

Amendment 107 #

Manuel BOMPARD, Marisa MATIAS, Cornelia ERNST, Sira REGO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission to conduct an impact assessment of different mechanisms and designs to incentivise international climate action and prevent carbon and investment leakage before presenting a legislative proposal.

Amendment 108 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Considers that the carbon border adjustment mechanism must complement the wide range of other mechanisms that promote decarbonisation and cannot be sufficient on its own to achieve the European Union's climate objectives; underlines the need to accompany the mechanism with an ambitious industrial policy that is both environmentally ambitious and socially fair, as well as with an action plan for circular economy, and the implementation of the Just Transition Mechanism aimed at assisting the most affected regions by the transition efforts;

Amendment 109 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Recalls the good results achieved by the Union in increasing energy and resource efficiency through product requirements and labelling, which were able to stimulate responsible consumption, engage European citizens and support industrial competitiveness and innovation by promoting the better environmental performance of products; calls on the Commission to draw on this experience and explore analogous measures that could complement or replace the mechanism;

Amendment 11 #

Draft opinion
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 efforts; believes that an EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (‘the mechanism’) which is compatible with World Trade Organisation agreements could incentivise international efforts to combat climate change only in the absence of progress towards a global CO2 price;

Amendment 110 #

Markus PIEPER, Massimiliano SALINI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Emphasises the importance of the European Parliament to ensure the representation of European citizens and interests, as well as for the achievement of EU priorities such as climate protection and international competitiveness; therefore calls on the Commission and the Council to fully involve the European Parliament as co-legislator in the legislative process to establish the mechanism.

Amendment 111 #

Draft opinion
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 112 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Underlines that existing carbon leakage protection mechanisms are effective, should be maintained and even extended where needed; the phasing out of existing mechanism could cause a loss of competitiveness of companies in the single market and globally; stresses the need for equally effective measures if existing measure are to be phased out.

Amendment 113 #

Klemen GROŠELJ, Andrus ANSIP, Christophe GRUDLER, Martina DLABAJOVÁ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Calls for a special evaluation of the impact of the mechanism on SMEs and on competition within the internal market; calls for the creation, if needed, of a support mechanism for SMEs to successfully adjust to the new market reality, thereby preventing them from being victims of unfair practices by larger market players;

Amendment 114 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Acknowledges that the mechanism is in principle trade restrictive, the impact assessment should look into the ease with which the mechanism could be adjusted or removed once breakthrough technologies reach global marketability, global climate ambitions are converged or when retaliation occurs;

Amendment 115 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Calls on the Commission to carefully examine the implications of a carbon border tax for the European emissions trading system (ETS) and its possible effects on company competitiveness;

Amendment 116 #

Draft opinion
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.

Amendment 117 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7b. Stresses that, whereas it is crucial for the mechanism to be manageable, cost-efficient and explainable to the Union´s international partners, its primary goal is to cut direct and indirect emissions by targeting processes and production methods of products consumed in the EU, regardless of their origin; calls on the Commission to explore the best available digital solutions, including distributed ledger technologies, to ensure product traceability and that emissions accounts are as close to reality as possible;

Amendment 118 #

Klemen GROŠELJ, Andrus ANSIP, Christophe GRUDLER, Martina DLABAJOVÁ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7b. Stresses that, regardless of its nature, the implementation of the mechanism will have to be accompanied by a set of standards that would prevent the mechanism from being bypassed and ensure its effective application;

Amendment 119 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7b. Underlines that the mechanism should reflect and be commensurate with the internal EU carbon price;

Amendment 12 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Welcom~~Acknowledges the Paris Agreement, the Green Deal and the EU collective goal of achieving climate neutrality by 2050; notes the lack of international climate efforts; believes that an EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (‘the mechanism’) could incentivise international efforts to combat climate change;

Amendment 120 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)

7c. Underlines that there should be a clear and ambitious timeline for the implementation and evolution of the mechanism;

Amendment 13 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Notes that the EU is the world’s largest carbon importer and that the carbon content of exported goods from Europe lies well below the carbon content of imported goods; deduces that European efforts to combat climate change are higher than the average international efforts; highlights that in order to measure overall climate impact of the Union the reporting method should not only take into consideration the territorial emissions, but also emissions from the imports to the EU;

Amendment 14 #

Manuel BOMPARD, Marisa MATIAS, Cornelia ERNST, Sira REGO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Stresses that, according the Commission's impact assessment, without removals by carbon sink (forests, soil etc.), the real target for emission reductions is 52,8% by 2030, and not 55%; underlines that, in order to respect the Paris Agreement long-term goal to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, the best available scientific data and the United Nations recommend a reduction of at least 65% by 2030;

Amendment 15 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Stresses that avoiding the risk of carbon leakage is a pre-condition for preserving EU industrial competitiveness, since it contributes to reducing emissions at the global level while keeping jobs and investments in Europe; stresses that strategic sectors such as steel are particularly exposed in terms of impact on their output and investment capacity;

Amendment 16 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. The mechanism (climate tariffs) need to be compatible with World Trade Organisation agreements and, be non- discriminatory and be simple to administer, furthermore, they should also avoid weakening European companies export opportunities to third countries in the form of retaliatory actions;

Amendment 17 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Emphasises that the main goal of the mechanism is to facilitate the achievement of carbon neutrality; underlines that the mechanism should enable European industry to contribute substantially to meeting the climate ambitions of the European Union;

Amendment 18 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Stresses the need to uphold the Union´s climate ambition in line with the 2050 climate neutrality objective and the raised 2030 target while making sure that the polluter-pays principle is consistently applied;

Amendment 19 #

Manuel BOMPARD, Marisa MATIAS, Cornelia ERNST, Sira REGO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Underlines that the Union goals regarding the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions are biased if they ignore the emissions embedded in imported goods and services; expresses its deep worriedness that the lack of objective regarding imported emissions create a phenomenon under which EU emissions are reduced through a transfer of emissions to third countries and the relocation of industrial activities; stresses that the achievement of climate neutrality in the Union by 2050 cannot be achieved at the expense of third countries by relocating polluting industries which are detrimental to the environment and local populations; urges the Commission and Member States to adopt a carbon footprint approach in defining their climate objectives;

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 a (new)

-1a. Whereas the Commission’s communication on the European Green Deal states that the carbon border adjustment mechanism “would be an alternative to the measures that address the risk of carbon leakage in the EU’s Emissions Trading System”;

Amendment 20 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Calls on the Commission to take into account the social dimension of the mechanism in its coming proposal; underlines the need to assess the risks of both intra and extra-EU industrial delocalisation and outsourcing that may be caused by an inadequately designed mechanism; stresses also the need to assess the impact of each options for consumers and end-users in order to ensure fair burden-sharing; favours an option that would ensure that the mechanism incentivises industries to engage in substantial efforts towards the decarbonisation of their manufacturing processes, while protecting them from unfair competition;

Amendment 21 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Underlines that international carbon pricing and fully competitive zero-to-low- emission solutions would render the mechanism obsolete~~; stresses, therefore, that the EU needs to step up efforts in this respect;~~ , as the creation of a carbon border adjustment mechanism will not necessarily ensure the further decarbonisation of affected sectors and materials in Europe and therefore requires additional measures; stresses, therefore, that the EU needs to step up efforts in this respect by adopting more ambitious and effective norms, quotas and standards that would stimulate the development of lead markets for more sustainable industrial materials and products, in particular those with high Capex requirements; calls on the Commission to design this mechanism as part of a comprehensive and long-term oriented policy package that is consistent with achieving a highly energy and resource efficient, fully renewable-based, net-zero GHG economy by 2050 at the latest;

Amendment 22 #

Markus PIEPER, Massimiliano SALINI

Draft opinion
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;~~the mechanism cannot help against indirect carbon- leakage; further underlines that sufficient international climate efforts, such as through an international carbon pricing and fully competitive low-emission technologies, products and production processes will render the mechanism obsolete; encourages the Commission to design the mechanism as a transitional measure and to step up efforts in this respect by establishing a thorough framework to support industry and society in the low-carbon transition and by engaging in climate diplomacy.

Amendment 23 #

Manuel BOMPARD, Marisa MATIAS, Cornelia ERNST, Sira REGO

2. Underlines that international carbon pricing and fully competitive low-emission solutions wcould render the mechanism obsolete; stresses~~, therefore, that the EU needs to step up efforts in this respect~~ that the US decision to pull out of the Paris agreement has strongly undermined global response to climate change; stresses, therefore, that the EU needs to step up efforts in this respect meanwhile implementing the mechanism; recalls that the Union has a historical responsibility regarding the accumulation of greenhouse gas and therefore has a duty to take ambitious climate and environmental actions;

Amendment 24 #

Draft opinion
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 25 #

Draft opinion
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; stresses 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; calls on the Commission to ensure comprehensive and timely carbon leakage protection for all sectors;

Amendment 26 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Underlines that widespread, robust and consistent international carbon pricing and fully competitive low-emission solutions wcould render the mechanism obsolete over time; stresses, therefore, that the EU needs to step up efforts in this respect;

Amendment 27 #

Draft opinion
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;~~

Amendment 28 #

Manuel BOMPARD, Marisa MATIAS, Cornelia ERNST, Sira REGO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Underlines that the mechanism should be part of wider set of policies to enable and promote the investment in low carbon industrial processes, energy efficiency measures and renewable energies to achieve the decarbonisation of industry; suggests to promote, alongside the mechanism, strong public innovation policies excluding support for fossil lock- in technologies and obligations to purchase low carbon materials through public procurement; calls for a revision of EU State Aids rules to ensure proper support to the constitution of a strong decarbonized industrial base in the Union;

Amendment 29 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Large parts of the world, especially system rivals, do not share the EU's ambitious environmental and climate agenda, therefore, demand for European solutions and European companies' competitiveness is eroded on the global market where certain companies and states have considerably lower environmental requirements than those in Europe;

Amendment 3 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 b (new)

-1b. Whereas recently published report by the European Court of Auditors concludes that the current free allocation system under the EU ETS is not providing an incentive for industries to decarbonise;

Amendment 30 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Points to the dilemma arising if such carbon border tax arrangements were to allow for the reimbursement of carbon costs for EU exports at its external borders in the interests of competitiveness; notes that this would undermine the climate protection objective of the tax;

Amendment 31 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Underlines that the mechanism must ensure that the price of imports reflects their true carbon content in line with WTO rules and EU obligations;

Amendment 32 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Stresses that the mechanism should ensure predictability for the European industry, as well as for trading partners;

Amendment 33 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. It is therefore in the interest of European companies to strengthen global environmental requirements, not only because that would be beneficial to companies but also because climate change is a global problem that requires global solutions, the EU should therefore continue to support the establishment of a global price for CO2 emission in line with Article 6 of the Paris Agreement;

Amendment 34 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)

2 c. Emphasises that a large port of the world’s state aid goes to activities that are damaging to the environmental which means that European companies face competition that is distorted and harmful to the environment, at the same time they face increasingly greater pressure to reduce their own negative environmental impacts, therefore, attempts to limit global state support will contribute towards improving the competitiveness of European companies and reducing emissions at the same time;

Amendment 35 #

Manuel BOMPARD, Marisa MATIAS, Cornelia ERNST, Sira REGO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Emphasises that decentralised climate actions can lead to carbon and investments 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 of export rebates in the mechanism;~~ with a mechanism created as an alternative to the current measures against carbon leakage under the EU ETS and to consider the inclusion of export rebates in the mechanism; stresses the need for the mechanism to include the emissions resulting from transport in the carbon content pricing; urges the mechanism to aim for a reduction of EU share of imported emissions, which implies a reduction in value chains and their length;

Amendment 36 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Emphasises that decentralised climate actions can lead to carbon -leakage leading to an increase of global emissions and a competitive disadvantage on international markets for the EU industry~~; urges the Commission, therefore, to ensure full~~ and that they hence put at risk European jobs and value chains; stresses that the EU industry suffers increased economic pressure due to cheap imports from trading partners and the COVID-19 crisis; thus urges the Commission to ensure full and effective climate and carbon-leakage protection and to consider ~~the inclusion of~~ export rebates in the design of the mechanism;

Amendment 37 #

Marek Paweł BALT

Draft opinion
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 ensure full carbon-leakage protection by a design of a carbon border adjustment mechanism as an additional and complementing measure to the existing carbon leakage measures and to consider the inclusion of export rebates in the mechanism;

Amendment 38 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Emphasises that~~Notes that while in theory decentralised climate actions can lead to carbon leakage ~~and a competitive disadvantage on international markets for the EU industry~~, in reality such effects did not occur in the EU1a; urges the Commission, therefore, to ensure ~~full~~a more targeted carbon-leakage protection and to ~~consider the inclusion of export rebates in the mechanism;~~apply the carbon border adjustment mechanism as an alternative to the current measures against carbon leakage under the EU ETS; opposes any introduction of export rebates, which would undermine the incentives for exporting industries to reduce their climate impact; _________________ 1aThere is no evidence of carbon leakage having taken place due to climate policies such as the EU ETS, and ex-ante theoretical predictions have found a very limited risk in the future.

Amendment 39 #

Draft opinion
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, the~~refore,~~ Parliament and the Council to ensure full carbon-leakage protection by designing and adopting a carbon border adjustment mechanism as an additional and complementing measure to the existing carbon leakage measures and to consider the inclusion of export rebates in the mechanism;

Amendment 4 #

Massimiliano SALINI, Markus PIEPER, Marian-Jean MARINESCU, Antonio TAJANI, François-Xavier BELLAMY, Aldo PATRICIELLO, Salvatore DE MEO, Jerzy BUZEK, Adam JARUBAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 c (new)

-1c. Whereas scientific literature reviews show the absence of evidence that the EU ETS had widespread negative or positive effects on the competitiveness of regulated firms, nor is there evidence of significant carbon leakage1a ; _________________ 1aThe impact of the EU Emissions Trading System on competitiveness and carbon leakage: the econometric evidence https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1 080/14693062.2018.1502145.

Amendment 40 #

Draft opinion
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 41 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

Amendment 42 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

Amendment 43 #

Tomas TOBÉ, Eva MAYDELL, Marian-Jean MARINESCU, Pernille WEISS, Maria SPYRAKI, Massimiliano SALINI, Angelika WINZIG, Sara SKYTTEDAL, Ioan-Rareş BOGDAN, Jerzy BUZEK, Pilar del CASTILLO VERA, Maria da Graça CARVALHO, Angelika NIEBLER, Edina TÓTH, Tom BERENDSEN, Hildegard BENTELE, Adam JARUBAS, Henna VIRKKUNEN, Salvatore DE MEO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Emphasises that ~~decentralised~~asymmetrical 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 of~~include export rebates in the mechanism;

Amendment 44 #

Klemen GROŠELJ, Andrus ANSIP, Christophe GRUDLER, Martina DLABAJOVÁ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Emphasises that the introduction of protectionist measures often lead to retaliation with unforeseeable consequences for the competitiveness of companies within the EU. Notes that trade barriers in general lead to lower exports, lower imports and a lower rate of economic growth. Further highlights the need for a balanced and holistic approach, which continues to enable opportunities for trade and investment with the rest of the world and is aware of the fact that the EU has greatly benefited from being one of the most open economies in the world.

Amendment 45 #

Draft opinion
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 46 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Stresses that the mechanism must comply with EU internal market regulations and not cause any additional unnecessary market distortions and red tape, which could limit fair, open and rule-based market competition and have a particularly adverse effect on SMEs or become a tool for protectionism;

Amendment 47 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Acknowledges that if the mechanism is designed and implemented as an import-ETS system, maintaining the existing free allowances would not amount to double protection, especially if importers are able to demonstrate that their imports are at least as efficient as the best in class;

Amendment 48 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Points to the great complexity involved in calculating the carbon costs of end products resulting from a division of labour and cross-border manufacturing processes;

Amendment 49 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Underlines that, in order for the mechanism to meet its climate objective and to ensure its effectiveness, the price per ton of carbon will need to be significantly increased; affirms that the introduction of the mechanism must above all be accompanied by an appropriate revision of the EU-ETS system and full phasing out of free allowances; calls on the Commission to extend the scope of greenhouse gases covered by the EU-ETS system, including methane, and to reflect it in the mechanism; stresses the need to update the benchmarking and calculation methods, based on scientific evidence, and to end speculation in the EU ETS system;

Amendment 5 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the Paris Agreement, as an international commitment to fight climate change and underlines the necessity to conduct a thorough evaluation of all international rulebooks regarding their compatibility with the climate goals; welcomes the European efforts in this regard like the Green Deal and the goal tof achieve a cost-efficient, just, socially balanced and fair transition leading to climate neutrality by 2050~~; notes the lack of international climate efforts~~ at the latest; notes with concern the lack of sufficient ambitious international climate efforts and measures, especially with regard to implementing the decisions made under the Paris Agreement, as well as the withdrawal of the USA from the Agreement; believes that an EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (‘“the mechanism’”) c~~ould incentivi~~an incentivize low-emission imports to the EU, market creation of low- emission technologies and products in the EU, increased international efforts to combat climate change and be a first step towards international carbon pricing as decentralised climate protection measures are not sufficient to combat climate- change;

Amendment 50 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Calls on the Commission to evaluate all operational options of the mechanism, such as a carbon tax on select imported and domestic products, a new carbon duty or tax on imports, or the extension of the EU ETS to imports;

Amendment 51 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Calls on the Commission not to replace existing carbon leakage measures with an untested mechanism which could create considerable uncertainties and risks for European industry, such as retaliatory measures;

Amendment 52 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)

3c. Urges the Commission to coordinate with worldwide EU trading partners such as the US and Australia, whose governments have a different approaches to climate protection and could regards the mechanism as arbitrary and unjustified discrimination, recent trade conflicts with the US have demonstrated what conflict potential there is in unilateral customs tariffs, therefore, an unbalanced "climate tariff" should be very carefully weighed up against the risk of renewed trade disputes with allies and to avoid signalling protectionist measures;

Amendment 53 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 d (new)

3d. Welcomes the announcement of the Chinese Communist Party’s intent to reach climate neutrality by 2060; welcomes this announcement as a success for continued climate diplomacy, furthermore, stresses the importance of climate diplomacy and rejects the notion of climate protectionism;

Amendment 54 #

Draft opinion
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 distortion~~Highlights 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 55 #

Manuel BOMPARD, Marisa MATIAS, Cornelia ERNST, Sira REGO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Suggests a progressive mechanism that first includes sectors which are emissions intensive and with the highest risk of carbon leakage ~~before being enlarged over time; stresses that this should not lead to internal market distortions~~such as clinker, cement, iron, steel, aluminium, some bulk chemicals, pulp, paper and oil refining, before being enlarged over time to encompass all imports; recalls the importance of adopting complementary measures to reduce the emissions intensity of these sectors, such as renovation of the building stock and raw construction material substitution;

Amendment 56 #

Draft opinion
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 distortions; acknowledges however, that for many products it’s difficult to determine and verify a "product carbon footprint", this applies in particularly to complex technical products whose production and supply processes consist of multiple stages;

Amendment 57 #

Massimiliano SALINI, Markus PIEPER, Marian-Jean MARINESCU, Antonio TAJANI, François-Xavier BELLAMY, Aldo PATRICIELLO, Salvatore DE MEO, Jerzy BUZEK, Adam JARUBAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Suggests a progressive mechanism that first includes sectors ~~with the highest~~based on sector’s risk of carbon leakage ~~before being enlarged over time~~, with the potential for emissions abatement in third countries, and limited impact on downstream sectors before being enlarged over time, after a thorough and comprehensive analysis of the mechanism’s impact on the sectors in question and downstream sectors; stresses that this should not lead to internal market distortions;

Amendment 58 #

Marek Paweł BALT

Draft opinion
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 distortions; and should cover imports from all countries not subject to astringent carbon trading scheme of equivalent CO2 emission reduction targets and costs.

Amendment 59 #

Josianne CUTAJAR

Draft opinion
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 distortions; underlines that consumers, especially those of Member States heavily relying on imports from third countries, should be protected from possible higher product prices;

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
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 efforts~~significant 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 60 #

Draft opinion
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 shoul~~such 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 61 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Suggests a progressive mechanism that first includes sectors with the highest ~~risk~~share of carbon ~~leakage~~emissions before being enlarged over time; stresses that this should not lead to internal market distortions; and should be conditional on phasing out free allowances and state aid for indirect cost compensation to these sectors 2a; _________________ 2a CBAM should be an alternative to free allowances under the EU ETS and State Aid. In addition to being double subsidies to industry, it is also unclear and doubtful that both provisions (CBAM and free allowances) would be compatible with WTO rules.

Amendment 62 #

Draft opinion
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 be applied to all third countries that do not have a carbon trading framework linked to the EU schemes and should not lead to internal market distortions;

Amendment 63 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Suggests a progressive mechanism ~~that~~, firstly includesing sectors with the highest risk of carbon -leakage ~~before~~and being enlarged over time; ~~stresses~~believes that such a design could reduce international retaliation and serve as a test phase for EU industry; stresses however that this should not lead to internal market distortions;

Amendment 64 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Suggests a progressive mechanism that first includes sectors with the highest risk of carbon leakage in accordance with the realities of each sector and the maturity of the technology, before being enlarged over time; stresses that this should not lead to internal market distortions;

Amendment 65 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Suggests a progressive and sector- specific 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 distortions;

Amendment 66 #

Manuel BOMPARD, Marisa MATIAS, Cornelia ERNST, Sira REGO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Stresses the need to limit international retaliation measures against the EU caused by the mechanism; urges the Commission to mtake ~~the mechanism World Trade Organization-compatible and to take a multilateral approach to its design~~a multilateral approach to its design; strongly suggests to use the environmental exemption provisions under the Article 20 of the GATT agreement; recalls that over the last decade the World Trade Organization has proven increasingly blocked and bypassed by third States; stresses that the Union has other international obligations, notably under the Paris Agreement; recalls that the European Parliament has declared a climate and environmental emergency and has called on the Commission to ensure that every legislative and budgetary proposals are all fully aligned with the objective of limite global warming to under 1.5°C; calls therefore on the Union to initiate a profound reform WTO rules in order to ensure that world trade is fully aligned with the realisation of the Paris Agreement long-term goal to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre- industrial levels;

Amendment 67 #

Tomas TOBÉ, Maria da Graça CARVALHO, Angelika NIEBLER, Edina TÓTH, Tom BERENDSEN, Hildegard BENTELE, Adam JARUBAS, Henna VIRKKUNEN, Salvatore DE MEO, Eva MAYDELL, Marian-Jean MARINESCU, Pernille WEISS, Maria SPYRAKI, Massimiliano SALINI, Angelika WINZIG, Ioan-Rareş BOGDAN, Jerzy BUZEK, Sara SKYTTEDAL, Pilar del CASTILLO VERA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Str~~esses 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- t~~o take a multilateral approach to its des~~rade 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 68 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Stresses the need to limit international retaliation measures against the EU caused by the mechanism; in order to minimise negative effects on the European trade balance and the EU industry; encourages the Commission to ~~make the mechanism World Trade Organization-compatible~~ensure a level-playing field in international trade paying due respect to the principles of a free and fair global market; thus urges the Commission make the mechanism WTO-compatible, preferably by using articles XX(b)and (g) that allow WTO members to justify GATT-inconsistent measures if these are either necessary to protect human, animal or plant life or health and to ~~tak~~have a multilateral approach to its design by involving international trading partners by making it part of the negotiations for multilateral environmental agreements while taking into consideration the European Union's position as the world's largest trading block; underlines that the mechanism shall not be a prerogative for the EU to foster protectionism vis-a-vis third countries;

Amendment 69 #

Draft opinion
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 and to take a multilateral approach to its design, without prejudice to its effectiveness;

Amendment 7 #

Draft opinion
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 effort~~Regrets the lack of international efforts to achieve climate neutrality; notes that the EU is only responsible for 9% of global GHG emission levels and stresses that EU environmental efforts as well as competitiveness of EU economy will be offset by the non-compliance of other international major producers of GHG emissions unless binding tools are adopted to foster global commitment to reduce pollution levels; believes that an EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (‘the mechanism’) could incentivise international efforts to combat climate change;

Amendment 70 #

Draft opinion
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 71 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Underlines that a well-working mechanism, under which a distinctive definition of the carbon leakage that shall be prevented is included and that puts Europe in the position to fight carbon- leakage, requires a complex design and calculation method to determine carbon contents of products; recognizes that the more complex the mechanism and the calculation of the adjustment needed to be paid by importers, the more effective climate and carbon-leakage protection can be; calls nonetheless on the Commission to consider technical feasibility and the availability of reliable data for and from importers and exporters in case of export rebates; stresses that the European calculation system should not result in disadvantages for European industries;

Amendment 72 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Supports unilateral environmental requirements on developing countries in exchange for market access as an alternative to linking EU tariff-free access in the General System of Preferences scheme not only to ratification and implementation of international environmental conventions but also directly to relevant initiatives in the EU Green Deal;

Amendment 73 #

Manuel BOMPARD, Marisa MATIAS, Cornelia ERNST, Sira REGO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Encourages to minimise risks that exporters to the EU try to avoid the mechanism or compromise its effectiveness, for example by rerouting production between markets or exporting semi-finished goods;

Amendment 74 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Highlights that introduction of CBAM should be seen as increased effort to ensure emissions reductions in addition to existing measures.

