From the US Department of State
Media Note
October 10, 2025
Joint Statement by Secretary of State Rubio, Secretary of Energy Wright, and Secretary of Transportation Duffy
President Trump has made it clear that the United States will not accept any international environmental agreement that unduly or unfairly burdens the United States or harms the interests of the American people. Next week, members of the IMO will vote on the adoption of a so-called NZF aimed at reducing global carbon dioxide gas emissions from the international shipping sector. This will be the first time that a UN organization levies a global carbon tax on the world.
The Administration unequivocally rejects this proposal before the IMO and will not tolerate any action that increases costs for our citizens, energy providers, shipping companies and their customers, or tourists. The economic impacts from this measure could be disastrous, with some estimates forecasting global shipping costs increasing as much as 10% or more. We ask you to join us in rejecting adoption of the NZF at the October meeting and to work together on our collective economic and energy security.
The NZF proposal poses significant risks to the global economy and subjects not just Americans, but all IMO member states to an unsanctioned global tax regime that levies punitive and regressive financial penalties, which could be avoided. The United States is considering the following actions against nations that support this global carbon tax on American consumers:
- Pursuing investigations and considering potential regulations to combat anti-competitive practices from certain flagged countries and potential blocking vessels registered in those countries from U.S. ports;
- Imposing visa restrictions including an increase in fees and processing, mandatory re-interview requirements and/or revisions of quotas for C-1/D maritime crew member visas;
- Imposing commercial penalties stemming from U.S. government contracts including new commercial ships, liquified natural gas terminals and infrastructure, and/or other financial penalties on ships flagged under nations in favor of the NZF;
- Imposing additional port fees on ships owned, operated, or flagged by countries supporting the framework; and
- Evaluating sanctions on officials sponsoring activist-driven climate policies that would burden American consumers, among other measures under consideration.
The United States will be moving to levy these remedies against nations that sponsor this European-led neocolonial export of global climate regulations. We will fight hard to protect our economic interests by imposing costs on countries if they support the NZF. Our fellow IMO members should be on notice.
H/T CFACT
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
This is nuts. There is no real evidence that CO2 has any effect on our global climate system. The AGW hypothesis has been falsified by science.
It was never about science and always about money. In all those supernational organization there are thousands of political profiteers living from taxpayer money and their greed is simply indefinite.
It doesn’t need to.
The UNO exists for a specific purpose- global governance(it is no coincidence that the UNO is located at the same place as the One World Tower).
One can not centralize power on a global level without a series of global crisis as catalysts.
Wether these crisis exist is irrelevant as long as they serve the purpose.
We have Covid and AGW , next will be an economic crisis(and this time they’ll save us with CBDC’s) and the 4th horseman will be a war(the UN and its predecessor League of Nations only exist because of the World Wars, and those happened for this reason alongside the rise of communism)
FYI, the plural of crisis is crises.
Well done.. Mr Rudio, Wright and Duffy…… !
USA should also reduce any payments to the UN by whatever extra costs are involved in this tax.
Isolate US taxpayers from the UN.
In fact, the US should ask the UN to VACATE ITS PREMISES and move to another country.
Great idea. I hear Burkina Faso is fabulous this time of year.
I don’t know who Mr. Rudio is, but Marco Rubio has been doing a fantastic job.
Wouldn’t that amount to an acceptance of the UN’s right to tax? If an American doesn’t pay taxes they can go to jail. What happens to a country? Who collects? Wo counts? Who disciplines?
“The penalties for tax evasion in the USA are severe and can include significant fines and imprisonment. The U.S. Code section 7201 states that any person who willfully attempts to evade or defeat any tax imposed by this title or the payment thereof shall be guilty of a felony.”
AFAIK the UN Charter does not allow for the UN to impose taxes on anyone. Does not the US have veto power over any UN actions that affect members? Seems like we should be able to simply veto whatever action the UN/IMO is taking to impose this idiotic tax.
It’s an end run. Like the Paris Accord, it is offered as a treaty. The Paris Accord was never ratified by Congress yet we had Presidents commit us to it in violation of the Constitution.
I doubt President Trump will even submit such a treaty to Congress for ratification approval.
Going to be interesting. Trying to find real, useful information on this is not easy, just the IMO FAQ which is full of weasel words, and other sites in the same vein.
(If anyone knows of any good sites that are neither salivating at the new taxing authority, nor ranting about the evils, but explain the details simply and objectively, I would appreciate it.)
Near as I can gather, the IMO is a UN organization, meaning the tow the IPCC lion about AGW. The claim is that if the IMO adopts this, every UN member is obligated to adopt it too, as if the UN think it is an actual world government with taxing authority. One is tempted to ask how many divisions they have.
Unfortunately, governments love them some taxing authority, and I have no doubt that all EU countries and many Asian countries, for instance, will happily dance to the IMO’s tune. They will no doubt find some way to collect this tax on all ships entering their ports, or tack it on to all fuel sales. That makes it hard for the US to not participate. This letter from Rubio, Wright, and Duffy, backed by Trump, is probably more bluff than reality.
“his letter from Rubio, Wright, and Duffy, backed by Trump, is probably more bluff than reality.”
The Europeans should not bet on it.
The Trump administration is going to apply economic pain to any country that applies economic pain to the United States. Count on it.
Trump can’t apply pain to the entire world forever. At some point, he will find the fence he has built also fences him (and us) in as much as it fences them out.
You assume the world will welcome self immolation. I suspect the people might start asking serious questions about yet another attack on their cost of living. Remember, this tax will apply to all shipborne trade movements of every type of good. That 8ncludes movements of raw materials as well as finished goods that will therefore get stung twice over.
The UN is putting its legitimacy on the line. It might not hang onto it. It’s already a rotting corpse like its predecessor the League of Nations.
It is possible, of course, but Trump is not immortal nor is he in office forever.
Your phraseology suggests it is a given, pre-ordained, result.
My point is, your speculation has equal chances of being right or wrong.
What this tax does is make for every country, imported items more expensive in relation to those produced internally.
This hurts those countries that import and export a lot. A country that is economically independent will not be affected.
What I suspect will happen is that those countries that can, will start figuring out how to produce as much as possible internally. Those countries that are most dependent on trade, will enter into one on one treaties with the countries they trade with the most, to not impose these taxes. Everyone else will muddle through, avoiding these taxes wherever they can find a sufficiently convincing subterfuge.
To achieve internal self-sufficiency mean tossing the Net Zero transition into the dumpster where it belongs.
If countries don’t pay, do they get sanctioned or invaded?
By whom?
Tried googling “UN annual budget” and got $5.4B for invading 3rd world dictatorships but the headline number is mysteriously absent from the metaverse. What -is- the UN’s total budget including seat covers on Wonder Woman’s Invisible jet??
Google:
“For 2025, the regular budget is $3.72 billion and the peacekeeping budget is approximately $5.4 billion.”
How exactly does say Denmark taxing ships coming into ports force Trump to tax ships coming into US ports?
Force is an interesting choice of words.
Taxing power for the UN is the first step in the creation of global Communism.
Next they’ll be taxing the air we breathe.
Oh, wait….
It is all part of the plan to achieve the One World Order.
Serious question… What good does the United Nations do?
There are probably a few useful small functions the UN enables. Not reason to waste money on 99% of what it does which is detrimental to the free world (what’s left of it