Amendment 75 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Calls on the Commission to come up with a design and method of calculation that takes account as much as possible of the actual carbon content of the concerned good ; at the same time the calculation method should not refer to the EU average when establishing the carbon contents of products since that would strongly reduce the effectiveness of the instrument; further notes that the design and calculation method must aim to ensure the most effective climate and carbon-leakage protection, while respecting WTO-rules;

Amendment 76 #

Draft opinion
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 77 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Calls on the Commission not to present a mechanism which undermines the Paris Agreement which allows the definition of CO2 reduction targets to be tailored to individual countries; if the mechanism presented by the Commission aims to balance out the various reduction paths of the individual countries by means of Carbon Border Adjustment, it may possibly undermine the Paris Agreement's approach

Amendment 78 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Stresses that an important objective of the carbon border adjustment mechanism should be creating incentives for third country governments and exporters to reduce their emissions, therefore the potential for reducing greenhouse gas emissions should be an important factor when selecting sectors to be covered by the mechanism;

Amendment 79 #

Tomas TOBÉ, Maria da Graça CARVALHO, Angelika NIEBLER, Edina TÓTH, Tom BERENDSEN, Hildegard BENTELE, Adam JARUBAS, Henna VIRKKUNEN, François-Xavier BELLAMY, Eva MAYDELL, Pernille WEISS, Maria SPYRAKI, Angelika WINZIG, Ioan-Rareş BOGDAN, Jerzy BUZEK, Sara SKYTTEDAL, Pilar del CASTILLO VERA

Draft opinion
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 8 #

1. Welcomes the Paris Agreement, and the Green Deal ~~and the goal of achieving climate neutrality by 2050; notes the lack of international climate efforts~~; supports the achievement of climate neutrality by 2040 and the intermediate goal of reducing CO2 emissions by 65% by 2030; notes the lack of international mechanisms to ensure attainment of climate goals in line with the Paris Agreement; believes that an EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (‘the mechanism’) cshould incentivise international efforts to combat climate change, thereby creating a virtuous circle to combat climate change on an international level;

Amendment 80 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)

5c. Notes that the determination of the carbon content of an end- or intermediate product is difficult due to international value chains; further notes with concern that a mechanism only based on basic materials could lead to a shift in imports towards intermediate and end products not covered by the mechanism and harm the EU industry; points out that the mechanism needs to be designed in way that prevents circumventing behaviour such as resource shuffling or importing semi-finished or end products not covered under the mechanism;

Amendment 81 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)

5c. Observes that since carbon border adjustment mechanism can only secure the competitiveness of the EU industry against competing polluting imports on the domestic EU market and not on export markets, then EU should maintain all existing measures ensuring EU industry’s competitiveness on export markets;

Amendment 82 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 d (new)

5d. Further notes that, in order to prevent unfair competition on the European market, no competitive disadvantages should be created by the mechanism amongst competing materials;

Amendment 83 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 e (new)

5e. Calls on the Commission to provide technical advice and support to industries at home and abroad, especially for SMEs, in setting up reliable greenhouse gas emissions accounting systems for imports and potential export rebates in order to maintain a strong European industry while continuing good relations with trading partners; further calls on the Commission to ensure that importers are allowed to demonstrate low carbon content of their products, giving them the opportunity to lower the carbon payment for these products; call on the Commission to guarantee the feasibility with the ETS;

Amendment 84 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 f (new)

5f. Notes that there is difficulties in collecting verified and reliable data concerning the carbon content of the imported products; stresses the importance of establishing a thorough monitoring, reporting and verification system in order to evaluate the efficiency of the mechanism regarding climate and carbon leakage protection; considers that independent third party verification could be considered as a tool to ensure the reliability of the data;

Amendment 85 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 g (new)

5g. Underlines that the inclusion of importers in the EU ETS by obliging to buy CO2 allowances according to the carbon content of their imports could lead to a significant and unpredictable increase in carbon prices in addition to the increase foreseen by the ETS itself by lower free allocation, the market stability reserve and the linear reduction factor that could facilitate achieving our climate goals in the EU, leading to an unbearable burden for European industry that is unproportioned to the EU industry’s decarbonisation efforts and exacerbating carbon-leakage risks;

Amendment 86 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 h (new)

5h. Believes that the mechanism should take account of the specific situations of least developed countries that have not emitted much historically; stresses that it should not hamper their sustainable development;

Amendment 87 #

Manuel BOMPARD, Marisa MATIAS, Cornelia ERNST, Sira REGO

Draft opinion
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 social and climate measures, including for supporting third countries, particularly developing countries, in their efforts to decarbonize their economies, mitigate and adapt to climate change; stresses the importance of transferring decarbonized technologies towards developing countries; urges Member States to take measures, particularly fiscal measures, to support low-income households and compensate any rise in price on imported goods as a result of the implementation of the mechanism;

Amendment 88 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Underlines that according to the European Parliament resolution of 14 November 2018 on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027,the resources incurred by the mechanism ~~are to~~shall be considered EUuropean own resources; is convinced that these resources ~~must be used for climate measures~~shall be solely used for measures to achieve climate-neutrality, for example carbon- neutral and sustainable industrial production processes, recycling and material efficiency or to finance administrative costs incurred by the mechanism;

Amendment 89 #

Draft opinion
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 measures both within and outside the EU; suggests that these resources could partly feed into the EU's contribution to the adaptation fund for developing countries created by the Paris Agreement;

Amendment 9 #

Manuel BOMPARD, Marisa MATIAS, Cornelia ERNST, Sira REGO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Welcomes~~Recalls the international obligations of the Union under the Paris Agreement,; acknowledges the Green Deal ~~and~~, the goal of achieving climate neutrality by 2050 and the newly announced target of at least 55% reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by 2030; notes the lack of international climate efforts; believes that an EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (‘the mechanism’) could incentivise international efforts to combat climate change;

Amendment 90 #

Draft opinion
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 measures~~must 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 91 #

Draft opinion
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 measures; in particular it should be channelled to the regions covered by the Just Transition Plans;

Amendment 92 #

Draft opinion
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 measures~~to avoid that environmental non-compliance of third countries offsets the competitiveness of EU industry;

Amendment 93 #

Draft opinion
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 measures;~~made available to the member states of the Union; they can be used in sustainable industrial economic growth and job creation.

Amendment 94 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Underlines that the resources incurred by the mechanism are to be considered EU own resources; is convinced that a substantial share of these resources must be used for climate measures;

Amendment 95 #

Markus PIEPER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Underlines that the resources incurred by the mechanism are to be considered at least partially EU own resources; is convinced that these resources must be used for climate measures;

Amendment 96 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Underlines that the resources incurred by the mechanism are to be considered ~~EU own~~Member State resources; is convinced that these resources must be used for climate measures;

Amendment 97 #

Tomas TOBÉ, Henna VIRKKUNEN, François-Xavier BELLAMY, Eva MAYDELL, Pernille WEISS, Maria SPYRAKI, Angelika WINZIG, Ioan-Rareş BOGDAN, Jerzy BUZEK, Sara SKYTTEDAL, Pilar del CASTILLO VERA, Marian-Jean MARINESCU, Maria da Graça CARVALHO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Underlines that the CO2 content of imported products would need to be reliably and precisely determined, inter alia through independent third party verification and if such cannot be provided relevant average data; stresses the need for the mechanism to cover both direct and indirect carbon emissions; reiterates the need for adequate anti- circumvention mechanisms; stresses nevertheless that the mechanism should not lead to excessive administrative burden, especially for small- and medium- sized enterprises.

Amendment 98 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Notes that the mechanism could lead to higher product prices for consumers; underlines that consumers, especially those with low incomes, should not suffer from a higher burden on their purchasing power; calls on the Commission and Member States to assess the potential impacts on living standards, especially those of vulnerable groups of our society, and to establish effective transfer mechanisms;

Amendment 99 #

Marco CAMPOMENOSI, Hervé JUVIN, Danilo Oscar LANCINI, Jean-Lin LACAPELLE, Markus BUCHHEIT

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6b. Stresses the need to consider the complementary role of improved product standards in line with the EU Circular Economy Action Plan; emphasises that product standards can ensure low-carbon, resource-efficient manufacturing as well as help to guarantee minimal negative environmental impacts from product use;

source: 658.773

2020/11/03 INTA 105 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)

-1. whereas, as stated in the TFEU, environmental affairs are a shared competence with Member States;

Amendment 10 #

Joachim SCHUSTER, Kathleen VAN BREMPT, Agnes JONGERIUS, Raphaël GLUCKSMANN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Is con~~vinc~~cerned that a purpose-built ~~trade policy can be an important driver in steering economies towards decarbon~~but highly politically motivated trade policy can be driver towards a planned economy in forcing economies towards decarbonisation and resulting deindustrialisation in order to achieve the climate objectives set in the Paris Agreement and the European Green Deal;

Amendment 100 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Calls for the establishment of a meticulous monitoring mechanism for the CBAM as well as a monitoring and review-process in which the European Parliament is involved to the fullest extent;

Amendment 101 #

Karin KARLSBRO, Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Urmas PAET, Svenja HAHN, Jérémy DECERLE, Jordi CAÑAS, Samira RAFAELA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Notes that special consideration must be taken with regards to least developed countries (LDCs) to make sure that a CBAM does not have negative effects on development;

Amendment 102 #

Joachim SCHUSTER, Kathleen VAN BREMPT, Agnes JONGERIUS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)

5c. 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 economy; 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 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 and that a carbon border adjustment mechanism should be designed as an action complementing actions under TSD chapters of the Union’s FTAs;

Amendment 103 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)

5c. Calls for CBAM revenues to support global and European climate action; revenues could be channelled to different funds, such as: the Rapid Response Fund via a new own resource of the EU, an international climate fund to support least developed countries in their sustainable transition, an innovation fund for sustainable technologies for European industry and the establishment of an independent agency conducting the CBAM;

Amendment 104 #

Karin KARLSBRO, Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Liesje SCHREINEMACHER, Urmas PAET, Svenja HAHN, Jérémy DECERLE, Jordi CAÑAS, Samira RAFAELA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)

5c. Urges the Commission to advance environmental sustainability in the WTO, with the UN SDGs and the Paris Agreement at the core of its work, also by updating the multilateral rules;

Amendment 105 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 d (new)

5d. 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;

Amendment 11 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

Amendment 12 #

Massimiliano SALINI, Andrey KOVATCHEV, Arnaud DANJEAN, Enikő GYŐRI, Angelika WINZIG, Jörgen WARBORN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

Amendment 13 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point 1 (new)

(1) Is convinced that the main objective of a carbon border adjustment mechanism should be to reduce global emissions, while avoiding carbon leakage and upholding competitiveness of European industries.

Amendment 14 #

Marco CAMPOMENOSI, Hervé JUVIN, Danilo Oscar LANCINI, Jean-Lin LACAPELLE, Markus BUCHHEIT

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Highlights that the CBAM should be formulated as a valuable instrument to protect from unfair competition and counterbalance the higher production costs that the EU Green Deal will evoke to EU companies; in this regard, highlights the need to ensure the level playing field for EU companies, as the standards imposed in the EU Green Deal are not equally ambitious in third countries, which has further increased the phenomenon of delocalisation aggravating the problem of ‘‘carbon leakage’’;

Amendment 15 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Highlights the fact that an EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) is exclusively designed to further climate objectives as well as safeguarding a level-playing field and must not be misused as a tool to enhance protectionism, unjustifiable discrimination or restrictions in an already burdened global landscape of international trade;

Amendment 16 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Supports the introduction of a WTO-compatible EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) as a means to strengthen the Union’s principle for free trade; considers that the CBAM can increase equal opportunities in order to achieve more competitive markets in a decarbonising scenario;

Amendment 17 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Warns against a build-up of bureaucracy; calls for the toning-down of measures that are driving European companies from the EU, as part of a strategy for the promotion of European environmental protection concerns at international level;

Amendment 18 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Strongly supports, in the absence of a global carbon price and a multilateral solution, a ~~market-based~~ EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) on condition that it is compatible with EU free trade agreements (FTAs) and WTO rules (by being non- discriminatory and not constituting a disguised restriction on international trade), and that it is proportionate, based on the polluter pays principle and fit for purpose in delivering the climate objectives; notes that GATT rules date back to 1947 and is of the view that those need to be rethought in the present context of climate crisis and the overarching objective of climate neutrality, with a view to allowing the consideration of such features as the carbon foot-print of products for the determination of like-products; for that purpose, calls on the Commission to also propose a reform of trade rules in any climate initiative it will launch in the framework of the WTO;

Amendment 19 #

Marco CAMPOMENOSI, Hervé JUVIN, Danilo Oscar LANCINI, Jean-Lin LACAPELLE, Markus BUCHHEIT

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Supports, in the absence of a global carbon price and a multilateral solution, a market-based EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) on condition that it is compatible with EU free trade agreements (FTAs) and WTO rules (by being non- discriminatory and not constituting a disguised restriction on international trade), and that it is proportionate, based on the polluter pays principle and fit for purpose in delivering the climate objectives; considers that there is an urgent need to pursue a comprehensive reform of the WTO, enabling it to guarantee fair trade while at the same time combating global warming; considers that, in order to be consistent with our climate ambitions, a new approach to the design of our trade relations is urgently required;

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 a (new)

-1a. whereas the European Union in 2017 was the first net importer of CO2 emissions worldwide;

Amendment 20 #

Jean-Lin LACAPELLE, Luisa REGIMENTI, Marco CAMPOMENOSI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Supports, in the absence of a global carbon price and a multilateral solution, a market-based EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) ~~on condition that it is~~, notes that this has been the Commission’s intention for a number of years, but that it has only very recently engaged with stakeholders to set such a mechanism in motion and has yet to flesh it out with any real substance, stresses that this mechanism must be compatible with EU free trade agreements (FTAs) and WTO rules (by being non- discriminatory and not constituting a disguised restriction on international trade), and ~~that it is~~ proportionate, based on the polluter pays principle and fit for purpose in delivering the climate, environment and social objectives;

Amendment 21 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Supports, in the absence of a global carbon price and a multilateral solu~~Question,s a market-based EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) oneven under the condition that it is compatible with EU free trade agreements (FTAs) and WTO rules (by being non- discriminatory and not constituting a disguised restriction on international trade), and that it is proportionate, based on the polluter pays principle and fit for purpose in delivering the climate objectives; underlines that unilateral action by the EU through the introduction of the CBAM may lead to retaliatory measures such as punitive tariffs on European exports, that might cause economic damages and severely impact European producers and companies;

Amendment 22 #

Joachim SCHUSTER, Kathleen VAN BREMPT, Agnes JONGERIUS, Raphaël GLUCKSMANN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Supports, in the absence of a global carbon price and a multilateral solution, a market-based EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM), that applies to imports from all third-countries which are not yet part of an effective cap and trade system with at least equivalent GHG emission reduction targets and costs as under EU-ETS, on condition that it is compatible with EU free trade agreements (FTAs) and WTO rules (by being non- discriminatory and not constituting a disguised restriction on international trade), and that it is proportionate, based on the polluter pays principle and fit for purpose in delivering the climate objectives;

Amendment 23 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Supports, in the absence of a global carbon price and a multilateral solution, a market-based EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) ~~on condition that it is compatible with EU free trade agreements (FTAs) and~~calls for EU free trade agreements (FTAs) to be made compatible with such a mechanism by way of using the respective review clauses in FTAs, in case the FTAs are not yet compatible with such a mechanism ; calls for the CBAM to be compatible with WTO rules (by being non- discriminatory and not constituting a disguised restriction on international trade), and that it is proportionate, based on the polluter pays principle and fit for purpose in delivering the climate objectives;

Amendment 24 #

Massimiliano SALINI, Andrey KOVATCHEV, Arnaud DANJEAN, Enikő GYŐRI, Angelika WINZIG

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Supports, in the absence of a global carbon price and a multilateral solution, a market-based EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM), with regard to imports from all countries not covered by a strict carbon trading system with similar goals and costs for lowering CO2 emissions, on condition that it is compatible with EU free trade agreements (FTAs) and WTO rules (by being non- discriminatory and not constituting a disguised restriction on international trade), and that it is proportionate, based on the polluter pays principle and fit for purpose in delivering the climate objectives;

Amendment 25 #

Emmanuel MAUREL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Supports, in the absence of a global carbon price and a multilateral solution, a market-based EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) on condition that it is compatible with EU free trade agreements (FTAs) and WTO rules (by being non- discriminatory and not constituting a disguised restriction on international trade), and that it is proportionate, based on the polluter pays principle and fit for purpose in delivering the climate objectives; considers that the gradual introduction of CBAM must be linked to the phasing out of free allocation ;

Amendment 26 #

Jan ZAHRADIL, Geert BOURGEOIS

2. Supports, in the absence of a global carbon price and a multilateral solution, a market-based EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) covering imports from countries not subject to a equivalent carbon trading scheme; on condition that it is compatible with EU free trade agreements (FTAs) and WTO rules (by being non- discriminatory and not constituting a disguised restriction on international trade), and that it is proportionate, based on the polluter pays principle and fit for purpose in delivering the climate objectives;

Amendment 27 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Supports, in the absence of a global carbon price and a multilateral solution, a fair and transparent market-based EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) on condition that it is without any question fully compatible with EU free trade agreements (FTAs) and WTO rules (by being non- discriminatory and not constituting a disguised restriction on international trade), and that it is proportionate, based on the polluter pays principle and fit for purpose in delivering the climate objectives;

Amendment 28 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Supports~~Takes note of, in the absence of a global carbon price and a multilateral solution, the Commission’s intent to propose a market-based EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) ~~on condition~~stresses that it ismust be compatible with EU free trade agreements (FTAs) and WTO rules (by being non- discriminatory and not constituting a disguised restriction on international trade), ~~and that it is~~ proportionate, based on the polluter pays principle and fit for purpose in delivering the climate objectives;

Amendment 29 #

Joachim SCHUSTER, Kathleen VAN BREMPT, Agnes JONGERIUS, Raphaël GLUCKSMANN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Supports, in the absence of a global carbon price and a multilateral solution, a market-based EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) on condition that ~~it is compatible with~~ EU free trade agreements will be adapted (FTAs) and WTO rules modernised (by being non- discriminatory and not constituting a disguised restriction on international trade), and that it is proportionate, based on the polluter pays principle and fit for purpose in delivering the climate objectives;

Amendment 3 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. IWelcomes the European goal of achieving a socially just transition to climate neutrality by 2050 as well as the 60%-goal for 2030; notes with concern the lack of ambition in climate efforts in EU trade policy as well as in many other policy spheres; calls for the Paris Agreement and its 1.5 percent goal to become the guiding principle of trade policy to which all trade initiatives must be adjusted; is convinced that such a purpose-built trade policy can be an important driver in steering economies towards decarbonisation in order to achieve the climate objectives set in the Paris Agreement and the European Green Deal;

Amendment 30 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

Amendment 31 #

Karin KARLSBRO, Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Liesje SCHREINEMACHER, Urmas PAET, Svenja HAHN, Jérémy DECERLE, Jordi CAÑAS, Samira RAFAELA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

Amendment 32 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 – point a (new)

(a) Believes that the CBAM should preferably not have a direct impact on intra-EU production costs, also in order to avoid unfair competition on third-country markets.

Amendment 33 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Commits to evaluate this proposal together with other options to incentivise international climate action and prevent carbon leakage; therefore asks the Commission to consider alternative measures and to thoroughly demonstrate the added value of a carbon border adjustment mechanism; underlines that the final mechanism can only be supported as long as it can be proven efficient to achieve its environmental objectives and does not harm the competitiveness of European companies vis-a-vis non-European companies, especially on markets outside the EU;

Amendment 34 #

Joachim SCHUSTER, Kathleen VAN BREMPT, Agnes JONGERIUS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Highlights that a technology on the tracing and tracking of the carbon content and performance of complex products could be helpful in the enforcement of a CBAM to those products; believes that the EU has an advantage in developing such a technology, which could then be used as a basis to set an international standard;

Amendment 35 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Underlines that the WTO rules are incompatible with the Paris Agreement; expects the Commission to take urgent initiative for WTO reform in order to achieve compatibility with the climate objectives;

Amendment 36 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Urges the Commission to look to more ways as to increase and develop a carbon market as well as to look for means to prevent subsidies to highly polluting industries, or if necessary to phase them out;

Amendment 37 #

Karin KARLSBRO, Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Liesje SCHREINEMACHER, Svenja HAHN, Jordi CAÑAS, Samira RAFAELA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. notes that any revenue from a EU CBAM must contribute to the aim of reducing global carbon emissions and to ensure WTO compatibility;

Amendment 38 #

Karin KARLSBRO, Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Urmas PAET, Jérémy DECERLE, Jordi CAÑAS, Samira RAFAELA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Believes that the implementation of a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism would fill an essential gap in the EU climate policy and is therefore essential to delivering on the EU’s climate ambition to tackle its carbon footprint;

Amendment 39 #

Massimiliano SALINI, Andrey KOVATCHEV, Arnaud DANJEAN, Enikő GYŐRI, Angelika WINZIG, Jörgen WARBORN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that the general exception clause of Article XX of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) should be the basis for any CBAM design and its only rationale should be an environmental one – reducing global CO2 emissions and preventing carbon leakagea CBAM is not per se WTO-incompatible, in particular with regard to the provisions of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT); underlines the principle of non- discrimination under GATT Article III and that, accordingly, existing measures on carbon leakage under Union law would cease to apply once the CBAM is in force, as this mechanism would apply carbon pricing to imports similar to what is applied to EU installations under the EU ETS; states unequivocally that this mechanism should serve the purpose of achieving the global common climate goals enshrined in the Paris Agreement by better addressing GHG emissions embedded in international trade, thereby incentivising climate action both within the Union and by our trading partners, through reducing global CO2 emissions and preventing carbon leakage; is therefore of the view that CBAM should be regarded as a means to help the acceleration of this process and not as a means for protectionism;

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Is convinced that a purpose-built trade policy can be an important driver in steering economies towards decarbonisation in order to achieve the climate objectives set in the Paris Agreement and the European Green Deal; emphasises that, as a result of the EU’s increased ambition on climate change, risk of carbon leakage increased consequently; urges the Commission to ensure full carbon-leakage protection in all its policies accordingly; stresses that EU climate policy must be aligned to economic growth and competitiveness for the European industry and SMEs;

Amendment 40 #

Jean-Lin LACAPELLE, Luisa REGIMENTI, Marco CAMPOMENOSI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that the general exception clause of Article XX of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) should be the basis for any CBAM design and its ~~only~~main rationale should be: an environmental one – reducing global CO2 emissions and preventing carbon leakage by reducing logistics chains, slowing down global flows and promoting local production and consumption circuits; recommends that the price per tonne of CO2 take account of the real environmental cost of a product, encompassing not only production costs but also transportation costs, which should include a coefficient for actual distance travelled; stresses that this real cost must not only offset the environmental cost of products, but also contribute to bolstering the internal market and providing impetus for reducing the carbon footprint and volume of world trade;

Amendment 41 #

Joachim SCHUSTER, Kathleen VAN BREMPT, Agnes JONGERIUS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that the general exception clause of Article XX of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) shcould be the basis for any CBAM design and its only rationale should be an environmental one – reducing global CO2 emissions and preventing carbon leakage; underlines that a universal system needs to be the final goal of the initiative since decentral climate protection measures will not have the desired effect and would only result in carbon leakage as well as have disadvantageous effects on European industries; thus suggests the externalisation of the European ETS as a possible CBAM; expects the Commission to initiate negotiations for a global approach within the framework of the WTO or the G20;

Amendment 42 #

Emmanuel MAUREL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

Amendment 43 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

Amendment 44 #

Marco CAMPOMENOSI, Hervé JUVIN, Danilo Oscar LANCINI, Jean-Lin LACAPELLE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

Amendment 45 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that the general exception clause of Article XX of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) should be the basis for any CBAM design ~~and its only rationale should be~~, avoiding any arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination between countries where the same conditions prevail with regards of countries which environmental standards might be lower and its rationale should be competitiveness as well as an environmental one – reducing global CO2 emissions and preventing carbon leakage;

Amendment 46 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

Amendment 47 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that to be fully compatible with WTO rules, CBAM should comply with all GATT provisions, including the key principles of most -favoured nation, national treatment and bound tariffs; notes that the general exception clause of Article XX of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) shcould also be the basis for any CBAM design ~~and~~if its only rationale ~~should be~~is strictly an environmental one – reducing global CO2 emissions and preventing carbon leakage;

Amendment 48 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that while the Union should stand ready to use the general exception clause of Article XX of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) as~~hould be~~ the basis for any ~~CBAM design and~~WTO-compatible CBAM design, the CBAM could also be made WTO-compliant as an internal charge, tax or regulation; stresses that its only rationale should be an environmental one – reducing global CO2 emissions and preventing carbon leakage;

Amendment 49 #

Gabriel MATO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

Amendment 5 #

Danilo Oscar LANCINI, Marco CAMPOMENOSI, Markus BUCHHEIT

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. INotes that, while the Union had reduced its domestic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 23.2 % below 1990 levels in 2018, its GHG emissions embedded in international trade have been constantly rising; underlines that the net imports of goods and services in the EU represent more than 20% of the Union’s domestic CO2 emissions; is convinced that a purpose-built trade policy can be an important driver in steering economies towards decarbonisation in order to achieve the climate objectives set in the Paris Agreement and the European Green Deal;

Amendment 50 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that the general exception clause of Article XX of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) should be the basis for any CBAM design and its ~~only~~ rationale should be ~~an environmental one –~~ reducing global CO2 emissions and preventing carbon leakage; while protecting the competitiveness of the EU industrial sectors in Europe and worldwide;

Amendment 51 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that the general exception clause of Article XX of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) should be the basis for any CBAM design and its only rationale should be an environmental one – ~~reducing global CO2 emissions and preven~~hence it should not be established as an immediate alternative to the EU-ETS and the related existing carbon leakage; measures.

Amendment 52 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

Amendment 53 #

Joachim SCHUSTER, Kathleen VAN BREMPT, Agnes JONGERIUS, Raphaël GLUCKSMANN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that the general exception clause of Article XX of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) shcould ~~be the~~likely be a basis for any CBAM design and its only rationale should be an environmental one – reducing global CO2 emissions and preventing carbon leakage;

Amendment 54 #

Karin KARLSBRO, Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Liesje SCHREINEMACHER, Urmas PAET, Svenja HAHN, Jérémy DECERLE, Jordi CAÑAS, Samira RAFAELA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that the ~~general exception clause of Article XX~~provisions of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), such as Articles I, III and XX GATT, should be the basis for any CBAM design and its only rationale should be an environmental one – reducing global CO2 emissions and preventing carbon leakage;

Amendment 55 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Calls for a calculation method for carbon contents that does not disadvantage European producers; calls for a calculation method that takes into account to the highest possible extent the real carbon content of the goods concerned; suggests that an independent agency should be responsible for the definition of the most realistic carbon content of goods as well as the determination of the respective good’s market entry price; calls for the inclusion of existing third country carbon pricing systems in the calculation;

Amendment 56 #

Gabriel MATO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Stresses that there are design options that allow the existing carbon leakage measures to co-exist with the mechanism while not leading to double protection; therefore strongly urges the European Commission to develop a scenario in its upcoming impact assessment where existing carbon leakage measures are maintained alongside the mechanism;

Amendment 57 #

Joachim SCHUSTER, Kathleen VAN BREMPT, Agnes JONGERIUS, Raphaël GLUCKSMANN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Takes into account that the Article XVI of the GATT on “Subsidies” is key for the introduction of a Union-led CBAM compatible with the WTO since there is the possibility that for each exported tone to third countries or non- EU members, producers may not have to pay for emission rights;

Amendment 58 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Asks the Commission to consider evaluating all products according to a worst-in-class approach, i.e. assume the most emission-rich production method and thus provide an incentive for producers to share information on their products carbon content in order to pay a lower CBA;

Amendment 59 #

Joachim SCHUSTER, Kathleen VAN BREMPT, Agnes JONGERIUS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)

3c. Asks the Commission to start implementing the mechanism as soon as possible with a view to pilot sectors in which the carbon contents of goods are easily identified;

Amendment 6 #

Emmanuel MAUREL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Is convinced that a purpose-built trade policy can be an important driver in steering economies towards decarbonisation in order to achieve the climate objectives set in the Paris Agreement and the European Green Deal, to steer industrial policy more effectively by favouring relocalisation, and to allocate additional funds to our companies to assist them in their efforts to ensure responsible innovation;

Amendment 60 #

Massimiliano SALINI, Andrey KOVATCHEV, Christophe HANSEN, Arnaud DANJEAN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. ~~Calls for thorough impact assessments and~~Expresses concern that a mechanism centred solely on basic materials could lead to a shift in imports towards intermediate and final products not covered by the mechanism, thereby affecting the EU industry; calls for thorough, proper and comprehensive impact assessments prior to its implementation also aimed to identify measures for sectors where the risk of carbon leakage is highest while taking into consideration the sector’s competitiveness and calls on the Commission for the utmost transparency of the process leading to the CBAM, as well as engagement with the EU’s trading partners to build coalitions and avoid any possible retaliations; calls on the Commission not to replace existing carbon leakage measures with an untested mechanism, in order to avoid major uncertainties and risks for European industry;

Amendment 61 #

Enikő GYŐRI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. ~~Calls for thorough impact assessments and~~Expresses concern that a mechanism centred solely on basic materials could lead to a shift in imports towards intermediate and final products not covered by the mechanism, thereby affecting the EU industry; calls for thorough, proper and comprehensive impact assessments prior to and throughout its implementation also aimed to identify measures for sectors where the risk of carbon leakage is highest while taking into consideration the sector’s competitiveness and calls on the Commission for the utmost transparency of the process leading to the CBAM, as well as engagement with the EU’s trading partners to build coalitions and avoid any possible retaliations; calls on the Commission not to replace existing carbon leakage measures with an untested mechanism, in order to avoid major uncertainties and risks for European industry;

Amendment 62 #

Joachim SCHUSTER, Kathleen VAN BREMPT, Agnes JONGERIUS, Raphaël GLUCKSMANN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls for thorough impact assessments and for the utmost transparency of the process leading to the CBAM, a~~s well as engagement with the EU’s trading partners to build coalitions and avoid any possible retaliations;~~mongst it the publication of all studies conducted during the build up of the mechanism; calls for the comprehensive integration of the European Parliament at all stages of the development process as well as engagement with the EU’s trading partners to build plurilateral CO2-pricing systems coalitions and avoid retaliations as far as possible; asks the Commission to take into consideration existing and future third country CO2-pricing systems

Amendment 63 #

Jean-Lin LACAPELLE, Luisa REGIMENTI, Marco CAMPOMENOSI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls for thorough impact assessments and for the utmost transparency of the process leading to the CBAM, ~~as well as engagement with the EU’s trading partners to build coalitions and avoid any possible retalia~~stresses that this must be accompanied by robust and coherent diplomacy on the part of the European Union and Member States in accordance with their respective competences, with a view to preventing and countering any possible retaliations, by means, inter alia, of engagement with the EU’s trading partners to build coalitions;

Amendment 64 #

Markus BUCHHEIT, Roman HAIDER, Maximilian KRAH, Danilo Oscar LANCINI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls for thorough impact assessments - especially on direct and indirect carbon leakage - and for the utmost transparency of the process leading to the CBAM, as well as engagement with the EU’s trading partners to build coalitions and avoid any possible retaliations; demands that a full life-cycle GHG emissions analysis will be used as the basis for calculation in order to obtain a neutral and comparable picture of the product’s carbon footprint;

Amendment 65 #

Karin KARLSBRO, Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Liesje SCHREINEMACHER, Urmas PAET, Svenja HAHN, Jérémy DECERLE, Jordi CAÑAS, Samira RAFAELA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls for thorough impact assessments and for the utmost transparency of the process leading to the CBAM, as well as engagement with the EU’s trading partners to build coalitions and avoid any possible retaliations; notes that the impact assessment must be conducted with the goal of reducing total global emissions, and that is must include the effects on sustainable innovation and changing trade flows and supply chains;

Amendment 66 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls for thorough impact assessments and for the utmost transparency ofand coordination with the European Parliament in the process leading to the CBAM, as well as engagement with the EU’s trading partners to build coalitions, and ~~avoid any possible retaliat~~incentivise them to establish their own carbon pricing measures, o bring them as close as possible to our own trajectory for reducing greenhouse gas emissions ;

Amendment 67 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls for thorough impact assessments analysing a combination of key variables, including sectors, countries and types of emissions included in CBAM, and relationship to existing carbon leakage measures, and for the utmost transparency of the process leading to the CBAM, as well as engagement with the EU’s trading partners to build coalitions and avoid any possible retaliations;

Amendment 68 #

Marco CAMPOMENOSI, Hervé JUVIN, Danilo Oscar LANCINI, Jean-Lin LACAPELLE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

Amendment 69 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls for thorough objective, independent and periodic impact assessments and for the utmost transparency of the process leading to the CBAM, as well as engagement with the EU’s trading partners to build coalitions and avoid any possible retaliations;

Amendment 7 #

Marco CAMPOMENOSI, Hervé JUVIN, Danilo Oscar LANCINI, Jean-Lin LACAPELLE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Is convinced that a purpose-built trade policy can be an important driver in steering economies towards decarbonisation in order to achieve the climate objectives set in the Paris Agreement and the European Green Deal;, taking into account that the latest EU’s ambitious policies in the climate field seem to set unattainable objectives which might damage the EU competitiveness overall

Amendment 70 #

Danilo Oscar LANCINI, Marco CAMPOMENOSI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls for thorough impact assessments and for the utmost transparency of the process leading to the CBAM, as well as engagement with the EU’s trading partners and stakeholders to build coalitions and avoid any possible retaliations;

Amendment 71 #

Jan ZAHRADIL, Geert BOURGEOIS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls for thorough and calibrated impact assessments and for the utmost transparency of the process leading to the CBAM, as well as engagement with the EU’s trading partners to build coalitions and avoid any possible retaliations;

Amendment 72 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls for thorough impact assessments and for the utmost transparency of the process leading to the CBAM, as well as engagement with WTO and the EU’s trading partners to build coalitions and avoid any possible retaliations;

Amendment 73 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls for thorough impact assessments and for the utmost transparency of the process leading to the CBAM, as well as engagement with the EU’s trading partners to ~~build coali~~incentivise cooperations and avoid any possible retaliations;

Amendment 74 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Stresses that there are design options that allow existing carbon leakage measures to co-exist with the CBAM while not leading to double protection; therefore strongly urges the European Commission to develop a scenario in its upcoming impact assessment where existing carbon leakage measures are maintained alongside the CBAM.

Amendment 75 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Calls on the Commission not to allocate CBAM revenues as assigned own resources to Next Generation EU (NGEU) but to the various EU research programmes and use it as a mean to help SMEs and industry coping the burdens of the Green Deal policy;

Amendment 76 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Demands a holistic perspective ensuring that not only revenues, but also existing subsidies and competition rules are considered in the development of any CBAM; suggests a thorough assessment of implications for and by rules on the internal market;

Amendment 77 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4b. Asks the Commission in its impact assessment to take into account further burdens for European companies in global competition if parts of their products become less competitive on global markets due to higher prices for imported preliminary products because of any CBAM; further asks the Commission to make WTO-compatible suggestions how to address this with EU-internal measures;

Amendment 78 #

Jan ZAHRADIL, Geert BOURGEOIS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)

4c. Notes the difficulties related to the establishment of carbon footprints for products originating from both non-EU Member States as well as EU Member States and calls for continuous efforts to ensure comparability of carbon footprints for products regardless of their origin;

Amendment 79 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Notes that many carbon- and trade- intensive industrial sectors could potentially be impacted by the CBAM, either directly or indirectly, and that it could influence supply chains; emphasises therefore, that any CBAM design should be a complementary measure to the existing carbon leakage measures to better control the cost impact and to safeguard the EU industrial sectors’ global level playing-field vis a vis third country competition with non-equivalent CO2 reduction targets and costs; stresses that any CBAM should be easy to administer anshould not place ~~an undu~~excessive financial and administrative burden on enterprises, especially small and medium- sized enterprises (SMEs) and should not harm competitiveness of EU businesses and industries at a global stage.

Amendment 8 #

Massimiliano SALINI, Andrey KOVATCHEV, Arnaud DANJEAN, Enikő GYŐRI, Angelika WINZIG, Jörgen WARBORN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Is convinced that a purpose-built trade policy can be an important driver in steering economies towards decarbonisation in order to achieve the climate objectives set in the Paris Agreement and the European Green Deal; emphasises the importance of internationally harmonised product labelling and of consumer values in this connection;

Amendment 80 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Notes that many carbon- and trade- intensive industrial sectors could potentially be impacted by the CBAM, either directly or indirectly, and that it could influence supply chains; emphasises therefore, that any CBAM design should be an additional and complementary measure to existing carbon leakage measures, at least in an initial phase, in order to better monitor the cost effect and to safeguard the global level of competitiveness of the EU industrial sectors vis a vis competition from third countries with non-equivalent CO2 reduction and cost reduction goals; stresses that any CBAM should be easy to administer and not place an undue burden on enterprises, especially small and medium- sized enterprises (SMEs); notes that from a bureaucratic and implementation cost point of view, the CBAM should not be a complicated alternative to the instruments already in use.

Amendment 81 #

Marco CAMPOMENOSI, Hervé JUVIN, Danilo Oscar LANCINI, Jean-Lin LACAPELLE, Markus BUCHHEIT

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Notes that ~~many~~the measure is part of the European Green Deal, the overarching strategy aiming at transforming the European Union into a modern, resource-efficient and competitive economy, where there are no net emissions of greenhouse gases in 2050; notes that the most carbon- and trade- intensive industrial sectors cwould ~~potentially be impact~~be covered by the CBAM, either directly or indirectly, and that ~~it could influence supply chains~~supply chains need to internalise negative climate externalities as a necessary condition to achieve climate neutrality; stresses that any CBAM should be easy to administer and not place an undue burden on enterprises, especially small and medium- sized enterprises (SMEs), by initially focusing on the most carbon-intensive industrial sectors.

Amendment 82 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Notes that many carbon- and trade- intensive industrial sectors could potentially be impacted by the CBAM, either directly or indirectly, and that it could influence supply chains; stresses that any CBAM should be easy to administer and not place an undue burden on enterprises, especially small and medium- sized enterprises (SMEs)., that need a stable and predictable policy and legislative framework in order to make the necessary investments, especially on national custom authorities and the implementation of the Union Customs Code, trying to balance between the complexity and efficiency of the instrument;

Amendment 83 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Notes that many carbon- and trade- intensive industrial sectors could potentially be impacted by the CBAM, either directly or indirectly, and that it could influence supply chains; stresses that any CBAM should be introduced gradually to allow time for businesses to adjust, easy to administer and not place an undue burden on enterprises, especially small and medium- sized enterprises (SMEs).; stresses also that the ultimate aim must be to make the CBAM redundant as the rest of the world catches up with the level of ambition the EU has set for reducing CO2 emissions;

Amendment 84 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Notes that many carbon- and trade- intensive industrial sectors could potentially be impacted by the CBAM, either directly or indirectly, and that it could influence supply chains; stresses that any CBAM should be easy to administer and not place an undue burden on enterprises, especially small and medium- sized enterprises (SMEs), its implementation should not lead to abrupt modifications of existing provisions in order to secure legal certainty for long term investment decisions.

Amendment 85 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Notes that many carbon- and trade- intensive industrial sectors could potentially be impacted by the CBAM, either directly or indirectly, and that it could influence supply chains; points therefore out, that any possible CBAM framework should be an additional measure to the existing carbon leakage measures under the EU ETS; stresses that any CBAM should be easy to administer and not place an undue burden on enterprises, especially small and medium- sized enterprises (SMEs).

Amendment 86 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Notes that many carbon- and trade- intensive industrial sectors could potentially be impacted by the CBAM, either directly or indirectly, and th~~at it~~erefore should be consulted on all aspects of CBAM, that CBAM could influence supply chains; stresses that any CBAM should be easy to administer and not place an undue burden on enterprises, especially small and medium- sized enterprises (SMEs).

Amendment 87 #

Massimiliano SALINI, Christophe HANSEN, Jörgen WARBORN, Angelika WINZIG, Enikő GYŐRI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Notes that many carbon- and trade- intensive industrial sectors could potentially be impacted by the CBAM, either directly or indirectly, and that it could influence supply chains; stresses that any CBAM should be easy to administer and not place an undue financial, organisational or administrative burden on enterprises, especially small and medium- sized enterprises (SMEs).

Amendment 88 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 – point 1 (new)

(1) Is convinced that if the CBAM is designed and implemented as an import- ETS system, maintaining the existing free allowances would not result to double protection.

Amendment 89 #

Joachim SCHUSTER, Kathleen VAN BREMPT, Agnes JONGERIUS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Calls for the resources generated by the CBAM to be re-invested in the development of carbon neutral technologies and the build-up of an independent agency responsible for the definition of carbon contents as well as market-entry prices; requests that the revenue is re-invested in the scope of the EU-budget; calls for the CBAM to be applicable to imports of all trading partners in order not to discriminate; however calls for part of the revenues from the CBAM to be channelled into an international fund for climate, such as the Green Climate Fund (GCF), to support developing countries in the sustainable transition, reduce their GHG emissions and enhance their ability to respond to climate change.

Amendment 9 #

1. Is convinced that a purpose-built trade policy can be an important driver in steering economies towards decarbonisation in order to achieve the climate objectives set in the Paris Agreement and the European Green Deal; but this should be done in proportional and balanced ways, be evidence based and not be used as a cover for protectionism;

Amendment 90 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Notes that he effectiveness of the CBAM will depend on the details of its design and its ability to tackle delicate aspects: first, the issue of the source shifting which refers to the possibility that a third country producer exports to the EU the low carbon footprint products while selling products with high embedded emissions in other markets; secondly, the absorption of carbon costs since those costs in EU are applied to the entire production, while any border measure would likely apply only to the marginal tonnes that third countries’ producers export to the EU, hence having the possibility to absorb such costs throughout their entire production.

Amendment 91 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. points out that keeping free certificate allocation in parallel with a new CBAM can also be an incentive for third country suppliers to produce cleaner and more environmentally friendly products, not only if they wish to export to Europe; notes that this effect would also be achieved in third markets, in particular EU export markets; notes that by obtaining the EU ETS, European companies through their competitiveness would lead as an example on international level and pressure for more environmentally friendly production on third country suppliers can be increased also in EU export markets.

Amendment 92 #

Karin KARLSBRO, Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Liesje SCHREINEMACHER, Urmas PAET, Svenja HAHN, Jérémy DECERLE, Jordi CAÑAS, Samira RAFAELA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Considers that international trade and trade policy, as key enablers of the transition towards a climate neutral, resource efficient, circular global economy, need to support global efforts towards the achievement of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and international environmental commitments, such as the Paris Agreement, including efforts to reduce pollution, combat climate change and carbon leakage, and promote more sustainable production and consumption;

Amendment 93 #

Marco CAMPOMENOSI, Hervé JUVIN, Danilo Oscar LANCINI, Jean-Lin LACAPELLE, Markus BUCHHEIT

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Stresses that any mechanism must create an incentive for industries in the EU and abroad to produce clean and competitive products, and avoid carbon leakage, without endangering trade opportunities; highlights 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;

Amendment 94 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. In this regard, recalls that the CBAM should comprise a complex and detailed method to calculate objectively the amount of carbon in the products included in its scope; for this purpose a strong system of the effective rules of origin (RoOs) is needed in order to avoid and reduce additional administrative and bureaucratic obstacles for companies, especially for the SMEs;

Amendment 95 #

Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Stresses that any EU carbon border adjustment mechanism must comply with Article 2(1)(b) of the Paris Agreement1a and must therefore not in any way endanger trade flows and supply chains that are important for European food production and food security;

Amendment 96 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Stresses that the measure may have positive effects in terms of jobs by avoiding the substitution of EU production by production from third countries with lower climate ambition;

Amendment 97 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Calls that the power sector should be included in the specific cases of imports of high-carbon electricity.

Amendment 98 #

Marco CAMPOMENOSI, Hervé JUVIN, Danilo Oscar LANCINI, Jean-Lin LACAPELLE, Markus BUCHHEIT

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Strongly emphasises that the success of European companies, including SMEs, depends on access to global markets; underlines the need to deduct costs incurred from carbon taxes, emissions rights under cap-and-trade 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 99 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Highlights that one of the purposes of the CBAM should be to spur the reshoring of EU manufacturing activities, especially in the context of the Covid19 crisis, considering the fact that the pandemic has further shown the risks of depending on third countries’ economies and non-EU sources;

source: 660.137

2020/11/11 ECON 513 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)

-1. Whereas the EU Member States grant many subsidies to the intensive industries through fiscal support, including tax breaks for energy use, and price and income support for energy intensive companies and processes1a; _________________ 1aCAN Europe, « European Fat Cats : EU energy intensive industrie : paid to pollute, not to decarbonise », April 2018

Amendment 1 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 1

~~— having regard to the Agreement adopted at the 21st Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC (COP21) in Paris on 12 December 2015 (the Paris Agreement),~~deleted

Amendment 10 #

Draft opinion
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 leakage~~incentivising the reduction of imports greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and investments in green and energy efficient technology at European and global levels ;

Amendment 10 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 b (new)

- having regard to the Parliament’s decision on the 2030 climate target that took place on the 6th October 2020 as part of a wider vote on the proposed European Climate Law, which aims at reaching climate neutrality by 2050, through a 60% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by the end of this decade,

Amendment 100 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. BRecalls the environmental exemption provisions under the Article 20 of the GATT agreement; believes that the above proposal is compatible with World Trade Organization rules, since it does not discriminate between producers, is based on objective criteria and has a clear environmental objective.

Amendment 100 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Strongly deplores the non- cooperative and disloyal behaviour of~~Is concerned by the lack of cooperation between some of the Union’s trade partners in international climate negotiations, as recently observed at COP25; considers that this ~~behaviour~~lack of cooperation hampers our collective global ability to reach the objectives of the Paris Agreement;

Amendment 101 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Believes that the above proposal is compatible with World Trade Organization rules, since it does not discriminate between producers, is based on objective criteria and has a clear environmental objective; therefore, the design of the mechanism should be discussed and negotiated within the WTO.

Amendment 101 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Strongly deplores~~Takes note of the non- cooperative and disloyal behaviour of some of the Union’s trade partners in international climate negotiations, as recently observed at COP25; considers that this behaviour hampers our collective global ability to re~~ach the objectives of the Paris Agreement~~duce GHG emissions;

Amendment 102 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Believes that the above proposal is compatible with World Trade Organization rules~~, since it does not discriminate between producers~~ and the EU's international obligations, since it treats imports and national production in the same way, is based on objective criteria and has a clear environmental objective.

Amendment 102 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Strongly deplores the non- cooperative and disloyal behaviour~~Takes note of the different level of ambition of some of the Union’s trade partners in international climate negotiations, as recently observed at COP25; considers that this ~~behaviour~~ hampers our collective global ability to reach the objectives of the Paris Agreement;

Amendment 103 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Believes that ~~the above proposal~~a CBAM is compatible with World Trade Organization rules, ~~since~~as long as it does not discriminate between producers, is based on objective criteria and ~~has a clear environmental objective.~~fulfils its primary objective of protecting the environment and health;

Amendment 103 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Emphasises the importance for the EU to take the lead in building a coalition with other jurisdictions that are seriously engaging in carbon pricing and/or have signed up to pledges to decarbonise heavy-industry, and that are facing similar problems in terms of how to tackle carbon leakage; considers that good faith attempts should be made to reach a multilateral solution to this problem, allowing common approaches on anti- leakage measures to emerge;

Amendment 104 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Believes that the above proposal ishould be compatible with the World Trade Organization rules, s~~ince it does~~hould not discriminate between producers, isand be based on objective criteria and hasve a clear environmental objective.

Amendment 104 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Emphasises that a CBAM has the potential of incentivising countries and companies outside the EU to adopt and implement more ambitious policies to reduce their emissions and limit their environmental footprint;

Amendment 105 #

Niels FUGLSANG, Paul TANG

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. Emphasises that the introduction of protectionist measures often lead to retaliation with unforeseeable consequences for companies and consumers; notes that trade barriers in general lead to lower exports, lower imports and a lower rate of economic growth; further highlights the need for a balanced and holistic approach, which continues to enable opportunities for trade and investment with the rest of the world;

Amendment 105 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Expresses the hope that cooperation between the EU and the US in fighting climate change will be restored, establishing a key partnership as a common response to a challenge to accelerate climate action;

Amendment 106 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. 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 and to take a multilateral approach to its design; underlines that the mechanism should rely on a multilateral approach as well as taking into consideration the European Union's position as the world's largest trade bloc;

Amendment 106 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 c (new)

2c. Stresses the need of a parallel diplomatic effort to ensure that the EU’s neighbourhood countries, which trade the most with the EU and who are likely to be most affected, are engaged early on; notes that those are all countries with which the EU has a long-established trading and policy coordination relationship and who are, thus, likely to be constructive in pursuing a common solution in this space;

Amendment 107 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. Stresses that the implementation of the mechanism must be accompanied by the revision of the EU ETS, as well as the removal of all tax exemptions implemented at the national level on energy used by energy-intensive industries; calls therefore on the Commission to evaluate the different practices of Member States in terms of tax exemptions for energy intensive industries;

Amendment 107 #

2d. Underlines the necessity for the EU to engage in dialogues with developing countries on how BCAs might affect them and what technical and financial assistance measures might be taken to manage any impact;

Amendment 108 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. Calls the Commission for an impact assessment and for the comprehensive integration of the European Parliament at all stages of the development process; calls for the establishment of a meticulous monitoring mechanism for the CBAM as well as a monitoring and review-process in which the European Parliament is involved to the fullest extent;

Amendment 108 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that the Union has the responsibility and opportunity to assume a leading role in global climate action; highlights, however, the importance of ensuring that this responsibility does not result in carbon leakage, which may occur “either because production is transferred from the EU to other countries with lower ambition for emission reduction, or because EU products are replaced by more carbon- intensive imports”, as mentioned in the European Green Deal Communication;

Amendment 109 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. Stresses that the Commission should not pursue a unilateral approach to a CBAM, but should instead engage in bilateral and multilateral discussions with third-countries;

Amendment 109 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

Amendment 11 #

Draft opinion
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 leakage~~Welcomes the European goal of achieving a socially just transition to climate neutrality by 2050 as well as the 60%-goal for 2030; notes with concern the lack of ambition in climate efforts in EU economic policy as well as in many other policy spheres; calls for the Paris Agreement and its 1.5 percent goal to become the guiding principle of economic policy to which all initiatives must be adjusted; Believes that the main aim of the carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) should be to support the EU’s green objectives by fighting carbon leakage; underlines that a universal system needs to be the final goal of the initiative since decentral climate protection measures will not have the desired effect and would only result in carbon leakage as well as have disadvantageous effects on European industries; thus suggests the externalisation of the EU emissions trading system (EU ETS) as a possible CBAM; expects the Commission to initiate negotiations for a global approach within the framework of the WTO or the G20;

Amendment 11 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 5

~~— having regard to its resolution of 15 January 2020 on the European Green Deal1 , _________________ 1~~deleted Texts adopted, P9_TA(2020)005.

Amendment 110 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)

8 b. Calls for an impact assessment of the above proposal in terms of revenues, costs and other effects for consumers and companies within the EU Member States and the global economy as a whole; further it shall be estimated how much a CABT would decrease the global emissions of greenhouse gases and accordingly how much it would mitigate the global increase in average temperature;

Amendment 110 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that the Union has the responsibility and opportunity to assume a leading role in global climate action; highlights the importance of ensuring that this responsibility does not result in carbon leakage, which may occur “either because production is transferred from the EU to other countries with lower ambition for emission reduction, or because EU products are replaced by more carbon-intensive imports”, as mentioned in the European Green Deal Communication;

Amendment 111 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)

8 b. Stresses that the implementation of the mechanism will need to be underpinned by a set of EU standards that would prevent it from being circumvented or misused;

Amendment 111 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that the Union has ~~the responsibility and opportunity to assume a leading role in global climate action;~~always been a champion of global climate action, what is proven by the adoption of the climate neutrality 2050 goal and raising of its 2030 GHG reduction target; assumes that the Union has the opportunity to become an exemplary model for green and climate friendly transition if the achievement of its ambitious climate goals is coupled with the economic growth and increasing of the standard of living of its citizens.

Amendment 112 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)

8 b. Calls on the Commission to carefully study the compatibility of the CBAM with the FTAs which the EU has concluded;

Amendment 112 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that the Union has the responsibility and opportunity to assume a leading role in global climate action; regrets that, to date, the Union has been more self-congratulatory rather than truly leading; recalls the UNFCCC principle of ‘common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities’, which grants the Union and the Member States a particular responsibility, as well as acknowledges their capacity, to act;

Amendment 113 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 c (new)

8 c. Underlines that the CBAM and the EU ETS should not be seen as sufficient elements on their own to reduce carbon and GHG emissions; believes that the most efficient way to do so is by adopting binding norms and standards on products rather than relying upon a carbon market; therefore urges the Commission to make proposals in this direction as well, as a complement to a CBAM;

Amendment 113 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that the Union has the responsibility and opportunity to assume a leading role in global climate action; strongly encourages the Commission to intensify its climate diplomacy ahead and after the adoption of its legislative proposal for a CBAM, and ensure in particular continuous dialogue with trade partners, to incentivise global climate action;

Amendment 114 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 c (new)

8 c. Notes that protectionist measures risk to hamper the economic development in developing countries, which risks to undermine their long term capacities to protect the environment, both in local, regional and global perspectives;

Amendment 114 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that the Union has the responsibility and opportunity to assume a leading role in global climate action; notes that the Union and its Member States bear significant historic responsibility for the build-up of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and, thus, for the ongoing global warming;

Amendment 115 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 c (new)

8 c. Rejects the establishment of a carbon border adjustment mechanism.

Amendment 115 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that the Union has the responsibility and opportunity to assume a leading role in global climate action but that it must not be to the detriment of the competitiveness of our own industry; stresses that the EU emits circa 8.5 % of the global emissions;

Amendment 116 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that the Union has the responsibility and opportunity to assume a leading role in global climate action by transitioning to an economy with net zero GHG emissions;

Amendment 117 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that the Union ~~has the responsibility and opportunity to assume a leading role in global climate action~~should play a leading role in global climate action, in cooperation with all of the world’s other major industrialised economies;

Amendment 118 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that the Union has the responsibility and opportunity to ~~assume a leading role in global climate action~~significantly engage against carbon leakage;

Amendment 119 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Stress~~Notes that the Union ~~has the responsibility and opportunity~~is endeavouring to assume a leading role in global climate action;

Amendment 12 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. BRecalls the international obligations of the Union under the Paris Agreement; acknowledges the Green Deal, the goal of achieving climate neutrality by 2050 and the newly announced target as voted by the European Parliament of at least 60% reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by 2030; notes the lack of international climate efforts to limit global warming to 1.5 C; believes that the main aim of the carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) should be to support the EU’s green objectives and fight climate change, notably by fighting carbon leakage;

Amendment 12 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 a (new)

- having regard to the Parliament report modifying Regulation (EU) 2015/757 in order to take appropriate account of the global data collection system for ship fuel oil consumption data;

Amendment 120 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that the Union has the ~~responsibility and~~ opportunity to assume a leading role in global climate action;

Amendment 121 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Recalls that the European Parliament has declared a climate and environment emergency; points out that Parliament has asked the Commission to fully assess the climate and environmental impact of all relevant legislative and budgetary proposals, and to ensure that they are all fully aligned with the objective of limiting global warming to under 1.5°C and that they are not contributing to biodiversity loss; calls for the Union’s trade policy to be comprehensibly revised and brought fully into line with these objectives;

Amendment 122 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Underlines that the implementation of a CBAM will not lead per se to emissions reductions globally; stresses that concerted climate action at global level is required to address greenhouse gas emissions; calls on the Commission to use all diplomatic channels and power in international climate fora to engage third countries, in particular big emitters, in the adoption of more stringent climate and environmental policies;

Amendment 123 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Strongly emphasizes that the success of the European climate policies depend on the success of Europe's economy and businesses, including SMEs; calls, therefore, on the Commission to base any legislative proposal on a thorough impact assessment, which takes into consideration the impact of CBAM on competitiveness of European exporters, and possible counter measures taken by affected third countries against European industries;

Amendment 124 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Observes that climate change is a global threat and Europe alone cannot put an end to it; stresses that, in this regard, cooperation with partner countries is essential in strengthening the measures to reduce GHG emissions in accordance with the Paris Agreement;

Amendment 125 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Highlights the central role of citizens and consumers in the energy transition, and the importance of stimulating and supporting consumer choice in order to reduce the effects of climate change by promoting sustainable activities and collateral benefits that lead to a higher quality of life;

Amendment 126 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. 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 127 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

Amendment 128 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Takes note of the Commission’s proposal to set the Union’s 2030 climate target to ‘at least 55 % net emissions reduction’ compared to 1990 levels; ~~highlights, however, that this target does not re~~underlines that it needs to be coupled with incentives for the business to transform their operations towards green economy, regulatory arrangements presvent ~~the Union’s highest possible ambition, nor does it reflect the principle of equity and common but differentiated responsibilit~~ing carbon leakage and creating a level playing field for European companies and industries in transition, thus protecting jobs and investments in the EU by applying the adequate price for Indirect Carbon Influx (carbon footprint of goods consumed in the EU and produced in third countries);

Amendment 129 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Takes note of the Commission’s proposal to set the Union’s 2030 climate target to ‘at least 55% net emissions reduction’ compared to 1990 levels; highlights, however, that this target does not represent the Union’s highest possible ambition, nor does it reflect the principle of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities; is deeply concerned about the fact that, according to the Commission’s impact assessment, unless absorbed by the carbon sinks, the actual emissions reduction target proposed by the Commission is just 52.8% by 20301a; _________________ 1a https://ec.europa.eu/clima/sites/clima/files /eu-climate-action/docs/impact_en.pdf.

Amendment 13 #

Draft opinion
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 leakage; stresses that the CBAM should come with a 2050 decarbonisation target and required transition plans for the EU industry;

Amendment 13 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)

- having regard to the European Court of Auditors’ Special Report 18/2020, pursuant to Article 287(4), second subparagraph TFEU, on ‘The EU’s Emissions Trading System: free allocation of allowances needed better targeting’,

Amendment 130 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Takes note of the Commission’s proposal to set the Union’s 2030 climate target to ‘at least 55 % net emissions reduction’ compared to 1990 levels; highlights~~, however, that this target does not represent the Union’s highest possible ambition, nor does it reflect the principle of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities~~ the importance of setting a well-balanced CO2-emission reduction trajectory that enables the Union to deliver on the commitments under the Paris Agreement and on the target of reaching climate neutrality by 2050 without putting too much burden on the economy in the near term in order to allow for necessary long-term investments in R&;I;

Amendment 131 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Takes note of the Commission’s proposal to set the Union’s 2030 climate target to ‘at least 55 % net emissions reduction’ compared to 1990 levels; highlights, however, that this target does not represent the Union’s highest possible ambition, nor does it reflect the principle of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities; underlines in this respect the European Parliament’s position that calls for a revised 2030 climate target of 60% emissions reduction compared to 1990 levels;

Amendment 132 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. ~~Takes note of~~Welcomes the Commission’s proposal to set the Union’s 2030 climate target to ‘at least 55 % net emissions reduction’ compared to 1990 levels; ~~highlights, however, that this target does not represent the Union’s highest possible ambition, nor does it reflect the principle of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities;~~

Amendment 133 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Takes note of the Commission’s ambitious proposal to set the Union’s 2030 climate target to ‘at least 55 % net emissions reduction’ compared to 1990 levels; ~~highlights, however, that this target does not represent the Union’s highest possible ambition, nor does it reflect the principle of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities;~~

Amendment 134 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Takes note of the Commission’s proposal to set the Union’s 2030 climate target to ‘at least 55% net emissions reduction’ compared to 1990 levels; ~~highlights, however, that this target does not represent the Union’s highest possible ambition, nor does it reflect the principle of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities;~~

Amendment 135 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

Amendment 136 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

Amendment 137 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

Amendment 138 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Takes note of the Commission’s proposal to set the Union’s 2030 climate target to ‘at least 55 % net emissions reduction’ compared to 1990 levels; highlights, however, that this target is insufficient to effectively tackle global warming and does not represent the Union’s highest possible ambition, nor does it reflect the principle of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities;

Amendment 139 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Takes note of the Commission’s proposal to set the Union’s 2030 climate target to ‘at least 55 % net emissions reduction’ compared to 1990 levels; highlights, however, that th~~is target does not repre~~e European Parliament sent ~~the Union’s highest possible ambition, nor does it reflect the principle of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities~~out a higher 2030 target of 60% emission reductions compared to 1990;

Amendment 14 #

Draft opinion
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 leakage~~global GHG emissions, enabling just transition and pursuing the key objective of the strategic resilience of the EU;

Amendment 14 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital -A a (new)

-Aa. whereas a cause-and-effect relationship has been established between the warm climate cycle and the increase in carbon dioxide

Amendment 140 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

Amendment 141 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

Amendment 142 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Takes note of the Commission’s unduly proposal to set the Union’s 2030 climate target to ‘at least 55 % net emissions reduction’ compared to 1990 levels; highlights, however, that this target does not represent the Union’s highest possible ambition, nor does it reflect the principle of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities;

Amendment 143 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Takes note of the climate-neutral targets for 2050 and a 60% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 adopted by Parliament; stresses that this interim objective makes it impossible to follow the Paris Agreement trajectory of staying below the 1.5°C global temperature increase;

Amendment 144 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Deplores that the Commission limited its impact assessment on the 2030 emissions reduction target to no more than 55% and considers this to be completely irresponsible, a dereliction of duty and a denial of the best available science;

Amendment 145 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Notes that the Union had reduced its domestic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 23.2 % below 1990 levels in 2018, while at the same time its GHG emissions embedded in international trade have been constantly rising, thereby undermining the Union’s efforts to reduce its global footprint; believes, therefore, that the Commission should refrain from referring to its calculated domestic GHG emissions reductions without also referring to its embedded emissions; underlines that the net imports of goods and services in the EU represent more than 20 % of the Union’s domestic CO2 emissions;

Amendment 146 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Notes that the Union had reduced its domestic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 23.2% below 1990 levels in 2018, while at the same time its GHG emissions embedded in international trade have been constantly rising, thereby undermining the Union’s efforts to reduce its global footprint; underlines that the net imports of goods and services in the EU represent more than 20% of the Union’s domestic CO2 emissions; believes that these imports should be monitored more closely in order to identify their potential gas emission impacts;

Amendment 147 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Notes that the Union had reduced its domestic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 23.2 % below 1990 levels in 2018, while at the same time its GHG emissions embedded in international trade have been constantly rising, thereby undermining the Union’s efforts to reduce its global footprint; underlines that the net imports of goods and services in the EU represent more than 20 % of the Union’s domestic CO2 emissions; notes that incorrectly implemented CO2 tariffs increase the competitiveness of third countries vis-à-vis intra-EU players.;

Amendment 148 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Notes that the Union had reduced its domestic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 23.2 % below 1990 levels in 2018, while our economy grew by more than 60%, while at the same time its GHG emissions embedded in international trade have been constantly rising, thereby undermining the Union’s efforts to reduce its global footprint; underlines that the net imports of goods and services in the EU represent more than 20 % of the Union’s domestic CO2 emissions;

Amendment 149 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Notes that the Union had reduced its domestic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 23.2 % below 1990 levels in 2018, while at the same time its GHG emissions embedded in i~~nternational trade~~mports to EU have been constantly rising, thereby undermining the Union’s efforts to reduce its global carbon footprint; underlines that the net imports of goods and services in the EU are~~present~~ equivalent of more than 20 % of the Union’s domestic CO2 emissions;

Amendment 15 #

Draft opinion
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 leakage, without violating WTO- compatibility;

Amendment 15 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas the adverse impacts of climate change represent a direct threat to human livelihoods and ecosystems, as confirmed by the Special Report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) on Global Warming of 1.5°C; whereas carbon dioxide is a prerequisite for all growth and a natural, colourless, odourless and tasteless atmospheric gas; whereas the increasing carbon dioxide is accelerating growth and that a warm climate cycle can be a positive thing for much of Northern Europe;

Amendment 150 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Notes that the Union had reduced its domestic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 23.2 % below 1990 levels in 2018, while at the same time its imported GHG emissions ~~embedded in international trade~~ have been constantly rising, thereby undermining the Union’s efforts to reduce its global footprint; underlines that the net imports of goods and services in the EU represent more than 20 % of the Union’s domestic CO2 emissions;

Amendment 151 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

Amendment 152 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Stresses that it would be more effective to replace the EU ETS with a WTO -compatible carbon border adjustment mechanism based on the carbon footprint of imported goods, taking into account direct emissions, emissions from electricity generation and emissions from the use of raw materials; also considers it appropriate for the Commission and the Member States to support this trade measure with adequate incentive policies for the relocation of production from third countries to the Member States;

Amendment 153 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Recalls the position expressed in the Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services by the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) that exports of crops, deforestation, and other transfers of resources from developing countries have contributed to the deterioration of nature, while importing developed countries and rapidly growing developing countries often decrease nature degradation nationally; underscores that emissions reductions and material footprint nationally cannot be considered without including embedded emissions and impacts;

Amendment 154 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Stresses that the European Union is a net importer of greenhouse gases; underlines that greenhouse gases other than carbon dioxide make up a large share of the emissions imported by the Union, especially methane and nitrous oxide;

Amendment 155 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Notes that a recent peer-reviewed scientific study by researchers across the Union found that the Union has the largest carbon footprint in the world due to its soy imports from Brazil, which are 13.8% larger than such imports to China, the largest soy importer worldwide1a; underlines, therefore, the need for the carbon border adjustment mechanism to include in the long term imported emissions generated by agricultural production; _________________ 1aEscobar, N., Tizado, E. J., zu Ermgassen, E. K., Löfgren, P., Börner, J., & Godar, J. (2020), Spatially-explicit footprints of agricultural commodities: Mapping carbon emissions embodied in Brazil’s soy exports, Global Environmental Change, 62, 102067, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti cle/pii/S0959378019308623.

Amendment 156 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. ~~Supports th~~Takes note of ongoing discussions on the possible introduction of a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) as a way to reduce global GHG emissions in the pursuit of the Paris Agreement objectives; states unequivocally that ~~this~~such a mechanism should serve to better address GHG emissions embedded in international trade, thereby incentivising climate action both within the Union and by our trading partners, ~~and not as an instrument for protectionism~~while being non-discriminatory and not creating further administrative burden or cost; stresses that such a mechanism must be compatible with WTO-rules and should not become an instrument for protectionism; stresses, however, that currently discussed approaches do not unambiguously address these concerns and that even a formally WTO-compatible mechanism could trigger third-country trade policy responses, thereby supporting a partitioning of markets;

Amendment 157 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Supports the introduction of a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) as a way to reduce EU consumption based and global GHG emissions in the pursuit of the Paris Agreement objectives; states unequivocally that this mechanism should serve to better address GHG emissions embedded in EU industry and in international trade, by preventing any potential undermining of EU climate policies by carbon leakage, thereby incentivising climate action both within the Union and by our trading partners (while fully respecting the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities), and not as an instrument for protectionism;

Amendment 158 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Supports the introduction of a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) as a way to reduce EU and global GHG emissions in the pursuit of the Paris Agreement objectives; states unequivocally that this mechanism should serve to better address GHG emissions embedded in EU industry and in international trade, by preventing any potential undermining of EU climate policies by carbon leakage, thereby incentivising climate action both within the Union and by our trading partners (while fully respecting the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities), and not as an instrument for protectionism;

Amendment 159 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Supports the introduction of a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) as a way to reduce global GHG emissions in the pursuit of the Paris Agreement objectives, given that third countries would be forced to consider the cost of less restrictive environmental regulations and to adopt measures to reduce their carbon footprint; states unequivocally that this mechanism should serve to better address GHG emissions embedded in international trade, thereby incentivising climate action both within the Union and by our trading partners, and not as an instrument for protectionism;

Amendment 16 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Believes that the main aim of the carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) should be to support the EU’s green objectives and achieve the climate objectives set out in the Paris Agreement by fighting carbon leakage;

Amendment 16 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas the adverse impacts of climate change represent a direct threat to human livelihoods and ecosystems, as confirmed by the Special Report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) on Global Warming of 1.5°C; whereas these impacts show an uneven distribution, with most adverse effects on poorer countries and people;

Amendment 160 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Supports the ~~introduction of~~timely conclusion of a comprehensive impact assessment of the environmental, socioeconomic and political consequences of introducing a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) as a way to reduce global GHG emissions in the pursuit of the Paris Agreement objectives; states unequivocally that this mechanism should serve to ~~better address~~reduce GHG emissions embedded in international trade and better address the risk of carbon leakage, thereby incentivising climate action both within the Union and by our trading partners, and not as an instrument for protectionism;

Amendment 161 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Supports the introduction of a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) as ~~a way to reduce global GHG emissions in the pursuit of~~it would create an incentive for European industries and EU trade partners to decarbonize their industries, and therefore support both EU and global climate policies towards GHG neutrality in line with the Paris Agreement objectives; ~~states unequivo~~Recallys that ~~this mechanism sh~~studies foulnd ~~serve to better address GHG emissions embedded in int~~little or no factual evidence of a competitiveness-driven opernational ~~trade, thereby incentivising climate action both within the Union and by our trading partners, and not as an instrument for~~carbon leakage due to the EU ETS, and that the main objective of a CBAM should be to incentivise global climate action rather than protectionism;

Amendment 162 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Supports the introduction of a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) as a way to reduce global GHG emissions in the pursuit of the Paris Agreement objectives; states unequivocally that this mechanism should serve to better address GHG emissions embedded in international trade, thereby incentivising climate action both within the Union and by our trading partners, and not as an instrument for protectionism; notes that, as the most important climate action, each nation state must take care of population growth and its own population;

Amendment 163 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Supports the introduction of a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) as a way to reduce global GHG emissions in the pursuit of the Paris Agreement objectives; states unequivocally that this mechanism should serve to better address GHG emissions embedded in international trade, thereby incentivising climate action both within the Union and by our trading partners, and not as an instrument for protectionism or generating tax revenues; as such it cannot be perceived as the alternative to carbon leakage measures embedded in Union law;

Amendment 164 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Supports the introduction of a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) as a way to reduce global GHG emissions ~~in the pursuit of the Paris Agreement objectives~~; states unequivocally that this mechanism should serve to better address GHG emissions embedded in international trade, thereby incentivising climate action both within the Union and by our trading partners~~, and not as an instru~~; considers that such measure should take into account both the environmental fo~~r protectionism;~~otprint including GHG emissions over the full life cycle of products and a global level playing field with third countries’ producers.

Amendment 165 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Supports the introduction of a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) as a way to reduce global GHG emissions in the pursuit of the Paris Agreement objectives; states unequivocally that this mechanism should serve to better address GHG emissions embedded in international trade fully in line with WTO rules, thereby incentivising climate action both within the Union and by our trading partners, and not as an instrument for protectionism;

Amendment 166 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Supports the introduction of a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) as a way to reduce global GHG emissions in the pursuit of the Paris Agreement objectives; states unequivocally that this mechanism should serve to better address GHG emissions embedded in international trade, thereby incentivising climate action both within the Union and by our trading partners, and ~~not as an instrument for protectionism~~encouraging the relocation of industrial activities in Europe;

Amendment 167 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Supports the introduction of a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) as a way to reduce EU and global GHG emissions in the pursuit of the Paris Agreement objectives; states unequivocally that this mechanism should serve to better address GHG emissions embedded in EU industry and in international trade, thereby incentivising climate action both within the Union and by our trading partners, and not as an instrument for protectionism;

Amendment 168 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

Amendment 169 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

Amendment 17 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Believes that the main aim of the carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) should be to support the EU’s ~~green~~climate objectives ~~by fighting carbon leakage~~and to contribute to the achievement of climate neutrality as of 2040;

Amendment 17 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas the adverse impacts of climate change represent a direct threat to human livelihoods and terrestrial and marine ecosystems, as confirmed by the Special Report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) on Global Warming of 1.5°C, and the IPCC special report on the ocean and cryosphere;

Amendment 170 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Supports the introduction of a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) as a way to reduce global GHG emissions in the pursuit of the Paris Agreement objectives; states unequivocally that this mechanism should serve to better address all GHG emissions embedded in international trade, thereby incentivising climate action both within the Union and by our trading partners, and not as an instrument for protectionism;

Amendment 171 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Supports the introduction of a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) as a way to reduce global GHG emissions in the pursuit of the Paris Agreement objectives; states unequivocally that this mechanism should serve to ~~better address GHG emissions embedded in international trade~~reduce the EU's imported GHG emissions, thereby incentivising climate action both within the Union and by our trading partners, and not as an instrument for protectionism;

Amendment 172 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Stresses that it is absolutely vital to protect the climate and the only ecosystems compatible with human existence, and to protect fair and decent living and working conditions; believes, in this regard, that the establishment of a carbon border adjustment mechanism is a necessary and desirable protectionist measure from an ecological and social perspective;

Amendment 173 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Emphasises that trade agreements should disseminate EU standards, and help to raise standards worldwide; points to the need to improve the competitiveness of the EU’s primary producers and ensure a level playing field for all;

Amendment 174 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Reiterates that restrictive CO2 emission reduction targets would have serious negative repercussions on the competitiveness of European companies which face increasing competition from third countries which do not apply the same environmental standards;

Amendment 175 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Underscores that carbon pricing measures have been used as alternatives to regulatory approaches of emissions and that this seriously undermines climate action; believes carbon pricing has a limited role alongside regulatory approaches;

Amendment 176 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Stresses that the CBAM should play the role of a strong incentive to EU- wide innovation and technological jump, rather than a model of a defensive protectionism;

Amendment 177 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Stresses that this type of mechanism would prevent ‘carbon leakage’ and the relocation of companies to countries with lower pollution costs;

Amendment 178 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Appeals to use the funds composed of the border tax in support of all investments related to just energy transformation;

Amendment 179 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6b. Takes the view that in trade deals both the EU and third countries should agree ambitious commitments on key priorities and ensure the effective implementation of these commitments; believes that every EU trade agreement should feature an ambitious sustainability chapter, which should be fully implemented and enforced;

Amendment 18 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Believes that there is no need for a CBAM under the Paris Agreement since all countries have agreed to implement relevant emissions policies; believes that the introduction of a CBAM would constitute a motion of no-confidence of the EU towards all third countries; recalls that the European Green Deal Communication stipulates that third countries should share the same climate ambition as the EU;

Amendment 18 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas unmitigated climate change has a serious impact on Europe’s economic productivity, infrastructure, food production capacity, public health, biodiversity and political stability;

Amendment 180 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 c (new)

6c. Believes that the EU’s ramped-up climate targets, which are at the heart of the Green Deal, will increase the risk of carbon leakage in industry; calls on the Commission to ensure that comprehensive anti-carbon leakage measures are rapidly introduced;

Amendment 181 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Reiterates that the introduction of a CBAM should be part of a broader Union industrial policy that is both environmentally ambitious and socially fair, aiming at steering a decarbonised reindustrialisation of Europe that will create local jobs, and ensure the competitiveness of the European economy ~~while fulfilling the Union’s climate ambition~~and a level playing field from an environmental perspective, while fulfilling the Union’s climate ambition; recalls too the importance of ensuring the competitiveness of exports from European producers;

Amendment 182 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Reiterates that the introduction of a CBAM should be part of a broader Union ~~industri~~environmental policy that is both ~~environmentally~~ ambitious and socially fair, a~~iming at steering a~~nd compatible with European Green Deal objective of decarbonised reindustrialisation of Europe that will create local jobs ~~and ensure the~~, will not be detrimental to competitiveness of the European economy and will ensure the environmental level playing field on the European internal market along with the 'polluter pays' principle while fulfilling the Union’s climate ambition;

Amendment 183 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Reiterates that the introduction of a CBAM should be part of a broader Union industrial policy that is both environmentally ambitious and socially fair, aiming at steering a decarbonised reindustrialisation of Europe, by 2050 at the latest, that will create local jobs and ensure the competitiveness of the European economy while fulfilling the Union’s climate ambition; considers that the CBAM should come with a 2050 decarbonisation target and required transition plans for industry;

Amendment 184 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Reiterates that the introduction of a CBAM should be part of a broader Union industrial policy that is both environmentally ambitious and socially fair, so as to ensure, where possible, the rapid modernisation and adaptation of existing industries to the new climate standards, and to ensure a new process aiming at steering a decarbonised reindustrialisation of Europe that will create local jobs and ensure the competitiveness of the European economy while fulfilling the Union’s climate ambition;

Amendment 185 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Reiterates that the introduction of a CBAM should be part of a broader Union industrial policy that is both environmentally ambitious and socially fair, aiming at steering a decarbonised reindustrialisation of Europe that will create local jobs and ensure the competitiveness of the European economy while fulfilling the Union’s climate ambition; stresses that this mechanism should also be a means of restoring fair competition at European and international level;

Amendment 186 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

Amendment 187 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Reiterates that the introduction of a CBAM should be part of a broader Union industrial policy that is both technologically advanced and superior to any international competitior’s, environmentally ambitious and socially fair, aiming at steering a decarbonised reindustrialisation of Europe that will create local jobs and ensure the competitiveness of the European economy while fulfilling the Union’s climate ambition;

Amendment 188 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Reiterates that the introduction of a CBAM should be ~~part of~~complemented with a broader Union industrial policy that is both environmentally ambitious and socially fair, aiming at steering a decarbonised reindustrialisation of Europe, by 2050 at the latest, that will create local jobs and ensure the competitiveness of the European economy while fulfilling the Union’s climate ambition within the European Green Deal;

Amendment 189 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

Amendment 19 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. Believes that the introduction of a CBAM protects expensive green production in energy-intensive sectors in the EU from cheaper carbon intensive alternatives, and therefore reduces competitive pressure to drive down the price; rejects therefore the CBAM as a tool fostering green protectionism;

Amendment 19 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas according to the World Health Organization (WHO), as of 2030 climate change is expected to contribute to approximately 250 000 additional deaths per year, from malnutrition, malaria, diarrhoea and heat stress;

Amendment 190 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

Amendment 191 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Reiterates that the introduction of a CBAM should be part of a broader Union industrial policy ~~that is both environmentally ambitious and socially fair,~~, which aim~~ing~~s at steering a decarbonised reindustrialisation of ~~Europe~~the Union that will create local jobs, protect social rights and ensure the competitiveness of the ~~European~~Member States economy while ~~fulfilling the Union’s climate ambition;~~contributing to a greater respect for the environment.

Amendment 192 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Considers that the CBAM should be integrated and complemented by real planning organised by the Commission and the Member States to reduce immediately and irreversibly, in each industrial sector, direct and indirect scope 1, 2 and 3 GHG emissions; calls on the Commission and the Member States, in particular, to put in place decarbonisation strategies for imported emissions for each sector with binding quantified targets, drawn up with stakeholders on the basis of the most ambitious existing initiatives;

Amendment 193 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Calls on the Commission to conduct an impact assessment on the different possible mechanism and designs of a CBAM; points out that the impact assessment should at least assess and compare the effectiveness, efficiency and legal feasibility of a CBAM in the following forms: (a) a carbon tax or tariff on imports; (b) an extension of EU ETS to imports: (i.) obligation for importers to purchase (tradeable) allowances outside of EU ETS; (ii.) integrating import emissions into EU ETS; (c) products requirements;

Amendment 194 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Calls for thorough impact assessments and utmost transparency of the process leading to a CBAM, including in the engagement with EU trading partners to pre-empt possible trade retaliation; notes that these impact assessments must include effects on sustainable innovation and international trade flows as well as on carbon pricing strategies in third countries to ensure opportunities of international compatibility and linking of pricing schemes are duly reflected;

Amendment 195 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Stresses that the EU ETS has so far failed on substantially reducing GHG emissions from the industrial sector; urges therefore the Commission to propose, as a complement to a revised EU ETS and the introduction of a CBAM, more ambitious and binding norms and standards on products placed on the EU market in terms of GHG emission reduction, resource and energy-savings, in support of the Sustainable Product Policy Framework;

Amendment 196 #

7a. Believes that the main aim of the CBAM should be to support the EU’s green objectives and prevent carbon leakage by addressing theCO2 content of European imports; underlines the increase risked of carbon leakage that will result from the EU’s increased ambition on climate change; calls on the Commission, therefore, to strive for a level global playing field through all its policies;

Amendment 197 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Believes that the main aim of the CBAM should be to support the EU’s green objectives and prevent carbon leakage by addressing the CO2 content of European imports; underlines the increase risk of carbon leakage that will result from the EU’s increased ambition on climate change; urges the Commission, therefore, to ensure full carbon-leakage protection in all its policies;

Amendment 198 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Believes that the main aim of the CBAM should be to support the EU’s green objectives and prevent carbon leakage by addressing the CO2 content of European imports; underlines the increase risked of carbon leakage that will result from the EU’s increased ambition on climate change; urges the Commission, therefore, to ensure full carbon-leakage protection in all its policies;

Amendment 199 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Stresses that the modalities for the design and implementation of a CBAM should be explored alongside the revision of the EU ETS so as to ensure their complementarity and coherence, and avoid overlapping that would lead to double protection of industries;

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 a (new)

-1 a. Whereas excess emission allowances that industry actors initially received leads to an unreasonable amount of windfall profits (over 25 billion euros during 2008- 2015)1b; _________________ 1bCAN Europe, « European Fat Cats : EU energy intensive industrie : paid to pollute, not to decarbonise », April 2018

Amendment 2 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 1

~~— having regard to the Agreement adopted at the 21st Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC (COP21) in Paris on 12 December 2015 (the Paris Agreement),~~deleted

Amendment 20 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Believes that the CBAM is the appropriate instrument to contribute effectively to a global reduction in greenhouse gases;

Amendment 20 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas the average global temperature has already risen by about 1.1°C above pre-industrial levels, and estimated anthropogenic global warming is currently increasing at 0.2 ºC (likely between 0.1 ºC and 0.3ºC) per decade due to past and ongoing emissions;

Amendment 200 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Underlines that the introduction of a CBAM should be based on a comprehensive impact assessment which should be conducted with the aim of reducing total global emissions and should assess the effects on sustainable innovation and changing trade flows and supply chains;

Amendment 201 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Believes that the main aim of the CBAM should be to support the EU’s green objectives and prevent carbon leakage by addressing the CO2 content of European imports; urges the Commission to ensure full carbon-leakage protection in all its policies;

Amendment 202 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7b. Underlines that the CBAM, the European industrial strategy and the new Circular Economy Action Plan complement one another to a large extent in terms of ensuring the relocation of industrial production, reducing the length of value chains and cutting imported emissions, especially for industrial sectors such as the steel sector;

Amendment 203 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 c (new)

7c. Stresses that discussion of the carbon footprint should go hand in hand with the assessment of each Member State’s responsibility in terms of their contribution to the Union’s climate efforts; notes that the emissions generated in certain Member States are exported to other Member States; underlines, in this regard, the role played by the relocation of industrial activities from certain Member States to others, particularly from the West to the East; considers, to this end, that the Union should strive to shorten value chains, including within the EU, in order to reduce the carbon footprint of the various Member States, in particular by planning harmonious industrial co-development across the Union through measures to keep significant industrial capacity in each Member State and ensure greater complementarity of the national and regional production structures throughout the Union;

Amendment 204 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 d (new)

7d. Underlines that the CBAM should be part of a wider set of policies to enable and promote investment in low-carbon industrial processes, energy efficiency measures and renewable energies in order to achieve the decarbonisation of industry; suggests promoting, alongside the CBAM, highly innovative public policies that exclude support for fossil fuel technologies and making it compulsory to purchase low-carbon materials under public contracts; calls for a revision of EU state aid rules to ensure proper support for the establishment of a strong decarbonised industrial base in the Union;

Amendment 205 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Considers that a CBAM shcould theoretically cover all imports, but that as a starting point already by 2023 it should cover the power sector and energy- intensive industrial sectors like cement, steel, chemicals and fertilisers, which continue to receive substantial free allocations, and still represent 94 % of Union industrial emissions; considers, however, that before introducing CBAM on all imports, there should be a test phase of 3-5 years during which it should only cover the most energy-intensive products, such as steel and concrete, or aluminium; considers that the processing industry must receive a refund equivalent to that of its exports in order not to reduce its competitiveness on the international market;

Amendment 206 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Considers that a CBAM should cover all EU-ETS emissions embedded in imports, but that as a starting point already by 2023 it should cover the power sector and energy and emissions -intensive industrial sectors like electricity, cement, steel, and certain chemicals and fertilisers, which continue to receive substantial free allocations, and still represent 94 % of Union industrial emissions; considers that the CBAM may also cover products containing large amounts of these energy- intensive commodities that may be particularly at risk of carbon leakage;

Amendment 207 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Considers that a CBAM should cover alls many imports~~, but that as a starting point already by 2023 it should cover~~ as possible, especially the power sector and energy- intensive industrial sectors like cement, steel, chemicals and fertilisers, which continue to receive substantial free allocations, and still represent 94 % of Union industrial emissions; due to its complexity, the functioning of the CBAM should be tested during a transition period with the objective of detecting operational and administrative problems of the mechanism and making the necessary adjustments and modifications;

Amendment 208 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Considers that a CBAM should cover all ~~imports~~sectors covered by the EU ETS, but that as a starting point already by 2023 it should cover the power sector and energy-intensive industrial sectors like cement, steel, chemicals and fertilisers, which continue to receive substantial free allocations, and still represent 94 % of Union industrial ~~emissions~~greenhouse gas emissions; considers that the CBAM may also cover products containing large amounts of these energy-intensive commodities that may be particularly at risk of carbon leakage;

Amendment 209 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Considers that a CBAM should cover all imports, but that as a starting point already by 2023 it should cover the ~~power~~energy sector and, as a priority, energy- intensive industrial sectors like cement, and steel, ~~chemicals and fertilisers, which continue to receive substantial free allocations, and still represent 94% of Union industrial emissions~~which represent almost 40% of the emissions from sectors at risk of carbon leakage in Europe, before moving on to other sectors that are vulnerable to carbon leakage, such as refining, aluminium, chemicals and fertilisers, depending on the technical feasibility and the level of risk of carbon leakage;

Amendment 21 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Welcomes the Commission’s intention to propose a CBAM that would ensure that the price of imports reflect more accurately their carbon content;

Amendment 21 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas the average global temperature has already risen by about 1.1°C above pre-industrial levels; whereas the relationship between temperature variation and carbon dioxide has not been demonstrated;

Amendment 210 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Considers that a CBAM should cover all imports~~, but that~~ in sectors covered by the EU ETS and avoid distortions in the EU internal market; as a starting point already by 2023 it should cover the power sector and energy-intensive industrial sectors exposed the most to carbon leakage, like cement, steel, chemicals and fertilisers, which ~~continue to receive substantial free allocations, and still represent 94 % of Union industrial emission~~still represent 94 % of Union industrial emissions; in order to avoid carbon leakage, a CBAM should covered imports of commodities and processed products;

Amendment 211 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Considers that a CBAM should cover all imports, but that as a starting point already by 2023 it should cover the power sector and energy-intensive industrial sectors like cement, steel, chemicals and fertilisers, which continue to receive ~~substantial~~ free allocations, and still represent 94 % of Union industrial emissions; emphasizes that the inclusion of specific sectors in CBAM should be preceded by a thorough impact assessment on downstream processing and on final consumers;

Amendment 212 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. ~~Considers that a CBAM should cover all imports, but that as a starting point already by 2023 it should cov~~Notes that before establishing a CBAM and deciding which sectors it should cover, the Commission should deliver an impact assessment that considers the ~~power sector and energy-intensive industrial sectors like ce~~consequences on sectors most exposed to carbon leakage; considers that such impact assessment, s~~teel, chemicals and f~~hould take into considerati~~lisers, which continue to receive substantial free allocations, and still represent 94 % of Union industrial emissions~~on the upcoming revision of the ETS system that, as currently structured, presents a number of difficulties in fostering investments in low carbon technologies through the ETS itself;

Amendment 213 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Considers that a CBAM should cover all imports, but that as a starting point already by 2023 it should cover the power sector and energy-intensive industrial sectors like cement, steel, chemicals and fertilisers, which continue to receive substantial free allocations, and still represent 94 % of Union industrial emissionundergo a pilot stage and a phased introduction, and begin by covering energy-intensive industrial sectors like cement, steel, chemicals and fertilisers;

Amendment 214 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Considers that a CBAM should cover all imports, except for all the electric vehicles, appliances, and components needed for the production of green energy, but that as a starting point already by 2023 it should cover the power sector and energy-intensive industrial sectors like cement, steel, chemicals and fertilisers, which continue to receive substantial free allocations, and still represent 94 % of Union industrial emissions;

Amendment 215 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Considers that a CBAM should cover all imports, but that as a starting point already by 2023 it should cover the power sector and energy-intensive industrial sectors like cement, steel, chemicals and fertilisers, which continue to receive substantial free allocations, and still represent 94 % of Union industrial emissions; stresses, however, the need to avoid internal market distortions, notably on downstream markets;

Amendment 216 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Considers that a CBAM should eventually cover all imports, but that ~~as a starting point already by~~in an initial phase, from 2023, it should cover the power sector and energy-intensive industrial sectors like cement, steel, ~~chemicals~~aluminium, chemicals, glass, paper, oil refining and fertilisers, which continue to receive substantial free allocations, and still represent 94 % of Union industrial emissions;

Amendment 217 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

Amendment 218 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Considers that a CBAM should cover all imports, but that as a starting point already by 2023 it should cover the power sector and energy-intensive industrial sectors like cement, steel, chemicals and fertilisers, which continue to receive substantial free allocations, abe based on the actual carbon footprint of the products imported, including that caused by their storage, packaging and transport, while promoting the energy transition of the ind ust~~ill represent 94 % of Union industrial~~rial sectors with the highest GHG emissions;

Amendment 219 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Considers that a CBAM should cover all imports, but that as a starting point already by 2023 it should cover the power sector and energy-intensive industrial sectors like cement, steel, chemicals and fertilisers, which continue to receive substantial free allocations, and still represent 94 % of Union industrial emissionsas a starting point should cover the sectors that are sensitive to carbon leakage in the sense that they have carbon intense production and are trade intensive; considers that it could both include goods and energy;

Amendment 22 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. Insists on the need for a CBAM compatible with World Trade Organization (WTO) rules, since WTO rules do not discriminate between producers, are based on objective criteria and have a clear environmental objective.

Amendment 22 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas the average global temperature has already risen ~~by abou~~past 1.1°C above pre-industrial levels; 1a _________________ 1a https://library.wmo.int/index.php?lvl=noti ce_display&id=21700#.X5qHDxS2mUk

Amendment 220 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Considers that a CBAM should ~~cover all imports,~~be gradually developed with caution and be based on substantiated evidence but that as a starting point already by 2023 it shcould cover the power sector and energy-intensive industrial sectors like cement, steel, chemicals and fertilisers, which continue to receive substantial free allocations, and still represent 94 % of Union industrial emissionose sectors that the Commission impact assessment considers as adequate starting points;

Amendment 221 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

Amendment 222 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Considers that a CBAM should cover all imports, but that as a starting point already by 2023 it should cover at least the power sector and energy-intensive industrial sectors like cement, steel, chemicals and fertilisers, which continue to receive substantial free allocations, and still represent 94 % of Union industrial emissions;

Amendment 223 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

Amendment 224 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Considers that a CBAM should cover all imports, but that as a starting point already by 2023 it should cover the power sector and energy-intensive industrial sectors like cement, steel, chemicals and fertilisers~~, which continue to receive substantial free allocations, and still represent 94 % of Union industrial emission~~; stresses the need to avoid internal market distortions, notably on downstream markets;

Amendment 225 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Considers that a CBAM should cover all imports, but that as a starting point already by 2023 it should cover the power sector and energy-intensive industrial sectors like cement, steel, chemicals and fertilisers~~, which continue to receive substantial free allocations, and still represent 94 % of Union industrial emission~~; stresses the need to avoid internal market distortions, notably on downstream markets;

Amendment 226 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Considers that a CBAM should ~~cover all~~ultimately cover the vast majority of imports, but that as a starting point already by 2023 it should cover the power sector and energy-intensive industrial sectors like cement, steel, chemicals and fertilisers, which continue to receive substantial free allocations, and still represent 94 % of Union industrial emissionit should gradually cover specific sectors of the economy determined according to an Impact Assessment including for example the power sector and energy-intensive industrial sectors like cement, steel, chemicals and fertilisers;

Amendment 227 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Considers that a CBAM should cover all ~~imports, but that as a starting point already by 2023 it should cover~~products and by 2023 it should already cover at least the power sector and energy-intensive industrial sectors like cement, steel, chemicals and fertilisers, which continue to receive substantial free allocations, and still represent 94 % of Union industrial emissions;

Amendment 228 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Notes that there is some opposition to the protection and restoration targets laid down in the Biodiversity Strategy to 2030 highlighting in particular leakage of production to non-EU countries with higher proportion of primary forest ecosystems; expresses its full support for the Biodiversity Strategy objectives; calls therefore for the inclusion of the forest sector in the carbon border adjustment mechanism, as a way of promoting sustainable and circular utilisation of forest resources in the forest-value chain and of protection of the most valuable forest ecosystems both in the EU and non- EU countries;

Amendment 229 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Highlights the important contribution that European agriculture makes in terms of ensuring the greatest possible degree of food security and sovereignty for EU citizens; points out that local production and short supply chains result in significant carbon savings compared to third-country imports;

Amendment 23 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)

1 c. Notes the diversity of policy instruments allowing to implement a CBAM, ranging from tax instruments to mechanisms relying to the EU Emission Trade System (EU ETS), for example: (i) an import tax, which could be a simple tool to give a strong and stable environmental price signal to administer while being WTO compatible as long it would echo the impact of the EU ETS price per ton (ii) an excise duty on carbon, which could be applied to GHG emissions content of products and would send a stable price signal.Such excise duty could allow EU exports to maintain their competitiveness and maintain the EU environmental incentives while allowing EU producers to operate on a level playing field both within and outside the EU via a system of reconciliation between allowances bought and excise duty paid, as well as legitimate deductions (iii) notional ETS that would create a parallel system mirroring the EUETS prices without distorting the EU ETS allowances price balance

Amendment 23 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas there are strong and increasing inequalities regarding both the effects and the causes of climate change, being the poorest countries the most deeply impacted and at the same time the ones with a lowest share of GHG emissions;

Amendment 230 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Considers that this CBAM should take into account the level of development of the importing countries so as not to have a negative impact on the poorest countries; believes that the CBAM should contain an exemption clause or compensation mechanism for the poorest countries;

Amendment 231 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Calls on the Commission to carefully assess which sectors should be covered under the scope of the mechanism;

Amendment 232 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)

8b. Stresses that for the CBAM to be fully integrated into the EU’s climate policies, it must not penalise countries that have climate policies that are equivalent to those of the EU; calls for the mechanism to differentiate between importing countries in order to take into account the equivalent climate policies of other states;

Amendment 233 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)

8b. Emphasises that imports contribute substantially to the EU food chain’s environmental footprint, in terms of both carbon and biodiversity; calls on the Commission to act as swiftly as possible and put forward tailored measures to reduce the impact of imports while complying with international rules;

Amendment 234 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)

8b. Stresses that the efficiency and overall success of the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism will be highly conditional to the scheme’s ability to accurately determine the carbon content of the imported goods; calls on the Commission to assess all options regarding the methodologies for the determination of a product’s actual carbon content;

Amendment 235 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Underlines that the GHG emissions content of imports concerned should be accounted for on the basis of transparent and reliable product-specific benchmarks ~~representing the global average GHG emissions content of individual products~~at the level of the installations in third countries but, by default, if data is not made available by the importer, the global average GHG emissions content of individual products should be accounted for; notes in that perspective that carbon intensity of imported products may be evaluated through their raw materials composition and that this approximation would weigh each basic material covered by the EU ETS and multiply it by its carbon intensity value; stresses that importers should be allowed to individually demonstrate the specific carbon intensity of their product; considers that the carbon pricing of imports should also take into account the country- specific carbon intensity of the electricity grid or if data is made available by the importer the carbon intensity of the energy consumption at the installation level;

Amendment 236 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Underlines that the GHG emissions 9. content of imports concerned should be accounted for on the basis of transparent and reliable product-specific benchmarks representing the ~~glob~~national average GHG emissions content of individual products for each country of origin; considers that the carbon pricing of imports should also take into account the country- specific carbon intensity of the electricity grid; emphasises the need to incorporate the emissions from transport to the Union in the GHG emissions content of the imports covered by the CBAM; stresses that the emissions content of the imports concerned should cover not just carbon dioxide, but all GHG, especially methane and nitrous oxide;

Amendment 237 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Underlines that the GHG emissions content of ~~impor~~products concerned should be accounted for as close to reality as possible or, where not feasible, on the basis of transparent and reliable product-specific benchmarks representing the global average GHG emissions content of individual products~~; considers that the carbon pricing of imports should also take into account the country-specific carbon intensity of the electricity grid~~, disaggregated by different production methods with varying emission intensities; considers that a CBAM should also take into account the country-specific carbon intensity of the electricity grid and the emissions related to transportation; considers that producers should have the option to prove that the carbon content of their products is lower than the benchmark, and avail of a carbon charge adjusted accordingly;

Amendment 238 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Underlines that the GHG emissions content of imports concerned should be accounted for on the basis of transparent and reliable product-specific benchmarks representing the global average GHG emissions content of individual products; considers that the carbon pricing of imports should also take into account the country- specific carbon intensity of the electricity grid, disaggregated by different production methods with varying emission intensities; considers that importers should have the option to prove, in accordance with EU standards for measurement, reporting and verification (MRV), that the carbon content of their products is lower than the benchmark, and avail of a CBAM price adapted accordingly;

Amendment 239 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Underlines that the GHG emissions content of imports concerned should be accounted for on the basis of transparent and reliable product-specific benchmarks representing the global average GHG emissions content of individual products; ~~considers that the carbon pricing of~~disaggregated by different production methods with varying emission intensities; considers that importers should ~~also take into account the country-specific~~have the option to prove, in accordance with EU standards for measurement, reporting and verification (MRV), that the carbon iconten~~sity of the electricity grid;~~ t of their products is lower than the benchmark, and avail of a CBAM price adapted accordingly; and stresses the need to address the inclusion of transport emissions into the CBAM and not only product-based emissions;

Amendment 24 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)

1 d. Should the CBAM be of fiscal nature, welcomes the possibility to propose a mechanism based on article 192(2) TFEU in order to create a more efficient and democratic decision making procedure in EU energy and climate policy;

Amendment 24 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas the Union and its Member States are committed to delivering climate action on the basis of the latest available scientific evidence; whereas many measures, such as the denial of nuclear power and stricter regulations than the EU's competitors, have increased the use of fossil energy worldwide;

Amendment 240 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Underlines that the GHG emissions content of imports concerned should be accounted for on the basis of transparent ~~and~~, reliable up to date product-specific benchmarks representing the global average GHG emissions cointentsities of individual products~~; considers that the carbon pricing of imports should also take into account the country-specific carbon intensity of the electricity grid;~~, disaggregated by different production methods with varying emission intensities; considers that non EU producers should have the option to prove, in respect with EU standards for measurement, reporting and verification (MRV), that the actual carbon intensity embodied in their products is below the average value estimated by the benchmark, and should therefore benefit from a CBAM price adapted accordingly.

Amendment 241 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Underlines that the GHG emissions content of imports concerned should be accounted for on the basis of transparent and reliable product-specific benchmarks representing the global average GHG emissions content of individual products, with the exception of the agricultural and forestry sector where the GHG emission content will be reflecting different methods of production and sourcing and land use changes; considers that the carbon pricing of imports should also take into account the country- specific carbon intensity of the electricity grid;

Amendment 242 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Underlines that the GHG emissions content of imports concerned should be accounted for on the basis of transparent and reliable product-specific benchmarks representing ~~the global~~, initially and by default, the European average GHG emissions content of individual products~~; considers that the carbon pricing of imports should also take into account the country-specific carbon intensity of the electricity grid~~, while working towards standardised reporting on an international level in order to allow the global average to be used in the long term; considers that the climate policies of third countries and their level of development should also be taken into account;

Amendment 243 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

Amendment 244 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

Amendment 245 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

Amendment 246 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

Amendment 247 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

Amendment 248 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

Amendment 249 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

Amendment 25 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Proposes that the CBAM should not be implemented as an extension of the EU emissions trading system (EU ETS), which would require importers to purchase allowances for the volume of carbon emissions incorporated in their products; notes that the mechanism should ensure a single carbon price, both for domestic producers and importer, especially during the COVID-crisis, since it will inevitably lead to higher consumer prices, which will deteriorate the already precarious financial situation of many EU citizens and families;

Amendment 25 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas the Union and its Member States are committed to delivering climate action on the basis of the latest available scientific evidence and taking into account the existing inequalities between richer and poorer regions worldwide;

Amendment 250 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

Amendment 251 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

Amendment 252 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Underlines that the GHG emissions content of imports concerned should be accounted for on the basis of transparent and reliable ~~product-specific benchmarks representing the global average GHG emissions content of individual products; considers that the carbon pricing of imports~~benchmarks based on the rulebook of the Paris Agreement that incentivizes actors to innovate and to lower the carbon footprint of imports; considers that the mechanism should also take into account the average of the country-specific carbon intensity of the e~~lectricity grid~~xporting power system;

Amendment 253 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

Amendment 254 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Underlines that the GHG emissions cointentsity of imports ~~concerned should be accounted for on the basis of transparent and reliable product-specific benchmarks representing the global average GHG emissions content of individual product~~should be calculated on the basis of product-specific Union benchmarks; considers that the carbon pricing of imports should also take into account the country- specific carbon intensity of the electricity grid, if the inclusion of indirect emissions can be achieved in a WTO-compatible and non- discriminatory way;

Amendment 255 #

9. Underlines that the GHG emissions cointentsity of imports ~~concerned~~ should be ~~accoun~~calculated for on the basis of ~~transparent and reliable product-specific benchmarks representing the global average GHG emissions content of individual product~~product-specific Union benchmarks; considers that the carbon pricing of imports should also take into account the country- specific carbon intensity of the electricity grid, if inclusion of indirect emissions can be done in a WTO-compatible and non-discriminatory way;

Amendment 256 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Points out that if the correction mechanism took into account the carbon intensity of the electricity grid in a given country, it would most likely be in favour of some highly developed countries as they already have a relatively low-carbon electricity grid, while countries that are much less developed depend on a more carbon-intensive electricity grid; stresses therefore that the correction mechanism must be as simple as possible and should not take into account the country-specific carbon intensity of the electricity grid;

Amendment 257 #

9a. Calls on the Commission to explore how the European co-operation for Accreditation (EA) could be employed to accredit independent third-party verifiers that can quantify, upon request of the importers, the actual carbon content of their products and establish whether it is below the benchmark set by the CBAM;

Amendment 258 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Stresses that the life-cycle analysis of imports must take into account all impacts such as the extraction and use of materials, the manufacturing process and energy use, and the mode of transport used, in order to enhance their traceability;

Amendment 259 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Reaffirms the importance of cooperation with partner countries to stop deforestation and promote sustainable forest management as well as sustainable land use management;

Amendment 26 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Propos~~Notes that ~~the~~a CBAM be implemented as an extension of the EU ~~emissions trading system (EU ETS), which~~ETS would require importers to purchase allowances for the volume of carbon emissions incorporated in their products; notes that ~~the~~such mechanism ~~should ensure a single carbon price, both for domestic producers and importers~~encompasses risks of foreign interference into the EU ETS balance;

Amendment 26 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas the Union and its Member States are committed to delivering climate action on the basis of the latest available scientific evidence and impact assessments on how climate actions affect European businesses and competitiveness;

Amendment 260 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)

9b. Emphasises that life-cycle assessment tools should take into account the deviations of the carbon mechanism at borders, through the establishment of a readjustment system, in order to take into account the real impacts of carbon on the most vulnerable ecosystems, for example, when the transport of goods by sea takes place through the Arctic Ocean, thereby reducing the duration of transport and therefore emissions, but at the same time increasing the impact on the environment;

Amendment 261 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)

9b. Emphasises the need to tackle global deforestation and forest degradation; welcomes the Commission’s intention to present a legislative proposal and other measures to avoid or minimise the presence of products associated with deforestation or forest degradation in the EU market;

Amendment 262 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)

9b. Recommends to the Commission to consider distributed ledger technologies, including blockchain, for designing the practical aspects of the CBAM, so as to ensure that accounting of embedded emissions of products are as close to reality as possible;

Amendment 263 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 c (new)

9c. Emphasises that current carbon leakage prevention measures are effective, should be retained and should, if necessary, be expanded; underlines that the phasing-out of existing mechanisms could result in a loss of competitiveness for companies in the single market and globally; stresses the need for equally effective measures if the existing measures are to be phased out;

Amendment 264 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 c (new)

9c. Stresses that life cycle assessment tools should take into account impacts on biodiversity such as eutrophication of terrestrial and marine habitats or ocean acidification;

Amendment 265 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 d (new)

9d. Stresses that life cycle assessment tools should also be applied to European products and services;

Amendment 266 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. ~~Stresses that carbon pricing under the CBAM should mirror the dynamic evolution of the price of Union allowances under the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS); points out that~~Calls on the Commission to consider and assess different policy options for the implementation of the CBAM as well as alternative solutions such as the introduction of a ~~rising~~consumption char~~bon floor price under the EU ETS could ensure predictability under the CBAM while also ensuring a stronger price signal within the EU~~ge, or charge on emissions, which would apply on both imported and domestic products by adjusting their VAT rate proportionally to their embedded GHG emissions;

Amendment 267 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Stresses that carbon pricing under the CBAM should mirror the dynamic evolution of the price of Union allowances under the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS); points out that the introduction of a rising carbon floor price under the EU ETS could ensure predictability under the CBAM while also ensuring a stronger price signal within the EU;deleted

Amendment 268 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Stresses that carbon pricing under the CBAM should mirror the dynamic evolution of the price of Union allowances under the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS); is of the opinion that importers should buy allowances from a separate pool of allowances to the EU ETS, whose carbon price corresponds to the carbon price of the day of the transaction in the EU ETS; points out that the introduction of a rising carbon ~~floor price~~price floor under the EU ETS could ensure predictability under the CBAM while also ensuring a stronger price signal within the EU;

Amendment 269 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Stresses that carbon pricing under the CBAM should mirror the dynamic evolution of the price of Union allowances under the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS)~~; points out that the introduction of a rising carbon floor price under the EU ETS could ensure predictability under the CBAM while also ensuring a stronger price signal within the EU;~~

Amendment 27 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Proposes that the CBAM be ~~implemen~~created as an ~~extension of~~alternative to the EU emissions trading system (EU ETS), which ~~would require importers to purchase allowances for the volume of carbon emissions incorporated in their product~~has proven to be highly ineffective in increasing the carbon price; stresses the need for the mechanism to include the emissions resulting from transport in the carbon content pricing; urges the mechanism to aim for a reduction of EU share of imported emissions; notes that the mechanism should ensure a single carbon price, both for domestic producers and importers;

Amendment 27 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas the Union and its Member States are committed to delivering climate action on the basis of prosperity, innovation, technological openness and the latest available scientific evidence;

Amendment 270 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Stresses that carbon pricing under the CBAM should mirror the dynamic evolution of the price of Union allowances under the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS); ~~points out that the introduction of a rising carbon floor price under the EU ETS could ensure predictability under the CBAM while also ensuring a stronger price signal within the EU;~~

Amendment 271 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

Amendment 272 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

Amendment 273 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

Amendment 274 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

Amendment 275 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

Amendment 276 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. SRecalls that the COVID-19 crisis led to a significant drop in the price of carbon, revealing the shortcomings of the existing system, stresses that carbon pricing under the CBAM should mirror the dynamic evolution of the price of Union allowances under the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS); points out that the introduction of a rising carbon floor price under the EU ETS could ensure predictability under the CBAM while also ensuring a stronger price signal within the EU;

Amendment 277 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Stresses that ~~carbon~~the pricing ~~under the CBAM~~of fossil coal used in the CO2 tariff mechanism should ~~mirror~~reflect the dynamic evolution of the prices of Union allowances under the EU ~~Emissions Trading System (EU~~ ETS); points out that the introduction of a rising ~~carbon floor price under~~base price for fossil coal in the EU ETS could ensure the predictability ~~under the CBAM while also ensuring a stronger price signal within the EU~~of the carbon tariff mechanism as well as a stronger price signal within the EU; stresses that the CBAM should be based on a non-discriminatory principle in order to be WTO compatible;

Amendment 278 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Stresses that carbon pricing under the CBAM should mirror the dynamic evolution of the price of Union allowances under the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS); such evolution shall grant that ETS free allowances remain at 100% of the benchmark without any reduction; points out that the introduction of a rising carbon floor price under the EU ETS could ensure predictability under the CBAM while also ensuring a stronger price signal within the EU;

Amendment 279 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Stresses that carbon pricing under the CBAM should mirror the dynamic evolution of the price of Union allowances under the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS); points out that the introduction of a rising carbon auction floor price under the EU ETS could be a way to ensure predictability under the CBAM while also ensuring a stronger price signal within the EU for the power sector while incentivizing the industry sectors;

Amendment 28 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Propo~~Calls on the Commission to assess ~~that the CBAM be implemented as~~all different options for the introduction of a carbon border adjustment mechanism, including, among others, an extension of the EU emissions trading system (EU ETS), which would require importers to purchase allowances for the volume of carbon emissions incorporated in their products; notes that the mechanism should ensure a single carbon price, both for domestic producers and importers;

Amendment 28 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas the Union and its Member States armust be committed to delivering climate action on the basis of the latest available scientific evidence;

Amendment 280 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Stresses that carbon pricing under the CBAM should mirror the dynamic evolution of the price of Union allowances under the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS); points out that ~~the introduction of a rising carbon floor price under the EU ETS could ensure predictability under the CBAM while also ensuring a stronger price signal within the EU~~an increased ambition will result in a higher carbon price;

Amendment 281 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

Amendment 282 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Is extremely concerned about the idea of linking the CBAM to the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) as it stands; stresses that this market mechanism is subject to the uncertainties inherent in the allowances and, consequently, results in a damaging volatility in the price of carbon1a; considers that the current EU ETS arrangements make it impossible to fulfil the Union’s climate objectives and its commitments under the Paris Agreement; stresses, in this regard, that it is very worried about the short and medium-term effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the functioning of the EU ETS and the price of carbon; underlines, too, that there is a risk of inconsistency between the sectors covered by the EU ETS and the imports covered by the CBAM; _________________ 1aAccording to the European Economic and Social Committee, the ETS ‘for the most part (...) has been ineffective: the price for GHG emissions has been very low for years (...) yet sufficiently volatile to trigger investment leakage’ (https://eur- lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:5201 9IE0927&from=EN).

Amendment 283 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Calls on the Commission to undertake an impact assessment and, when calculating emissions, to include, where feasible, the carbon cost of transporting imported products; notes that this assessment should cover both the transport of the final product and the transport required during the various phases of product creation so that all aspects of the carbon impact are actually incorporated;

Amendment 284 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Stresses the importance of the existing measures to prevent carbon leakage, such as free allocation under the EU ETS; urges the Commission, therefore, to propose a mechanism that provides certainty for European industries, and can co-exist with the existing carbon leakage measures, whilst avoiding double protection;

Amendment 285 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

Amendment 286 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

Amendment 287 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Considers that the mechanism’s design should incentivize carbon pricing and ambitious climate action abroad and reward third country ambition levels equivalent to that of the Union by exempting, where appropriate, bilateral trade from CBAM obligations;

Amendment 288 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Emphasises that the implementation of the mechanism should go hand in hand with the deletion of free allowances under the ETS, in order to encourage an increased carbon price, and to avoid a tangle of measures to tackle carbon leakage;

Amendment 289 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Highlights that unlike the ETS, the mechanism should not treat burning wood for fuel as carbon neutral and within the revised and updated framework the carbon embedded in logged wood and depleted soil should have a price;

Amendment 29 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Proposes that the CBAM be implemented as an extension of the EU emissions trading system (EU ETS), which would require importers to purchase allowances for the volume of carbon emissions incorporated in their products; emphasizes that the EU ETS shall accelerate, through a rebasing of the cap and adjustment of the Linear Reduction Factor resulting in ambitious and meaningful carbon pricing, reaching the necessary GHG emissions reduction in line with the updated 2030Union climate target and the objective of net zero GHG emissions within the Union by 2050; notes that the mechanism should ensure a single carbon price, both for domestic producers and importers;

Amendment 29 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas the Union and its Member States ~~are committed to delivering climate action on the basis of the latest available scientific evidence~~have now the objective of achieving climate neutrality at the latest by 2050;

Amendment 290 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)

10b. Considers that the CBAM should form part of a series of legislative measures designed to ensure the immediate, rapid and irreversible reduction of the emissions for which the Union is responsible, be they direct emissions from homes, emissions linked to the goods and services produced and consumed in the Union, or emissions linked to exports, imports and international transport; invites, therefore, the Commission to carry out an in-depth and rapid revision of the Energy Taxation Directive, the Industrial Emissions Directive and the Effort Sharing Regulation, and to replace the EU ETS with a system to organise, via binding measures, the reduction in emissions from the industrial and energy sectors throughout their value chains;

Amendment 291 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)

10b. Calls for effective and easily accessible opportunities for third countries to link their emission trading systems with the EU ETS or to directly join it and to design a CBAM in a way that invites trading partners to do so; for the sake of coherence and in an effort to incentivise third country linking make provisions to expand the sectors covered by the EU ETS.

Amendment 292 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)

10b. Stresses that Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Small Island Developing States (SIDS) should be eligible for exemptions, in order to take into account their specificities and the potential negative impacts of the mechanism on their development;

Amendment 293 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 c (new)

10c. Considers that the Union’s climate objectives should include imported emissions and emissions from international transport; stresses that in this framework the CBAM should set a ceiling for imported emissions and emissions from international transport, which should be lowered gradually and irreversibly from now until 2050; calls on the Commission to set binding targets for the reduction of imported emissions and emissions from international transport for 2030, 2040 and 2050; considers that the imported emissions and emissions from international transport should eventually be equivalent to the exported emissions and emissions from international transport leaving the Union that are covered by the goal of climate neutrality; calls on the Commission to take these requirements into account when preparing the CBAM;

Amendment 294 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 d (new)

10d. urges the Commission, within the framework of the CBAM and as a complement to the carbon pricing of imports, to introduce for all companies based in the Union or operating in the Union a requirement to establish, using a reliable and scientifically proven methodology, an inventory of their direct and indirect scope 1, 2 and 3 GHG emissions throughout their value chains; calls on the Commission to introduce labelling of the carbon content of all goods sold in the Union; urges the Commission to introduce, as a complement to the CBAM, new standards for the carbon content of products sold on the EU market and to ban them if they exceed a certain carbon content;

Amendment 295 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 e (new)

10e. Urges the Commission to minimise the risk of exporters to the EU trying to bypass the mechanism or compromise its effectiveness, for example by re-routing production between markets or exporting semi-finished goods;

Amendment 296 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Points out that a CBAM is not per se incompatible with WTO rules, ~~and highlights the necessity f~~but stresses that it is a major task to develop a correction mechanism that is fully compliant with WTO rules; stresses, moreover, that it is of the utmost impor tan~~y CBAM to be designed with the highest environmental integrity in mind~~ce to develop a correction mechanism that provides the most legal certainty for entrepreneurs; points out that the correction mechanism should be developed in such a way that it creates a minimum administrative burden for entrepreneurs;

Amendment 297 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Points out that a CBAM is not per se incompatible with WTO rules, and highlights the necessity for any CBAM to be designed with the highest environmental integrity in mind and aiming at setting high standards of commitment and exemplarity at complying with the Paris Agreement and against global temperature increase; calls on the Commission to take into account that a CBAM can be implemented within the framework of WTO in order to boost active policies in climate action;

Amendment 298 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Points out that a CBAM ~~is not per se in~~must be compatible with WTO rules, and with EU free trade agreements; highlights the necessity for any CBAM to be designed with the highest environmental integrity in mind taking into account the whole life cycle, the parameters of imported technologies and products contributing to Member State's decarbonisation commitments when setting the terms of CBAM;

Amendment 299 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Points out that a CBAM is not per se incompatible with WTO rules, and highlights the necessity for any CBAM to be designed with the highest environmental integrity in mind; insists that interpretations of WTO rules cannot be used to weaken the integrity of the CBAM, and that the CBAM must be an effective tool even despite WTO rules;

Amendment 3 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 b (new)

-1 b. Whereas intensive industries are responsible for a high proportion of the total energy consumed globally (37%) and the high proportion of air pollution produced, roughly a fifth of total greenhouse gas emissions;

Amendment 3 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 2

~~— having regard to the special report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCCC) entitled ‘Global Warming of 1.5°C’,~~deleted

Amendment 30 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Proposes that the CBAM be implemented as an extension of the EU emissions trading system (EU ETS), which would require importers to purchase allowances for the volume of carbon emissions incorporated in their products; notes that the mechanism should ensure a single carbon price, both for domestic producers and importers; believes that any CBAM must not place an undue burden on European enterprises, especially small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs);

Amendment 30 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

Ca. whereas in 2015 the ratio of imported to exported emissions in the Union was 3:1 as the Union imported 1 317 million tonnes of CO2 and exported 424 million tonnes1a; whereas these imports come primarily from manufacturing, mining and agricultural products; _________________ 1aPaola Fezzigna, Simone Borghesi, Dario Caro (2019), Revising Emission Responsibilities through Consumption- Based Accounting: A European and Post- Brexit Perspective (https://www.mdpi.com/2071- 1050/11/2/488).

Amendment 300 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Points out that a CBAM is not per se incompatible with WTO rules, and highlights the necessity for any CBAM to be designed with the highest environmental integrity in mind; calls on the Commission to pursue multilateral WTO reforms that bring international trade law in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement;

Amendment 301 #

Amendment 302 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Points out that a CBAM is not per se incompatible with WTO rules, and highlights the necessity for any CBAM to be designed with the highest environmental integrity in mind; urges the Commission to pursue multilateral WTO reforms that bring international trade law in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement;

Amendment 303 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Points out that a CBAM ~~is not per se in~~must be compatible with WTO rules, and highlights the necessity for any CBAM to be designed with the ~~highest environmental integrity in mind~~sole purpose of preventing carbon leakage by levelling the playing field for international trade for as long as different levels of climate policy ambitions persist internationally;

Amendment 304 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Points out that a CBAM is not per se incompatible with WTO rules and free trade agreements, and highlights the necessity for any CBAM to be designed with the highest environmental integrity in mind and preserving the competitiveness of the industrial sectors with the highest GHG emissions;

Amendment 305 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Points out that a CBAM is not per se incompatible with WTO rules, and highlights the necessity for any CBAM to be designed with the highest environmental integrity in mind; calls for an independent and scientific research before deciding how and when a possible CBAM is introduced

Amendment 306 #

Christophe HANSEN, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Sven SIMON, Danuta Maria HÜBNER, Luděk NIEDERMAYER, Jessica POLFJÄRD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Points out that a CBAM is ~~not per se in~~compatible with WTO rules~~, and highlights~~ if it is designed with a clear environmental objective; highlights therefore the necessity for any CBAM to be designed with the highest environmental integrity and purpose in mind;

Amendment 307 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Points out that a CBAM ~~is not per se incompatible with WTO rules, and~~can be designed in a WTO-compatible and non- discriminatory way highlights the necessity for any CBAM to be designed with the ~~highest~~ environmental ~~integrity~~objective to reduce global emissions in mind;

Amendment 308 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Points out that ~~a CBAM is not per se in~~in order to be applied rapidly a CBAM must be compatible with WTO rules, and highlights the necessity for any CBAM to be designed with the highest environmental integrity in mind;

Amendment 309 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Points out that a CBAM is not per se incompatible with WTO rules, and highlights the necessity for any CBAM to be designed with the highest environmental, social and economic integrity in mind;

Amendment 31 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Proposes that the CBAM be implemented as a~~n extension of~~ complementary measure to the EU emissions trading system (EU ETS), which would require importers to purchase allowances from a specific virtual pool mirroring the EU carbon price, as long as third countries do not have a cap and trade system comparable to the EU ETS for the volume of carbon emissions incorporated in their products; notes that the mechanism should ensure a single carbon price, both for domestic producers and importers;

Amendment 31 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

Ca. whereas the Commission should study the traceability of products and services in order to identify more precisely all the impacts of their life cycles, such as the extraction and use of materials, the manufacturing process and the use of energy, and the mode of transport used, with the aim of setting up databases;

Amendment 310 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Points out that a CBAM ~~is not per se incompatible with WTO rules, and~~can be designed in a WTO-compatible and non- discriminatory way; highlights the necessity for any CBAM to be designed with the ~~highest environmental integrity in mind~~objective of reducing global GHG emissions;

Amendment 311 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Points out that a CBAM is ~~not per se incompatible with WTO rules, and highlights the necessity for any CBAM to be designed with the highest environmental integrity in mind~~WTO- compatible when designed with the highest environmental integrity in mind in relation to the exemptions in GATT article XX sub b and g;

Amendment 312 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11a. Recalls the good results achieved by the Union in increasing energy and resource efficiency through product requirements and labelling, which were able to stimulate responsible consumption, engage European citizens and support industrial competitiveness and innovation by promoting the better environmental performance of products; calls on the Commission to draw on this experience and explore additional measures that could complement a CBAM, including more ambitious and effective norms, quotas and standards that would stimulate the development of lead markets for more sustainable industrial materials and products, particularly those with high Capex requirements; calls on the Commission to design this mechanism as part of a comprehensive and long-term oriented policy package that is consistent with achieving a highly energy and resource efficient, fully renewable-based, net-zero GHG economy by 2050 at the latest;

Amendment 313 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11a. Recalls that the Union has other international commitments over and above the WTO rules, notably respect for the commitments in the Paris Agreement; stresses that in the course of the last decade the WTO has been increasingly paralysed and circumvented by third countries; calls for a far-reaching reform of international trade to bring it into line with the Paris Agreement and other aspects of international law, especially the ILO conventions; invites, therefore, the Commission and the Member States to initiate a far-reaching reform of the WTO rules in order to ensure that international trade is fully aligned with the goal of staying below the 1.5°C limit on the global temperature increase, and that the international human rights laws and ILO conventions are fully respected;

Amendment 314 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11a. Notes that the design of a CBAM is still under discussion and recommends an effective involvement of all industrial sectors that would be interested by this measure;

Amendment 315 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)

11b. Notes that the effectiveness of the CBAM will depend on the details of its design and its ability to tackle delicate aspects: first, the issue of the source shifting which refers to the possibility that a third country producer exports to the EU the low carbon footprint products while selling products with high embedded emissions in other markets; secondly, the absorption of carbon costs since those costs in the EU are applied to the entire production, while any border measure would likely apply only to the marginal tonnes that third countries’ producers export to the EU, hence having the possibility to absorb such costs throughout their entire production.

Amendment 316 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)

11b. Underlines that the new CBAM is an instrument that can contribute in part to the sustainable development goals; recalls that the promotion of decent work is also a sustainable development goal; invites the Commission to put forward other border adjustment mechanisms, especially for imported goods produced under conditions that do not respect the ILO conventions; recalls that the Commission submitted such a proposal to the Council as far back as 19781a; _________________ 1aCommunication from the Commission of the European Communities to the Council on development cooperation and the observance of certain international standards governing working conditions, COM(78)0492 of 10 November 1978.

Amendment 317 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 c (new)

11c. Emphasises that the continuous rise in global trade, especially through the constant negotiation and conclusion of new free trade agreements, poses a threat to the target of staying below a 1.5°C global temperature increase; urges the Commission to put on the back burner the negotiation and conclusion of new free trade agreements; calls on the Commission to ensure that the conclusion of every trade agreement is conditional upon all partners respecting, by means of binding commitments, the objective of the Paris Agreement;

Amendment 318 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Underlines the principle of non- discrimination under GATT Article III; stresses that treating imports and domestic production in the same way is a key criterion for ensuring WTO compatibility of any measure, ~~and that, therefore, all existing measures on carbon leakage under Union law should immediately cease to apply as soon as the CBAM enters into force, as this~~therefore the CBAM should apply carbon pricing to imports similar to what is applied to EU installations under the EU ETS including rebates similar to carbon leakage measures under EU ETS; stresses that the possibility of acquiring rebate under CBAM should also be an incentive for importers to search for goods with low carbon footprint, thus incentivising low carbon production in third countries and at the same time reducing carbon footprint of EU's consumption; therefore 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 wshould ~~apply carbon pricing to imports similar to what is applied to EU installations under the EU ETS~~co-exist together with the free allocation of allowances and the compensation of indirect emission costs for certain sectors; the potential phasing out of existing carbon leakage measures should be the effect of longstanding climate policy and not the result of the introduction of a CBAM;

Amendment 319 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Underlines the principles of non- discrimination under most-favoured nation (MFN) and the National Treatment provisions in GATT Articles I and III; stresses that treating imports and domestic production in the same way ~~is a~~, and not discriminating between imports from different third countries are key criteriona for ensuring WTO -compatibility of any measure, and that, therefore, ~~all~~to ensure WTO-compatibility, the calculation basis for a CBAM must take into consideration existing measures on carbon leakage under Union law, s~~hould immediately cease to apply as soon as the CBAM enters into force, as~~o that this mechanism would apply carbon pricing to imports similar to what is applied to EU installations under the EU ETS;

Amendment 32 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Proposes that the CBAM be implemented as an extension of the EU emissions trading system (EU ETS), which would require importers to purchase allowances for the volume of carbon emissions incorporated in their products; notes that the mechanism should ensure a single carbon price, both for domestic producers and importers; as a result, the total amount of emission allowances would increase correspondingly in order to avoid a sudden leap in prices;

Amendment 32 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

Ca. whereas the EU Emissions Trade System is the world's first major carbon market addressing emissions, and has set leadership in the global carbon market in spite of showing shortcomings in key issues (such carbon leakage prevention or allocation of free allowances);

Amendment 320 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

Amendment 321 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

Amendment 322 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

Amendment 323 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

Amendment 324 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

Amendment 325 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

Amendment 326 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

Amendment 327 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Underlines the ~~principle of non- discrimination~~national treatment requirement under GATT Article III; stresses that treating imports and domestic production in the same way is a key criterion for ensuring WTO compatibility of any measure, and that, therefore, all existing measures on carbon leakage under Union law should immediately cease to apply in sectors covered by the CBAM as soon as the CBAM enters into force, as this mechanism would apply carbon pricing to imports similar to what is applied to EU installations under the EU ETS;

Amendment 328 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Underlines the principle of non- discrimination under GATT Article III; stresses that treating imports and domestic production in the same way is a key criterion for ensuring ~~WTO~~the compatibility of any measure with the WTO rules and free trade agreements, and that, therefore, all existing measures on carbon leakage under Union law should immediately cease to apply as soon as the CBAM enters into force, as this mechanism would apply carbon pricing to imports similar to what is applied to EU installations under the EU ETS;

Amendment 329 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

Amendment 33 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Proposes that - to achieve the WTO requirements of non-discrimination of foreign exporters - the CBAM be implemented as ~~an extension of~~complementary mechanism to the EU emissions trading system (EU ETS), ~~which would~~for example by requireing importers to purchase allowances similar to the ETS for the volume of carbon emissions ~~incorpor~~related into their products; notes that the mechanism should ensure a single carbon price, both for domestic producers and importers;

Amendment 33 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)

Cb. whereas the EU Emissions Trade System focuses on the Union’s emissions rather than on the carbon footprint of goods and products in and out the Union, and whereas the carbon footprint of imports needs to be addressed for the competitiveness and reshoring of the Union’s industry;

Amendment 330 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

Amendment 331 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

Amendment 332 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Stresses that, according to the most recent report by the European Court of Auditors, ‘free allocation to the power sector did not promote decarbonisation in phase 3’, that ‘during phase 3 and the early stages of phase 4, they con tinue to represent more than 40% of the total number of available allowances’, and that ‘the number of free allowances allocated to the industry and aviation sectors in phase 3 was not based on their ability to pass through costs and (...) there was limited targeting of the allocation of free allowances’1a; considers, therefore, that the system for the free allocation of allowances is ineffective and counter- productive, and should be abolished as soon as the CBAM enters into force; _________________ 1aEuropean Court of Auditors, Special Report No 18/2020: The EU’s Emissions Trading System: free allocation of allowances needed better targeting (https://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADoc uments/SR20_18/SR_EU-ETS_EN.pdf).

Amendment 333 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Recalls that European exporting companies also face a competitive disadvantage in relation to producers in third countries, since they are obliged to reduce their emissions in the EU, while their competitors might not have national reduction targets or carbon pricing schemes; calls on the Commission to take into account the need to create fair conditions of competition for EU exports;

Amendment 334 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Recalls the specific constraints and challenges facing the outermost regions, compounded, in particular, by their remoteness, their insularity and the limited size of their market, and calls for the CBAM to give special consideration to their specific characteristics, in accordance with Article 349 TFEU;

Amendment 335 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Points out that Article XX of the GATT provides for the possibility of taking measures that, inter alia, protect the life or health of humans, animals, and plants; reiterates in this context that the CBAM must not be in any form discriminatory against third countries;

Amendment 336 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Stresses that the border adjustment mechanism should mean that EU producers and importers are subject to the same carbon costs, thereby avoiding double protection;

Amendment 337 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Calls for an immediate end of all free allowances under EU ETS;

Amendment 338 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)

12b. Emphasizes the importance of legal certainty for importing and exporting companies; stresses also that only large companies will be able to litigate at the WTO; stresses, therefore, that the rules resulting from the correction mechanism should be as simple as possible so that SMEs, in particular, are affected as little as possible;

Amendment 339 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)

12b. Points to how contradictory it would be to maintain free allowances under the EU ETS while introducing a CBAM, which would only discriminate against foreign imports while continuing subsidies for larger polluters in the EU;

Amendment 34 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Proposes that the CBAM be implemented as an extension of the EU emissions trading system (EU ETS) through the creation of a dedicated pool of allowances for imports, which would require importers to purchase allowances for the volume of carbon emissions incorporated in their products; notes that the mechanism should ensure a single carbon price, both for domestic producers and importers;

Amendment 34 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)

Cb. whereas 90% of goods are transported by sea at international level ;

Amendment 340 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 c (new)

12c. Considers that the correction mechanism will have a heavy impact on small businesses in particular; therefore calls on the Commission to conduct a thorough and independent impact assessment of the impact of the correction mechanism on SMEs;

Amendment 341 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 c (new)

12c. Calls for the Commission to directly regulate emissions reductions from industry in the EU, leading to the abolishment of the EU ETS;

Amendment 342 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 d (new)

12d. Notes that the correction mechanism will cause the prices of the most essential products to rise; points out that people with lower incomes already have to pay a disproportionate share of the sky-high costs of the energy transition; therefore calls on the Commission to investigate the cost increase of the end-products of sectors that are covered by the correction mechanism; emphasizes in this regard that the polluter pays principle is not entirely true, as, in most cases, it is the consumer who pays;

Amendment 343 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

Amendment 344 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

Amendment 345 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Calls on the Commission to address this concern during the upcoming reform of the EU ETS, ensuring the EU ETS delivers, through ambitious and meaningful carbon pricing, on the necessary GHG emissions reduction in line with the updated 2030 Union climate target and the objective of reaching net zero GHG emissions within the Union by 2050 at the latest, fully respecting the polluter pays principle; stresses that export rebates risk creating perverse climate effects, incentivising less efficient production methods for European exporting industries; urges the Commission to refrain from including export rebates in its proposal; is of the opinion that the phasing out of free allowances should be considered with the introduction of export rebates in order to ensure a level-playing field within and outside the EU for European companies; these rebates should be designed to incorporate free allowances in their calculation, based on benchmarks reflecting the most efficient installations, and therefore to maintain GHG reduction incentives for EU exporting companies; export rebates should not lead to any kind of competitive advantages for EU exporting industries in third countries; stresses that the Commission should carry out a proper analysis regarding the WTO-compatibility of export rebates as well as mechanism to avoid market distortions for sectors covered by a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism;

Amendment 346 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

Amendment 347 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

Amendment 348 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Calls on the Commission to address this concern during the upcoming reform of the EU ETS, ensuring the EU ETS delivers, through the introduction of a rising carbon price floor, a rebasing of the cap and adjustment of the Linear Reduction Factor resulting in ambitious and meaningful carbon pricing, on the necessary GHG emissions reduction in line with the updated 2030 Union climate target and the objective of reaching net zero GHG emissions within the Union by 2050 at the latest, fully respecting the polluter pays principle; stresses that export rebates risk creating perverse climate effects, incentivising less efficient production methods for European exporting industries; urges the Commission to refrain from including export rebates in its proposal;

Amendment 349 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Calls on the Commission to address this concern during the upcoming reform of the EU ETS, ensuring the EU ETS delivers, through ambitious and meaningful carbon pricing that ensures a minimum carbon price consistent with the Paris Agreement ambitious emission goals, on the necessary GHG emissions reduction in line with the updated 2030 Union climate target and the objective of reaching net zero GHG emissions within the Union by 2050 at the latest, fully respecting the polluter pays principle; stresses that export rebates risk creating perverse climate effects, incentivising less efficient production methods for European exporting industries; urges the Commission to refrain from including export rebates in its proposal;

Amendment 35 #

Clara PONSATÍ OBIOLS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Stresses the importance of establishing a CBAM as a mirror to the EU ETS in order to create a level playing field between domestic producers and importers; notes, nevertheless, that this should imply a revision of the EU ETS to avoid the extension of its weaknesses to CBAM; highlights, in this respect, that the EU ETS has not been fully effective to reach the emission reduction targets; notes the difference between the theoretical emission cap and the actual current emissions; suggests that the suppression of free allocation emission allowances, as well as the full extension of the EU ETS to other sectors such as aviation and other transport, should be considered;

Amendment 35 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C c (new)

Cc. whereas the COVID-19 crisis has brought important lessons, and that the Commission's proposal for a new instrument for recovery, "Next Generation EU", underlines therefore the need to strengthen European sovereignty and resilience as well as short circuits;

Amendment 350 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Calls on the Commission to address this concern during the upcoming reform of the EU ETS, ensuring the EU ETS delivers, through a rebasing of the cap and adjustment of the Linear Reduction Factor resulting in ambitious and meaningful carbon pricing, on the necessary GHG emissions reduction in line with the updated 2030 Union climate target and the objective of reaching net zero GHG emissions within the Union by 2050 at the latest, fully respecting the polluter pays principle; stresses that export rebates risk creating perverse climate effects, incentivising less efficient production methods for European exporting industries; urges the Commission to refrain from including export rebates in its proposal;

Amendment 351 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Calls on the Commission to ~~address this concern dur~~ensure ing the upcoming reform of the EU ETS~~, ensuring the EU ETS~~ that it delivers, through ambitious and meaningful carbon pricing, on the necessary GHG emissions reduction in line with the updated 2030 Union climate target and the objective of reaching net zero GHG emissions within the Union by 2050 at the latest, fully respecting the polluter pays principle; stresses that export rebates risk creating perverse climate effects, incentivising less efficient production methods for European exporting industries; urges the Commission to refrain from including export rebates in its proposalany revenue from an EU CBAM must contribute to reducing global carbon emissions and reaching the aim of a climate neutral EU by 2050;

Amendment 352 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. CUnderlines that the CBAM is only one of the measures leading to the implementation of European Green Deal objectives and calls on the Commission to ~~address~~present thise co~~ncern during the upcoming reform of the EU ETS, ensuring the EU ETS delivers, through ambitious and meaningful carbon pricing, on~~herent package of legislation based on a thorough Impact Assessment including the reform of the EU ETS, and necessary measures in non-ETS sectors, ensuring the Union delivers the necessary GHG emissions reduction in line with the updated 2030 Union climate target and the objective of reaching net zero GHG emissions within the Union by 2050 at the latest, fully respecting the polluter pays principle; stresses that export rebates risk creating perverse climate effects, incentivising less efficient production methods for European exporting industries; ~~urges the Commission to refrain from including export rebates in its proposal;~~

Amendment 353 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

~~13.~~ Calls on the Commission to address ~~13.~~ this concern during the upcoming reform of the EU ETS, ensuring the EU ETS delivers, through ambitious and meaningful carbon pricing, on the necessary GHG emissions reduction in line with the updated 2030 Union climate target and the objective of reaching net zero GHG emissions within the Union by 2050 at the latest, fully respecting the polluter pays principle; stresses that export rebates ~~risk creating perverse climate effects,~~are necessary to guarantee the competitiveness of the EU’s low-carbon products on export markets and to incentivis~~ing less~~e more efficient production methods for European exporting industries; urges the Commission to ~~refrain from~~ includ~~ing~~e export rebates in its proposal;

Amendment 354 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

Amendment 355 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

Amendment 356 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

Amendment 357 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

Amendment 358 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Calls on the Commission to address this concern during the upcoming reform of the EU ETS, ensuring the EU ETS delivers, through ambitious and meaningful fossil carbon pricing, on the necessary GHG emissions reduction in line with the updated 2030 Union climate target and the objective of reaching net zero GHG emissions within the Union by 2050 at the latest, fully respecting the polluter pays principle; stresses that export rebates risk creating perverse climate effects, incentivising less efficient production methods for European exporting industries; urges the Commission to refrain from including export rebates in its proposal;

Amendment 359 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Calls on the Commission ~~to address this concern~~ during the upcoming reform of the EU ETS, to ensur~~ing~~e that the EU ETS delivers, through ambitious and meaningful carbon pricing, on the necessary GHG emissions reduction in line with the updated 2030 Union climate target and the objective of reaching net zero GHG emissions within the Union by 2050 at the latest, fully respecting the polluter pays principle; stresses that export rebates risk creating perverse climate effects, incentivising less efficient production methods for European exporting industries; urges the Commission to refrain from including export rebates including export rebates in its proposal;

Amendment 36 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Reminds the drastic drop in price of EU Allowances in 2020 as a result of the economic downturn induced by COVID-19 related lockdown measures, recalls the unstable features of the EU ETS price signal and therefore calls for any CBAM policy instrument to ensure a price floor per tonne of CO2 is paid and reflects the future upward necessary price adjustments, recalls in this context that the CBAM proposal should be proposed together with a revision of the EU ETS;

Amendment 36 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C d (new)

Cd. whereas it is essential for the Commission to have an integrated vision of climate policies, for example by addressing emission reduction targets, such as those for maritime transport, in coordination with carbon pricing strategies;

Amendment 360 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

Amendment 361 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

Amendment 362 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13a. Stresses that double protection of EU companies against carbon leakage shall be avoided; emphasises that an EU CBAM should constitute an alternative to the measures under the EU ETS aimed at addressing carbon leakage; suggests in this regard that the allocation of free emission allowances to industries must be phased out in time for the implementation of the EU CBAM; notes however that the abolishment of free allowances must be conducted in a coordinated and coherent manner and it should take place no sooner than the entry into force of the EU CBAM, to avoid carbon leakage risks;

Amendment 363 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13a. Notes that, in addition to a CBAM, supportive measures will be needed to foster industrial decarbonisation at a large scale; calls on the Commission to deliver an ambitious industrial policy framework that can offer predictability and certainty to realise carbon neutrality investments; stresses, in this respect, the importance of innovative financing tools such as Carbon Contract for Difference for investments in breakthrough technologies;

Amendment 364 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13a. Invites the Commission, pending an impact study, to set out principles to ensure that European exports are not penalised by the introduction of a progressive compensation mechanism, and to propose the application of environmental and societal surcharges to imports from countries that do not comply with the standards imposed on European companies;

Amendment 365 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13a. Emphasises that asymmetrical climate actions can lead to carbon leakage and a competitive disadvantage on international markets for the EU industry; calls therefore on the Commission to consider all possibilities for export rebates, without endangering the purpose of the CBAM as a climate action tool;

Amendment 366 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13a. Is aware that passing on costs to consumers, while being an expected consequence of CBAM, will increase market prices of necessity goods, and underlines the need to especially protect the most vulnerable populations while strengthening all measures against energy poverty;

Amendment 367 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13a. Urges to save the currently existing free CO2 emission allowance to be used for strategic industries.

Amendment 368 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

Amendment 369 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. ~~Supports the Commission’s intention to use revenues generated by the CBAM as new own resources for the EU budget, and asks the Commission to ensure full transparency about~~The revenues generated by the CBAM should be treated as any duty collected by the cuse of those revenues; believes these revenues should be earmarked for supporting the just transition and decarbonisation of Europe’s economy, and for stepping up the Union’s contribution to international climate finance in favour of Least Developed Countries and Small Island Developing States, which are most vulnerable to climate changetoms authorities of a Member state. The Member States should be authorised to retain 20 % as collection costs;

Amendment 37 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Calls on the Commission to conduct an in-depth impact assessment on the environmental and health-related impacts of the different forms of the mechanism; advises the Commission to take this environmental criterion as the leading factor in the choice of the form of the mechanism; calls on the Commission to make the results of the impact assessment publicly available as soon as possible, and before the publication of its legislative proposal;

Amendment 37 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas ensuring effective and meaningful carbon pricing, as part of a broader regulatory environment, can act as an economic incentive to production methods with lower GHG footprint and to spur investments in the decarbonisation and circularity of the Union’s economy;

Amendment 370 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. ~~Suppor~~Rejects the Commission’'s intention to use revenues ~~generated by the CBAM~~from the correction mechanism as new own resources for the EU budget, and asks the Commission to ensure full transparency about the use of those revenues; believes these revenues should be earmarked for supporting the just transition and decarbonisation of Europe’s economy, and for stepping up the Union’s contribution to international climate finance in favour of Least Developed Countries and Small Island Developing States, which are most vulnerable to climate chan; believes that the returns from the correction mechanism should flow back to the Member States; further believes that the distribution key should be based on the Members States net contribution to the Union budget;

Amendment 371 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Supports the Commission’s intention to use revenues generated by the CBAM as new own resources for the EU budget in a separate chapter so as to increase their visibility and enhance the credibility of EU measures, and asks the Commission to ensure full transparency about the use of those revenues; believes these revenues should be earmarked for supporting the just transition and decarbonisation of Europe’s economy, and for stepping up the Union’s contribution to international climate finance in favour of Least Developed Countries and Small Island Developing States, which are most vulnerable to climate change;

Amendment 372 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Supports the Commission’s intention to use revenues generated by the CBAM as new own resources for the EU budget, and asks the Commission to ensure full transparency about the use of those revenues; believes these revenues should be earmarked for supporting the just transition and decarbonisation of Europe’s economy, and for stepping up the Union’s contribution to international climate finance in favour of Least Developed Countries and Small Island Developing States, which are most vulnerable to climate changestresses that a part of those revenues should flow back to Least Developed Countries when their exports are covered by a CBAM in the form of a contribution to international climate finance in favour of Least Developed Countries and Small Island Developing States; believes that a significant part of these revenues should be earmarked for supporting the just transition and decarbonisation of Europe’s economy;

Amendment 373 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

Amendment 374 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Supports the Commission’s intention to use revenues generated by the CBAM as new own resources for the EU budget, ~~and~~provided that the CBAM is used as a commercial policy tool to defend European production; asks the Commission to ensure full transparency about the use of those revenues; believes th~~ese~~at this revenues should be ~~earmarked for supporting the just transition and decarbonisation of~~used to support sectors of the Europe’san economy~~, and for stepping up the Union’s contribution to international climate finance in favour of Least Developed Countries and Small Island Developing States, which are most vulnerable to climate change~~ severely affected by COVID-19;

Amendment 375 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Supports the Commission’s intention to use revenues generated by the CBAM as new own resources for the EU budget, ~~and~~however the budgetary role of CBAM should be the by-product and not the primary goal of the instrument; asks the Commission to ensure full transparency about the use of those revenues; believes these revenues should be earmarked for supporting the just transition and decarbonisation of Europe’s economy~~, and for stepping up the Union’s contribution to international climate finance in favour of Least Developed Countries and Small Island Developing States, which are most vulnerable to climate change~~;

Amendment 376 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. ~~Supports the Commission’s intention to use revenues generated by the CBAM as new~~Underlines that the introduction of the CBAM should not lead to a distortion of revenue collected by the Member States based own ~~resources for the EU budget,~~the country of import and asks the Commission to ensure full transparency about the use of those revenues; believes these revenues should be earmarked for supporting the just transition and decarbonisation of Europe’s economy, and for stepping up the Union’s contribution to international climate ~~finance in favour of Least Developed Countries and Small Island Developing States, which are most vulnerable to climate change~~actions;

Amendment 377 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

Amendment 378 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Supports the ~~Commission’s intention to use revenues generated by the CBAM as new own resources for the EU budget, and~~ringfencing of revenues from the CBAM strictly for climate action, including international climate finance; asks the Commission to ensure full transparency about the use of those revenues; believes these revenues should be earmarked for supporting the just transition and decarbonisation of Europe’s economy, and for stepping up the Union’s contribution to international climate finance in favour of Least Developed Countries and Small Island Developing States, which are most vulnerable to climate change;

Amendment 379 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

Amendment 38 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Underlines that the mechanism should be part of wider set of policies to achieve the decarbonisation of our economy; calls for a revision of EU State Aids rules to ensure proper support to the constitution of a strong decarbonized industrial base in the Union; urges the mechanism to aim for a reduction of EU share of imported emissions, which implies a reduction in value chains and their length;

Amendment 38 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas ensuring effective and meaningful carbon pricing, as part of a broader regulatory environment, can act as an economic incentive to spur investments in innovation and new technologies, providing for the decarbonisation of the Union’s economy;

Amendment 380 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Highlights the role CBAM 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 large a 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 uncertainties and that the mechanism should not contribute to an undue regulatory burden for importing companies especially SMEs;

Amendment 381 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Emphasises that 1% of European households, i.e. the richest, have a carbon footprint that is 22 times higher than the annual limit of 2.5 tonnes of carbon per person needed to keep global warming below 1.5°C1a; considers, therefore, that the efforts required of those households should be proportionally higher than those required of the vulnerable; believes that it is thus essential for the CBAM to be accompanied by targeted redistribution mechanisms; _________________ 1aIvanova, D., Wood, R. (2020), The unequal distribution of household carbon footprints in Europe and its link to sustainability, Global Sustainability, 3, E18, 1-12, https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2020.12.

Amendment 382 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Considers that a CBAM can effectively steer poorer and Least Developed Countries to undergo an industrialization process based on clean and decarbonised technologies, sparing them the huge reconversion costs of countries whose industry was initially built on polluting or non renewable technologies; and therefore stresses that Union funds and the development banks of Member States should not continue financing fossil fuel infrastructure in third countries;

Amendment 383 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Notes that, in addition to a CBAM, supportive measures will be needed to foster industrial decarbonisation at a large scale; calls on the Commission to deliver an ambitious industrial policy framework that can offer predictability and certainty to realise carbon neutrality investments; stresses, in this respect, the importance of innovative financing tools such as Carbon Contracts for Difference for investments in climate friendly technologies;

Amendment 384 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Notes that, in addition to a CBAM, supportive measures will be needed to foster industrial decarbonisation at a large scale; calls on the Commission to deliver an ambitious industrial policy framework that can offer predictability and certainty to realise carbon neutrality investments; stresses, in this respect, the importance of innovative financing tools such as Carbon Contract for Difference for investments in breakthrough technologies;

Amendment 385 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Calls on the Commission to develop a criteria-based approach which allows trading partners with national carbon pricing schemes comparable to EU ETS, to be exempted from the CBAM, to incentivise global climate action and align global carbon prices and policies; Underlines that these criteria should be adjusted for LDC’s, based on the special criteria’s for LDC’s as laid out in the Paris Agreement;

Amendment 386 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Requests a CBAM to be monitored through an independent body under the auspices of the Commission; the independent body shall regularly report and provide transparent information to the Parliament, Council and Commission on request; at least on a bi-annual basis.

Amendment 387 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Proposes that the revenue generated by the CBAM be collected directly by the Member States within the framework of value added tax and calculated on the basis of the carbon footprint of the imported products and services;

Amendment 388 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Points out that the CBAM, as a part of a broader and more comprehensive EU action against the climate crisis, may benefit from a complementary approach incorporating carbon intensity in EU standards for products placed on the EU market;

Amendment 389 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Stresses that the Union's free- trade agreements have increased the EU's embedded emissions, thus making the CBAM a necessary measure; calls for the Commission to end all FTA negotiations;

Amendment 39 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

~~3. Urges that the proposed CBAM apply to all imports in order to avoid distortion in the internal market;~~deleted

Amendment 39 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas ensuring effective and meaningful carbon pricing, accompanied by suitable investment measures, as part of a broader regulatory environment, can act as an economic incentive to spur investments in the decarbonisation of the Union’s economy;

Amendment 390 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Stresses that the revenues generated from a CBA mechanism should by no mean be used as disguised subsidies to high polluting European industries, which would ultimately compromise its compatibility with the WTO;

Amendment 391 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Stresses that a substantial part of the revenues generated under the mechanism should be allocated to the Union’s climate action and just transition;

Amendment 392 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)

14b. 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 393 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)

14b. Calls for the additional revenue generated by the CBAM to be used as a priority to support the adaptation policies of developing countries, to support the management and use of natural resources and to ensure that the poorest have access to them, and to compensate for the reduction in those countries’ subsidies for fossil fuels; urges the Member States to transfer decarbonised technologies to emerging and developing countries;

Amendment 394 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)

14b. Stresses that the implementation of the mechanism must be accompanied by the removal of all forms of environmentally harmful subsidies granted to energy-intensive industries at national level, in particular tax exemptions and breaks on energy used by energy-intensive industries; calls on the Commission to evaluate the different practices of Member States in that matter in light of the polluter pays principle;

Amendment 395 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)

14b. Stresses the need to consider the complementary role of improved product standards in line with the EU Circular Economy Action Plan; emphasises that product standards can ensure low-carbon, resource-efficient manufacturing as well as help to guarantee minimal negative environmental impacts from product use;

Amendment 396 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)

14b. Invites the Commission to seize the opportunity and include embedded emissions in imported fossil fuels under the umbrella of CBAM while expanding the scope of the EU-ETS to include all fossil fuel emissions, remedying a longstanding omission of a large share of EU emissions in the EU-ETS;

Amendment 397 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)

14b. Urges the Commission to bring forward measures to address the emissions from EU exports and related embedded emissions;

Amendment 398 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 c (new)

14c. Emphasises that the EU 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 4 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 c (new)

-1 c. Whereas air pollution has major consequences on health; causing each year 231,554 premature deaths in the EU due to air pollution, almost a quarter of which comes from energy intensive industry;

Amendment 4 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 2

— having regard to the special report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCCC) entitled ‘Global Warming of 1.5°C’, and the IPCC special report on the ocean and cryosphere,

Amendment 40 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Urges that the proposed CBAM should not apply to allny imports in order to avoid distortion in the internal market;

Amendment 40 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas ensuring effective and meaningful carbon pricing, as part of a broader regulatory environment, can act as an economic incentive to spur investments in the decarbonisation of the Union’s economy and to address carbon leakage;

Amendment 41 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Urges that the proposed~~Invites the Commission to assess the impact of a CBAM applyied to all imports ~~in order to avoid distortion in the internal market~~, however urges to ensure at least all energy intensive sectors are included in an early phase of implementation in order to ensure the EU environmental objectives are rapidly reached;

Amendment 41 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas ensuring effective and meaningful ~~carbon~~fossil carbon dioxide pricing, as part of a broader regulatory environment, can act as an economic incentive to spur investments in the decarbonisation of the Union’s economy;

Amendment 42 #

3. ~~Urg~~Suggests a progressive mechanism that first includes sectors which are emissions intensive and with the highest risk of carbon leakage, before being enlarged over time to encompass all imports; underlines that the proposed CBAM should end up applying to all imports in order to avoid distortion in the internal market;

Amendment 42 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas ensuring effective and meaningful carbon pricing, as part of ~~a broader~~the regulatory environment, ~~can act as an~~must be the key economic incentive to spur investments in the decarbonisation of the Union’s economy;

Amendment 43 #

Christophe HANSEN, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Sven SIMON, Inese VAIDERE, Jessica POLFJÄRD

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Urges that the proposed CBAM apply to all imports in order to avoid distortion in the internal market~~Considers that a CBAM should cover all imports, but that as a starting point already by 2023 it should cover the power sector and energy-intensive industrial sectors like cement, steel, chemicals and fertilisers, which still represent 94% of Union industrial emissions;

Amendment 43 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

Da. whereas trade can be an important tool to promote sustainable development and to help fight climate change; whereas the EU’s single market is the world’s second largest consumer market, which gives the Union a unique position to influence global rules and at the same time to fully take into account its carbon footprint;

Amendment 44 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

Amendment 44 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

Da. whereas the EU has managed in the last decades to successfully decouple greenhouse gas emissions from economic growth; with greenhouse gas emissions falling by 23,2% while GDP grew by more than 60% between 1990 and 2018;

Amendment 45 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Urges that the proposed CBAM apply to all imports in order to avoid distortion in the internal market~~Considers that a CBAM should eventually cover all imports; but that as a starting point it should cover for example energy-intensive industrial sectors like cement, steel, chemicals and fertilisers;

Amendment 45 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

Da. whereas the EU should accept that a third country set up a carbon border adjustment mechanism if this country implements a higher carbon price;

Amendment 46 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Urges that the proposed CBAM ~~apply to all imports in order to~~be based on a thorough impact assessment, which assesses the impact of different options also at sector level; believes that the CBAM should be applied gradually, first applying to select products related to carbon leakage sectors; urges that the proposed CBAM avoid distortion in the internal market;

Amendment 46 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

Da. whereas the EU’s increased ambition on climate change will increase the risk of carbon leakage for European industries;

Amendment 47 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Urges that the proposed CBAM ~~apply to all imports in order to avoid distortion in the internal market~~first includes sectors with the highest share of carbon emissions before being enlarged over time; stresses that this should not lead to internal market distortions and should be conditional on immediate ending of free allowances and state aid for indirect cost compensation to these sectors;

Amendment 47 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

Da. whereas equity is a guiding principle of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Paris Agreement;

Amendment 48 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Urges that the proposed CBAM apply to all ~~imports~~sectors covered by the EU ETS in order to avoid distortion in the internal market; considers that the CBAM may also cover products containing large amounts of these energy-intensive commodities that may be particularly at risk of carbon leakage;

Amendment 48 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D b (new)

Db. whereas climate change is a main driver of environmental degradation, having a negative impact on food and water security, access to natural resources, human health and migration; whereas these phenomena directly or indirectly also threaten the full enjoyment of human rights, including the rights to life, water and sanitation, food, health and housing; whereas the ability of people to adapt to climate change is inextricably linked to their access to basic human rights and to the health of the ecosystems they depend on for their livelihoods and wellbeing; whereas climate change could reverse human development through reduced agricultural productivity, increased food and water insecurity, increased exposure to extreme natural disasters, collapsed ecosystems and increased health risks;

Amendment 49 #

Clara PONSATÍ OBIOLS

3. Urges that the proposed CBAM apply to all imports in order to avoid distortion in the internal market; stresses the need to address the inclusion of shipping emissions into these imports, additionally to the product-based ones;

Amendment 49 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D c (new)

Dc. whereas France's High Climate Council report, published on 6th October, finds that France’s total carbon footprint, if including imported products, is about 70% higher than its national emission; whereas such trends are likely to be similar for other Member States;

Amendment 5 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 d (new)

-1 d. Whereas air pollution has significant economic costs, with an average annual health costs amounting to at least €215 billion;

Amendment 5 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 2 a (new)

- having regard to the UN Environment Programme’s Emissions Gap Report 2019,

Amendment 50 #

Draft opinion
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 50 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

~~E. whereas existing carbon leakage provisions under Union law have failed to demonstrate their effectiveness in delivering the necessary decarbonisation of the sectors concerned;~~deleted

Amendment 51 #

Luis GARICANO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Urges that ~~the proposed CBAM apply to all imports~~any import embedding materials covered by the EU ETS be subject to the CBAM in order to avoid distortions between products in the internal market and along the value chain;

Amendment 51 #

~~E. whereas existing carbon leakage provisions under Union law have failed to demonstrate their effectiveness in delivering the necessary decarbonisation of the sectors concerned;~~deleted

Amendment 52 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Urges that the proposed CBAM apply to all imports in order to avoid distortion in the internal market and that it guarantee the competitiveness of the European economy;

Amendment 52 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

~~E. whereas existing carbon leakage provisions under Union law have failed to demonstrate their effectiveness in delivering the necessary decarbonisation of the sectors concerned;~~deleted

Amendment 53 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Urges that the proposed CBAM apply to all imports in order to avoid distortion in the ~~intern~~global market;

Amendment 53 #

Niels FUGLSANG, Paul TANG

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

~~E. whereas existing carbon leakage provisions under Union law have failed to demonstrate their effectiveness in delivering the necessary decarbonisation of the sectors concerned;~~deleted

Amendment 54 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Notes that the determination of the carbon content of an end or intermediate product is difficult due to international value chains; further notes with concern that a mechanism only based on basic materials could lead to a shift in imports towards intermediate and end products not covered by the mechanism and harm the EU industry;

Amendment 54 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

~~E. whereas existing carbon leakage provisions under Union law have failed to demonstrate their effectiveness in delivering the necessary decarbonisation of the sectors concerned;~~deleted

Amendment 55 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. ~~Recomm~~Calls for a calculation method for carbon contendts 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 level; stresses, however, that importers who are more carbon efficient should be allowed to demonstrate the specificdoes not disadvantage European producers; calls for a calculation method that takes into account to the highest possible extent the real carbon content of the goods concerned; suggests that an independent agency should be responsible for the definition of the most realistic carbon content of goods as well as the determination of the respective good’s market entry price; calls for the inclusion of existing third country carbon pricing systems in the calculation; asks the Commission to consider evaluating all products according to a worst-in-class approach, i.e. assume the most emission- rich production method and thus provide an incentive for producers to share information on their products carbon iconten~~sity of their products~~t in order to pay a lower carbon border adjustment;

Amendment 55 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

~~E. whereas existing carbon leakage provisions under Union law have failed to demonstrate their effectiveness in delivering the necessary decarbonisation of the sectors concerned;~~deleted

Amendment 56 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. ~~Recommends that a design be~~ Notes the proposal from the European Economic and Social Committee to introduced a design 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 sh~~could be defined at country level; stresses, however, that importers who are more carbon efficient should be allowed to demonstrate the specific carbon intensity of their products; stresses the importance to also measure and include in the mechanism the emissions resulting from transport;

Amendment 56 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas existing ~~carbon leakage provisions under Union law have failed to demonstrate their effectiveness in delivering the necessary decarbonisation of the sectors concerned~~Union law has been effective in delivering the climate goals adopted up to date, and the decarbonisation of various sectors of economy is progressing, although not at the pace necessary to achieve the increased GHG reduction target for 2030;

Amendment 57 #

Draft opinion
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 and sector levels; stresses, however, that importers who are more carbon efficient should be allowed to demonstrate the specific carbon intensity of their products; is of the opinion that a CBAM would require a strong independent infrastructure to be administered , in particular as regard to the measurement of carbon content of imports, certifications, double taxation and/or the existence of an equivalent carbon pricing system in the country of imports origin;

Amendment 57 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas ~~existing~~ carbon leakage provisions ~~under Union law have failed to dem~~have been established under Union law in the ETS framework and constraibute t~~heir effectiveness in delivering the necessary decarbonisation of the sectors concerned~~o its acceptance; whereas the ETS has proven to be the Union's most effective and efficient tool for reducing CO2-emissions;

Amendment 58 #

Draft opinion
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 58 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas existing carbon leakage provisions under Union law have ~~fail~~proved to ~~demonstrate their effectiveness~~be inadequate in delivering the necessary decarbon~~isa~~ leakage protection to of the sectors concerned; whereas priority must be given to amending existing decisions which undermine the competitiveness of the internal market and, in addition, to imposing import duties;

Amendment 59 #

Draft opinion
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 level; stresses, however, that importers who are more carbon efficient should be allowed to demonstrate the specific carbon intensity of their products; furthermore, considers that importers should have the option to prove, in accordance with EU standards for MRV, that the carbon content of their products is lower than the benchmark, and avail of a CBAM price adapted accordingly;

Amendment 59 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas existing carbon leakage provisions under Union law ~~have failed to demonstrate their effectiveness in delivering the necessary decarbonisation of the sectors concerned~~should be ameliorated to protect the competitiveness of the European industry vis-à-vis competitors from Countries with lower climate ambitions;

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
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 leakage~~shelved until COVID has been eradicated and the European economies have fully relaunched, signified by a growth of 2.5 percent of GDP on average during the course of 3 years;

Amendment 6 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 3

~~— having regard to the Commission communication of 11 December 2019 on ‘The European Green Deal’ (COM(2019)0640),~~deleted

Amendment 60 #

Draft opinion
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 Europea~~as objectively and precisely as possible the carbon 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 level; stresses, however,tent of imports including the whole value-chain of products; stresses that importers who arconsider to be more carbon efficient than what is assessed should be allowed to demonstrate the specific carbon intensity of their products;

Amendment 60 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas existing carbon leakage provisions under Union law have ~~failed to~~ demonstrate ~~their~~d moderate effectiveness in delivering the necessary decarbonisation of the sectors concerned;

Amendment 61 #

Clara PONSATÍ OBIOLS

Draft opinion
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~~EU level; stresses, however, that importers who are more carbon efficient should be allowed to demonstrate the specific carbon intensity of their products; this flexible system should be based on objective and harmonized parameters, such as with the establishment of a range of values multiplier rather than a fixed one;

Amendment 61 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas existing carbon leakage provisions under Union law have failed to demonstrate their effectiveness in delivering the necessary decarbonisation of the sectors concerned; and have, on the other hand, led to unjustified windfall profits for the beneficiary companies as highlighted by the European Court of Auditors1a; _________________ 1aECA Special Report 18/2020, The EU's Emissions Trading System: free allocation of allowances needed better targeting

Amendment 62 #

Draft opinion
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 level; stresses, however, that importers who are more carbon efficient should be allowed to demonstrate the specific carbon intensity of their products, so as to encourage innovation and investments into greener technologies globally;

Amendment 62 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

Amendment 63 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Recommends that a design be ~~introduc~~evaluated 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 level; stresses, however, that importers who are more carbon efficient should be allowed to demonstrate the specific carbon intensity of their products; the suggested design would serve as a basis for negotiations with the WTO;

Amendment 63 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

Amendment 64 #

Draft opinion
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 level; stresses, however, that importers who are more carbon efficient should be allowed to demonstrate the specific carbon intensity of their products;~~producer level, which will reward firms by its carbon efficiency; whereas, should this not be feasible, the country level with possible adjustment for different levels of carbon efficiency should be used.

Amendment 64 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas existing carbon leakage provisions under Union law have ~~fail~~helped to ~~demonstrate their effectiveness in delivering~~reduce the risk of carbon leakage, but additional efforts are needed to achieve the necessary decarbonisation of the sectors concerned;

Amendment 65 #

Luis GARICANO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Recommends that a design be introduced that measures the carbon content of each imports through ~~their~~its 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 level; stresses, however, that importers who are more carbon efficient should be allowed to demonstrate the specific carbon intensity of their products;

Amendment 65 #

Christophe HANSEN, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Sven SIMON, Inese VAIDERE, Danuta Maria HÜBNER

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas an effective, legally certain and bureaucratically adequate CBAM cannot be considered an aim in itself but must be considered as an appropriate step towards achieving global carbon pricing in a globally imbalanced landscape of climate policies, therefore expectations on its ability to deliver should be grounded in realistic assumptions;

Amendment 66 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

Amendment 66 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas, to date, the Union has been subsidising pollution from heavy industry by way of free allowances under the EU ETS, under the guise of supposed measures to stop "carbon leakage", yet there is no evidence of "carbon leakage" having taken place due to climate policies;

Amendment 67 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. ~~Request~~Believes that the implementation of the CBAM shwould lead to the progressive phasing out of the free allocation of allowances, following an appropriate transition period, since the mechanism 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 exportsbe an obstacle to the reindustrialisation of Europe;

Amendment 67 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas the existence of free allocations as part of the EU ETS has had a major role to play in the system’s failures and has prevented the industries covered from achieving sufficient decarbonisation to fulfil the Union’s climate commitments;

Amendment 68 #

Christophe HANSEN, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Sven SIMON, Danuta Maria HÜBNER, Esther DE LANGE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Requests that the implementation of the CBAM should lead to the progressive phasing out of the free allocation of allowances, following an appropriate transition period, since the mechanism ensures that EU producers and imBelieves in the principle that EU producers and importers should have to deal with the same carbon cost in the EU market and that EU exporters wshould ~~have to deal with~~face the same carbon cost~~s in the EU market; notes that this phasing out should be coupled in parallel with~~ as non-EU producers outside the EU market; requests, therefore that the implementation of an effective CBAM in a specific sector should put an end to the free allocation of allowances in that sector and calls on the Commission to assess and propose the introduction of exsupport ~~rebates in order to maintain strong decarbonisation incentives, while ensuring a level playing field for EU export~~measures to exports that would remain WTO compliant and in coherence with EU environmental objectives;

Amendment 68 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas the EU framework does not encourage improvement of carbon balance in the LULUCF sector in the EU, nor does it deter production methods causing deforestation, forest degradation and conversion of valuable and carbon rich ecosystems;

Amendment 69 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. ~~Requests that the implementation of~~Until at least 2030, the CBAM framework should be an additional measure to the existing carbon leakage measures under the EU ETS; if after 2030 global markets for carbon lean products are put in place, the CBAM shcould lead to the ~~progressive~~gradual phasing out of the free allocation of allowances~~, following an appropriate transition period, since the mechanism~~; the mechanism intends to ensures that EU producers and importers would have to deal with ~~the same~~similar 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 exports~~;

Amendment 69 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E c (new)

Ec. whereas the US President-elect Joe Biden has taken favourable stance on a carbon adjustment tax to force countries exporting goods to the United States to meet climate and environmental obligations and open a new opportunity for cooperation with the EU on carbon pricing to make polluters pays their fair share in fighting the climate crisis;

Amendment 7 #

Draft opinion
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 leakage~~;

Amendment 7 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 a (new)

- having regard to the conclusions and recommendations of the European Court of Auditors in its special report 18/2020, entitled ‘The EU’s Emissions Trading System: free allocation of allowances needed better targeting’,

Amendment 70 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. ~~Request~~Notes that the implementation of the CBAM shwould lead to the progressive phasing out of the free allocation of allowances, following an appropriate transition period, since the mechanism 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 exportsfundamentally change the concept of the EU-ETS and broaden its scope, which would motivate a thorough evaluation of the system as such; notes that a drastic and premature change of EU-ETS risks to undermine its efficiency and long-term credibility;

Amendment 70 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas President-elect Joe Biden committed in his electoral platform to "impose carbon adjustment fees or quotas on carbon-intensive goods from countries that are failing to meet their climate and environment obligations"

Amendment 71 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Requests that the implementation of the CBAM should lead to the progressive phasing out of the free allocation of allowances, following an appropriate transition period, since the mechanism 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 exports;

Amendment 71 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas combating climate change is a factor in competitiveness and social justice, and offer major potential in terms of industrial development, job creation, innovation and regional development;

Amendment 72 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Requests that the ~~implement~~calculation 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 mechanism~~since 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 export~~approach would avoid the problems with the WTO-consistency of export rebates;

Amendment 72 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas free allocation of emission allowances is still high (representing more than 40% of total allowances) and does not fully include sectors such the power industry, transport or aviation;

Amendment 73 #

Luis GARICANO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Requests that the implementation of the CBAM should lead to the progressive phasing out of the free allocation of allowances, following an appropriate transition period, since the mechanism 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 par~~symmetricallely with the introduction of partial export rebates; such export rebates should not refund more than the current level of free allowances, in order to maintain strong decarbonisation incentives, while ensuring a level playing field for EU exports;

Amendment 73 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas the EU’s increased ambition on climate change can increase the risk of carbon leakage for European industries;

Amendment 74 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Requests that the implementation of the CBAM should lead to the progressive phasing out of the free allocation of allowances, following an appropriate transition period, since the mechanism 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 exports, as well as preventing any potential undermining of global climate policies by carbon leakage;

Amendment 74 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas the EU’s increased ambition on climate change will increase the risk of carbon leakage for European industries;

Amendment 75 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Requests that the implementation of the CBAM should lead to the progressive phasing out of the free allocation of allowances, following an appropriate transition period, since the mechanism ensures that EU producers and importers would have to deal with the same carbon costs in the EU market; notes that th~~is phasing out should be coupled in parallel with the introduction of export rebates in order to maintain strong decarbonisation incentives, while ensuring~~ese measures do not ensure a level playing field for EU exporters; asks European Commission to propose a set of measures, which will ensure strong incentives for decarbonisation outside and within the EU, to provide a level playing field for EU exports;.

Amendment 75 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas it is not yet feasible to accurately estimate the actual carbon content of all goods;

Amendment 76 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. ~~Reque~~Insists that the implementation of the CBAM should lead to the ~~progressiv~~immediate phasing out of the free allocation of allowances, ~~following an appropriate transition period,~~ since the mechanism 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 exportsopposes any introduction of export rebates, which would undermine the core objective of the mechanism, by reducing incentives for exporting industries to decrease their climate impact;

Amendment 76 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)

Eb. whereas the current operating arrangements of the EU ETS have made it impossible to establish a carbon price that would encourage effective decarbonisation of European industries; whereas the current emission caps under the EU ETS and their development make it impossible to meet the target of limiting the global temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels; whereas the COVID-19 pandemic has had harmful short and medium-term effects on the functioning of the EU ETS;

Amendment 77 #

Engin EROGLU

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Requests that the implementation of the CBAM should lead to the progressive phasing out of the free allocation of allowances, ~~following an appropriate transition period,~~ since the mechanism 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 exports;

Amendment 77 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)

Eb. whereas the lack of practical implementation experience obliges the Union institutions to advance with caution in its steps towards a CBAM, recognise the need to accompanying any advancements with evaluation, re- evaluation and gathered evidence, lest to create unintended consequences for domestic firms, especially small and medium sized enterprises, and already achieved environmental and climate standards and risk additional carbon and investment leakage;

Amendment 78 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Stresses that any CBAM implemented on raw materials, semi- finished products and commodities would negatively impact European industry competitiveness; urges that CBAM shall not be implemented on all raw materials, semi-finished products or commodities impossible to produce in Europe and for which there is no made-in-EU alternative solution;

Amendment 78 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)

Eb. whereas a simultaneous implementation of a CBAM and free allocation of allowances under the EU ETS would amount to double protection and preferential treatment of EU industries; whereas this practice would potentially be incompatible with the WTO rulebook;

Amendment 79 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses that ~~importers from third countrie~~European consumers should not pay ~~twice~~ for the ~~carbon content embodied in its products~~Green Deal;

Amendment 79 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)

Eb. whereas the EU Member States grant many subsidies to energy-intensive industries through fiscal support, including tax breaks for energy use, and price and income support for energy- intensive companies and processes;

Amendment 8 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Believes that ~~the~~ main aims of the carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) should be to support the EU’s green objectives by fighting carbon leakage; and creating a level playing field between domestic and foreign producers, which would promote the competitiveness of companies based in the EU and low- carbon production within the EU.

Amendment 8 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 a (new)

- having regard to its resolution of 28 November 2019 on the climate and environmental emergency,

Amendment 80 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses that importers from third countries should not pay twice for the carbon content embodied in its products; asks European Commission to carry out risk assessment and propose ways to mitigate it.

Amendment 80 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E c (new)

Ec. whereas there are currently no tangible elements to back up the risk of carbon leakage; whereas, however, the goal of climate neutrality in the Union should not come at the expense of third countries, especially developing countries, through the export of its polluting industries that harm local populations;

Amendment 81 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses that importers from third countries should be treated on equal footing and without any discrimination and should not pay twice for the carbon content embodied in its products;

Amendment 81 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E d (new)

Ed. whereas emissions from trade (approximately 8 billion tonnes in 2015) account for a quarter of all global emissions (approximately 32 billion tonnes)1a; whereas emissions from international transport are the main environmental problem posed by international trade; whereas emissions from goods transport increased by 75% between 1990 and 20131b; whereas, according to the OECD, emissions from international goods transport could increase by 290% by 20501c; whereas these emissions are excluded from the national inventories and are not covered by the countries’ commitments under the Paris Agreement; _________________ 1aBanque de France (2020), Les émissions de CO2 dans le commerce international (https://publications.banque- france.fr/sites/default/files/medias/docum ents/820084_bdf228-1_co2_vf.pdf). 1bConseil d'analyse économique (2017), Commerce et climat: pour une réconciliation (http://www.cae- eco.fr/staticfiles/pdf/cae-note037v2.pdf). 1c OECD (2015), Aligning Policies for a Low-Carbon Economy (https://www.oecd.org/environment/cc/ali gning-policies-for-a-low-carbon- economy-synthesis-english.pdf).

Amendment 82 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses that importers from third countries ~~should not pay twice~~are prevented from being double charged for the carbon content embodied in its products;

Amendment 82 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Is deeply concerned that currently none of the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) submitted, including those of the Union and its Member States, are in line with the objective of pursuing efforts to limit the global temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and deplores the Union and Member States for not contributing to the 1.5°C Paris Agreement target; calls on all Member States to immediately revise their NDCs to contribute equitably to the 1.5°C Paris Agreement target;

Amendment 83 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. ~~Calls for~~Rejects the inclusion of CBAM revenues into the EU budget, as the EU should be financed from membership fees alone and never obtain the right to raise taxes on its own; recalls that, according to Article 113 and 115 TFEU, all new own resources require the unanimity of Member States and ratification by national parliaments;

Amendment 83 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Is deeply concerned that currently none of the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) submitted, including those of the Union and its Member States, are in line with the objective of pursuing efforts to limit the global temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels; and notes that population relocations within the EU contribute to population growth in countries of origin and thus to global overpopulation, leading to environmental destruction;

Amendment 84 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls for ~~the inclusion of CBAM revenues into~~CBAM revenues to be distributed among Member States; emphasises that it should always be Member States who decide about the size of the EU budget;

Amendment 84 #

Christophe HANSEN, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Sven SIMON, Jessica POLFJÄRD, Esther DE LANGE, Danuta Maria HÜBNER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Is deeply concerned that currently none of the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) submitted, including those of the Union and its Member States, are in line with the objective of holding the global temperature increase, as provided by the Paris Agreement, to well below 2°C, while pursuing efforts to limit the ~~global temperature~~ increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels;

Amendment 85 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. C~~alls for the inclusion of CBAM revenues into the EU budget~~onsiders that the CBAM being an environmental measure, the revenues could be used to co-finance projects that foster technological and energetic transition as well as research on low- carbon projects and further projects in line with the Union`s environmental ambitions;

Amendment 85 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Is ~~deeply~~ concerned that currently none of the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) submitted, including th~~ose~~at of the Union ~~and its Member States~~, are in line with the ~~objective of pursuing efforts to limit the global temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels~~Paris Agreement's long-term temperature goal;

Amendment 86 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. ~~Calls for the inclusion of CBAM revenues into the EU budget~~Supports the Commission’s intention to include CBAM revenues into the EU budget, acknowledges that additional revenues would be generated by both the CBAM and the removing of EU ETS free allowances, therefore also requests that those supplementary revenues would become new own resources, believes these revenues should be aimed at supporting the environmental and sustainable objectives of the EU;

Amendment 86 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Is deeply concerned~~Notes that currently none of the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) submitted, including those of the Union and its Member States, are in line with the objective of pursuing efforts to limit the global temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels;

Amendment 87 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls for the inclusion of CBAM revenues into the EU budget; considers that these resources must be used for climate action both within and outside the EU; recommends that these resources could partly feed into the EU's contribution to the adaptation fund for developing countries created by the Paris Agreement in order to support the environmental transition in developing countries; underlines that such revenues should not be considered as permanent revenues because, if successful, the CBAM will not generate revenues anymore over time, as other countries will also price their carbon emissions in an equivalent way;

Amendment 87 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Reiterates that the EU is responsible for only around 10% of global CO2emissions;

Amendment 88 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls for the inclusion of CBAM revenues into the EU budget; is convinced that these resources must be used for social and climate measures, including for supporting third countries in their efforts to decarbonize their economies, decarbonize and build a greener European industry, mitigate and adapt to climate change and to support low-income households and compensate any rise in price on imported goods as a result of the implementation of the mechanism;

Amendment 88 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Recalls the Union’s international climate and environmental obligations, especially those under the Paris Agreement; stresses that, according to the UN Environment Programme’s 2019 report, global emissions must drop by 7.6% by 2030 in order to remain below the 1.5°C limit on the global temperature increase1a; notes that this requires a reduction of at least 65% by 2030 for the Union; stresses that this scientific observation is in line with the demands of environmental organisations and citizens’ climate movements; _________________ 1aUnited Nations Environment Programme (2019), Emissions Gap Report 2019 (https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle /20.500.11822/30797/EGR2019.pdf?seque nce=1&isAllowed=y).

Amendment 89 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls for the inclusion of CBAM revenues into the EU budget and earmarked as for fighting climate change actions of the EU; calls for the resources generated by the CBAM to be re-invested in the development of carbon neutral technologies and in the build-up of an independent agency responsible for the definition of carbon contents as well as market-entry prices;

Amendment 89 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Notes the significant 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 the CBAM should 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 9 #

Draft opinion
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 leakag~~addressing carbon leakage, increasing demand for low carbon processes and products and reducing the carbon content of products; believes that an ultimate aim should be to work towards a global climate policy with a global carbon price;

Amendment 9 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 5 a (new)

- having regard to its resolution of 28th November 2019 on the Climate and Environment Emergency;

Amendment 90 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls for the inclusion of CBAM revenues into the EU budget; being an environmental measure, the CBAM revenues could be used to co-finance projects that foster technological and energetic transition as well as research on low-carbon projects and further projects in line with the Union`s environmental ambitions;

Amendment 90 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Believes that the EU has a historic responsibility to be the most ambitious signatory of the Paris Agreement, both through its own commitments and through its assistance to others, and should acknowledge and act on its climate and environmental debt;

Amendment 91 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls for the inclusion of CBAM revenues into the EU budget; considers that these should be allocated to research and innovation as a priority;

Amendment 91 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Stresses that national emission inventories, drawn up under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, are recorded within each country; notes that the GHG emissions reduction targets adopted by the Union only cover these territorial emissions; points out that this perimeter ignores the Union’s responsibility for its international trade and its consumption patterns; urges the Union and the Member States to also integrate a carbon footprint approach when defining their climate objectives;

Amendment 92 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls for the inclusion of CBAM revenues into the EU budget; believes that such revenues should only fund climate related objectives;

Amendment 92 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

Amendment 93 #

Draft opinion
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;

Amendment 93 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Strongly deplores the non- cooperative and disloyal behaviour of some of the Union’s trade partners, namely USA, Brazil and Saudi Arabia, in international climate negotiations, as recently observed at COP25; considers that this behaviour hampers our collective global ability to reach the objectives of the Paris Agreement; insists that the Commission and Council engage in good faith with all Parties and also lead discussion on making the decision-making process in the UNFCCC fairer, more transparent and less vulnerable to stalling;

Amendment 94 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Calls on the Commission to assess carefully the impact of CBAM different options on Least Developed Countries and Small Island Developing States, which are most vulnerable to climate change;

Amendment 94 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Strongly deplores the non- cooperative and disloyal behaviour of some of the Union’s trade partners in international climate negotiations, as recently observed at COP25; considers that this behaviour hampers our collective global ability to reach the objectives of the Paris Agreement; stresses that while CO2- emissions in many 3rd countries have increased, the EU-27 emissions have decreased; notes that the EU must not compromise the competitiveness of its own industry by giving a competitive advantage to non-EU production;

Amendment 95 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

Amendment 95 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Strongly deplores the non- cooperative and disloyal behaviour of some of the Union’s trade partners in international climate negotiations, as recently observed at COP25; considers that this behaviour hampers our collective global ability to reach the objectives of the Paris Agreement; regrets, in particular, the decision by the United States to withdraw from the Paris Agreement;

Amendment 96 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Believes that the above proposal imust be negotiated with the WTO in order to evaluate its compatibleility with World Trade Organization rules, since order to ensure that it does not discriminate between producers, is based on objective criteria and has a clear environmental objective.

Amendment 96 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Strongly d~~Deplores the non- cooperative ~~and disloyal~~ behaviour of some of the Union’s trade partners in international climate negotiations, as recently observed at COP25; considers that this behaviour hampers our collective global ability to reach the objectives of the Paris Agreement as those objectives will only be met through a collective international effort;

Amendment 97 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Believes that the ~~above proposal~~mechanism should be designed in a way that does not impact international trade negatively and is compatible with World Trade Organization rules, ~~since it does~~ not discriminateing between producers, is based on objective criteria and has a clear environmental objective.

Amendment 97 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Strongly deplores the non- cooperative and disloyal behav~~Is of the opinion that only collective international effort can lead to the achievement of the ambitiours of some of the Union’s trade partners in international climate negotiations, as recently observed at COP25; considers that this behaviour hampers our collective global ability to reach the objectives of the Paris Agreementbjectives set by the Paris Agreement, therefore calls the Union’s trade partners for a more cooperative approach in international climate negotiations, leading to adoption of the necessary and ambitious measures that will allow the achievement of the objectives;

Amendment 98 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. ~~Believes that the above proposal is~~Is of the opinion that CBAM mechanism is fully compatible with World Trade Organization rules, ~~since~~ it does not discriminate between producers~~, is based on objective criteria and has a clear environment~~ or the country of the origin, and it is based on sound and urgent environmental objective that is based on transparent and science- based objective criteria; in addition, calls on the Commission to pursue multilateral WTO reforms that bring international trade law in line with the goals o~~bjective.~~f the Paris Agreement;

Amendment 98 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Strongly deplores the non- cooperative ~~and disloyal~~ behaviour of some of the Union’s trade partners in international climate negotiations over the past years, as recently observed at COP25~~; considers that this behaviour hampers our collective global ability to reach the objectives of the Paris Agreement~~;

Amendment 99 #

Valérie HAYER, Nils TORVALDS, Fabienne KELLER, Nicolae ŞTEFĂNUȚĂ, Olivier CHASTEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Believes that the above proposal is compatible with World Trade Organization rules, since it does not discriminate between producers, is based on objective criteria and has a clear environmental objective.; expects the Commission to take urgent initiative for WTO reform in order to achieve full compatibility with the climate objectives of the Paris agreement;

Amendment 99 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Strongly deplores the non- cooperative and disloyal behaviour of some of the Union’s trade partners in international climate negotiations, as recently observed at COP25; considers that this behaviour hampers our collective global abilityUrges and encourages all of the Union’s international partners to science based and constructive behaviour in international climate negotiations; and to work to reach the objectives of the Paris Agreement;

source: 660.214

2020/11/17 BUDG 50 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Valérie HAYER, Luis GARICANO, Nils TORVALDS, Fabienne KELLER, Moritz KÖRNER, Nicolae ŞTEFĂNUȚĂ, Olivier CHASTEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls that a carbon border ~~tax~~adjustment mechanism has long been a candidate for a genuine and green source of own revenue for the EU budget and was among the ‘basket’ of preferred options for new own resources taken up in Parliament’s legislative resolution of 16 September1 ; _________________ 1Texts adopted, P9_TA- PROV(2020)0220.

Amendment 10 #

Silvia MODIG

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Acknowledges that the primary purpose of the carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) must be to prevent unfair competition, to enable internationally effective carbon pricing schemes, to mitigate the leakage dilemma in the context of 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 under European climate law while keeping a level playing field in international trade, with the aim of galvanising the rest of the world into taking climate action in line with Paris Agreement and limiting the global temperature increase to 1.5°C;

Amendment 11 #

Draft opinion
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 of the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), and taking into account the Effort-Sharing Regulation if necessary, 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 climate action in line with Paris Agreement;

Amendment 12 #

Draft opinion
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 of~~promote 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 13 #

Valérie HAYER, Luis GARICANO, Nils TORVALDS, Fabienne KELLER, Nicolae ŞTEFĂNUȚĂ, Olivier CHASTEL

Draft opinion
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 of the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) and to prevent distortions to competition and trade; sStresses 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 climate action in line with Paris Agreement; Stresses that the venues generated from a CBA mechanism should by no mean be used as disguised subsidies to high polluting European industries, which would ultimately compromise its compatibility with the WTO;

Amendment 14 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Acknowledges that the primary purpose of the carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) must be to protect the climate, to enable internationally effective carbon pricing schemes, to mitigate the carbon leakage dilemma in the context of 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 climate action in line with Paris Agreement;

Amendment 15 #

Valérie HAYER, Luis GARICANO, Nils TORVALDS, Fabienne KELLER, Nicolae ŞTEFĂNUȚĂ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Acknowledges that the introduction of the CBAM might lead to the progressive phase out of free allocation of allowances, since the mechanism would ensure that EU producers and foreign importers face the same carbon costs in the EU market; calls for the CBAM design to include a partial reimbursement of EU Allowances for exports in order to ensure a level playing field for EU goods in third markets, thus maintaining a strong incentive to decarbonise while avoiding carbon leakage;

Amendment 16 #

Draft opinion
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 17 #

Draft opinion
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 18 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Underlines the importance of avoiding internal market distortions, as well as protectionist measures against the EU; suggests therefore a World Trade Organization compatible, non- discriminatory and progressive mechanism and strongly encourage the Commission to take a multilateral approach to its design;

Amendment 19 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Condemns the way in which the EU is interfering in non-EU countries by setting carbon pricing, the consequences of which will affect international trade as a whole;

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls that a carbon border tax has long been a candidate for a genuine and green source of own revenue for the EU budget and was among the ‘basket’ of ~~preferred options for~~ new own resources taken up in Parliament’s legislative resolution of 16 September1 ; _________________ 1Texts adopted, P9_TA- PROV(2020)0220.

Amendment 20 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Urges the Commission to pursue multilateral WTO reforms that bring international trade law in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement;

Amendment 21 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. 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 potential phasing out of existing carbon leakage measures should be the effect of longstanding climate policy and not the result of introduction of CBAM;

Amendment 22 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Acknowledges that the CBAM could be implemented either as an extension of the current regime of custom duties or as a complementary scheme within the existing ETS framework; highlights that the second model, centralised according to ETS standards for sectors and carbon prices, would facilitate the establishment of equivalent levels of taxation on EU and non-EU products and therefore guarantee a fair level playing field in international trade;

Amendment 23 #

Draft opinion
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 c (new)

2c. Calls on the Commission to conduct a solid impact assessment of the different designs according to which the CBAM could be implemented, taking into account different scenarios and the specific characteristics of the sectors that could be covered by the mechanism, before presenting a legislative proposal; considers it indispensable that the assessment evaluate economic and social consequences on the EU industrial sector, with specific regard to SMEs; stresses the importance to assess the impacts of each options on living standards of consumers, especially those of more vulnerable groups, as well as the impact on revenue;

Amendment 25 #

Valérie HAYER, Luis GARICANO, Nils TORVALDS, Fabienne KELLER, Nicolae ŞTEFĂNUȚĂ, Olivier CHASTEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 d (new)

2d. Notes with concern the lack of international climate efforts and measures, especially with regard to implementing the decisions made under the Paris Agreement; underlines that decentralised climate actions can lead to carbon-leakage and to a consequential increase of global emissions and a competitive disadvantage on international markets for the EU industry and that they hence put at risk European jobs and value chains; stresses that the EU industry, especially SMEs, suffers increased economic pressure due to cheap imports from trading partners and the COVID-19 crisis; thus urges the Commission to ensure a fully and effective climate and carbon-leakage protection mechanism which shall be capable of ensuring competitiveness of EU exports, in particular to third countries where the carbon constraint is absent or less ambitious than in the EU;

Amendment 26 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Recalls that the Parliament, the Council and the Commission agreed on the creation of new own resources in the course of the next Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF), including the CBAM, in the Interinstitutional Agreement on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management, as well as on new own resources, including a roadmap for the introduction of new own resources (IIA); Stresses that dedicating the financial flows resulting from the CBAM to the EU budget would help to mitigate issues of fiscal equivalence and ensure a fairly distributed impact across Member States, as well as ensuring a lean structure with minimal administrative overheads; concludes, therefore, that defining the proceeds as an EU own resource~~, and decreasing GNI-based contributions accordingly~~ to first cover a share of the repayment costs of the Next Generation EU instrument, and reducing the share of GNI-based contributions in the financing of the Union's budget, would help to mutualise the budgetary impact of the CBAM in a fair way across all Member States;

Amendment 27 #

Eero HEINÄLUOMA, Elisabetta GUALMINI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. SUrges that the proposed CBAM be based on a thorough impact assessment, which assesses the impact of different options also at sector level; believes that the CBAM should be applied gradually, first applying to select products related to carbon leakage sectors; believes that the mechanism should be designed in a way that does not impact international trade negatively and is compatible with World Trade Organization rules; stresses that dedicating the financial flows resulting from the CBAM to the EU budget would help to mitigate issues of fiscal equivalence and ensure a fairly distributed impact across Member States, as well as ensuring a lean structure with minimal administrative overheads; concludes, therefore, that defining the proceeds as an EU own resource, and decreasing GNI- based contributions accordingly, would help to mutualise the impact of the CBAM in a fair way across all Member States;

Amendment 28 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that dedicating the financial flows resulting from the CBAM to the EU budget would help to mitigate issues of fiscal equivalence and ensure a fairly distributed impact across Member States, as well as ensuring a lean structure with minimal administrative overheads; concludes, therefore, that defining the proceeds as an EU own resource, and decreasing GNI-based contributions accordingly, would help to mutualise the impact of the CBAM in a fair way across all Member States; Stresses that the implementation of the mechanism must be accompanied by the removal of all forms of environmentally harmful subsidies granted to energy-intensive industries at national level, in particular tax exemptions and breaks on energy used by energy-intensive industries; calls on the Commission to evaluate the different practices of Member States in that matter in light of the polluter pays principle:

Amendment 29 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that dedicating the financial flows resulting from the CBAM to the EU budget would help to mitigate issues of fiscal equivalence and ensure a fairly distributed impact across Member States, as well as ensuring a lean structure with minimal administrative overheads; concludes, therefore, that defining the proceeds as an EU own resource, and decreasing GNI-based contributions accordingly, would help to mutualise the impact of the CBAM in a fair way across all Member States; in fact, the savings at national level by correspondingly lower GNI-contributions could be taken into account in the overall endeavour to shift the tax burden from labour to environmental costs;

Amendment 3 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls that a carbon border tax has long been a candidate for a genuine and green source of own revenue for the EU budget a~~nd was among the ‘basket’ of preferred options for new ow~~lthough no cause-and-effect relationship has been res~~ources taken up in Parliament’s legislative resolution of 16 September1; _________________ 1~~tablished between the hot climate cycle and increased carbon dioxide; Texts adopted, P9_TA-PROV(2020)0220

Amendment 30 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Stresses that the issue of compatibility with WTO rules must be carefully thought through, because of the unclear legal status of this mechanism; considers that the aim should be preventing carbon leakage rather than maintaining the competitiveness of European companies;

Amendment 31 #

Draft opinion
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 the European Green Deal, the fight against climate change and the circular economy, and that it would thereby help to generate co- benefits, incentives and EU added value; considers that CBAM revenues would be, by their nature and origin, linked to EU climate policies, external borders, as well as trade policy, and would therefore constitute a highly suitable basis for an EU own resource.

Amendment 32 #

Draft opinion
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 the European Green Deal, the fight against climate change and the circular economy, and that it would thereby help to generate co- benefits, incentives and EU added value and highlights the necessity therefore, for any CBAM to be designed with the highest environmental integrity in mind;

Amendment 33 #

Valérie HAYER, Luis GARICANO, Nils TORVALDS, Fabienne KELLER, Nicolae ŞTEFĂNUȚĂ, Olivier CHASTEL

Draft opinion
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 34 #

Silvia MODIG

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

Amendment 35 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Welcomes the fact that the CBAM, ~~if used a~~when it becomes a basis for an own resource~~, would~~ according to the IIA, will bring the revenue side of the EU budget into closer alignment with strategic policy objectives such as the European Green Deal, the fight against climate change and the circular economy, and that it would thereby help to generate co- benefits, incentives and EU added value;

Amendment 36 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. ~~Welcomes the fact that the CBAM, if used as a basis for an~~Is concerned that the CBAM may become a new EU own resource, w~~ould bring~~hereas the revenue side of the EU budget into closer alignment with strategic policy objectives such as the European Green Deal, the fight against climate change and the circular economy, and that it would thereby help to generate co-benefits, incentives and EU added valuegenerated by the CBAM should be treated like any duty collected by the customs authorities of a Member State; considers that Member States should be authorised to retain 20% as collection costs;

Amendment 37 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Underlines that the GHG emissions content of imports concerned should be accounted for on the basis of transparent and reliable product-specific benchmarks representing the global average GHG emissions content of individual products while taking into account different production methods with varying emission intensities; considers that the carbon pricing of imports should also take into account the country-specific carbon intensity of the electricity grid;

Amendment 38 #

Draft opinion
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 39 #

Draft opinion
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 4 #

Valérie HAYER, Luis GARICANO, Nils TORVALDS, Fabienne KELLER, Nicolae ŞTEFĂNUȚĂ, Olivier CHASTEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Recalls EU’s international commitments under the Paris Agreement; acknowledges the European Green Deal and notes that it needs to ensure a cost- effective, just, socially inclusive and fair transition to a carbon neutral economy by 2050;

Amendment 40 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Takes note of various prudent revenue estimates ranging from 5 to 14 billion EUR per year, subject to the sectors concerned and carbon pricing, 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;

Amendment 41 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Highlights that the CBAM’s design can be fully compatible with World Trade Organization law if it is designed on the basis of the EU ETS and applies to imports embedding materials covered by the EU ETS, and thus avoid retaliation against the EU economy while raising the expected revenues;

Amendment 42 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Deplores the fact that the methodology takes such an imprecise approach;

Amendment 43 #

José Manuel FERNANDES, Angelika WINZIG

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Is determined to ensure that the CBAM-based own resource ~~constitute universal income and that it be deemed to cover a share of the repayment costs of the Next Generation EU instrument~~will be part of a basket of own resources raising an amount sufficient to cover at least the level of overall expected expenditure for the repayment of the principal and the interests of the borrowing for expenditure referred to in point (b) of paragraph 1 of Article 3b of the [Own Resources Decision], while respecting the principle of universality; underlines that the revenue from this basket in excess of the needs for repayment shall continue to fund the Union budget as general revenue in line with the principle of universality;

Amendment 44 #

Valérie HAYER, Luis GARICANO, Nils TORVALDS, Nicolae ŞTEFĂNUȚĂ, Olivier CHASTEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Is determined to ensure that the CBAM-based own resource are not to be formally earmarked for any particular expenditure item of fund; rather, they constitute universal income and that it be deemed to cover a share of the repayment costs of the Next Generation EU instrument; moreover, recalls that any surplus from the repayment plan shall continue to serve the EU budget as general revenue, since this approach would endow the budget with the required flexibility to cover unforeseen needs in the coming seven years;

Amendment 45 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Is determined to ensure that the CBAM-based own resource constitute universal income and that it be deemed to cover a share of the repayment costs of the Next Generation EU instrument; underlines that any earmarking of CBAM revenues would contravene the IIA, the Own Resources Decision and the Financial Regulation;

Amendment 46 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Is ~~determined to ensure that the CBAM-based own resource constitute universal income and that it be deemed to cover a share of the repayment costs of the Next Generation EU instrument~~concerned about the complexity of putting this new tax in place, in terms of its compatibility with WTO rules, and therefore calls for revenue to be allocated to Member States so that this tax is not treated as a new own resource;

Amendment 47 #

Valérie HAYER, Luis GARICANO, Nils TORVALDS, Nicolae ŞTEFĂNUȚĂ, Olivier CHASTEL

6a. Recalls that the introduction of a basket of new own resources, as established in the letter of the Roadmap for the introduction of New Own Resources under the Inter-institutional Agreement, could facilitate a better focus of expenditure at Union level on priority areas and common public goods with high efficiency gains compared to national spending;

Amendment 48 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Proposes a test phase of three to five years where the research and impact costs are limited, during which the CBAM should only cover the most energy- intensive products, such as steel, concrete or aluminium;

Amendment 49 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Recalls that any failure to respect the terms agreed in the IIA by one of the three institutions could expose it to a legal challenge by the others;

Amendment 5 #

Eero HEINÄLUOMA, Elisabetta GUALMINI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

Amendment 50 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. [Calls on the institutions to follow up actively in the spirit and to letter of the Roadmap for the introduction of New Own Resources under the Inter- institutional Agreement, which prescribes that this new own resource is to enter into force at the latest by 1 January 2023.]2 _________________ 2 Pending final agreement on the IIA in the context of the MFF negotiations.deleted

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

Amendment 7 #

Draft opinion
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 of the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), to increase demand for low carbon products and processes 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 climate action in line with Paris Agreement; believes that the ultimate aim should be to encourage innovation and investments into greener technologies globally and to work towards a global climate policy with a global carbon price;

Amendment 8 #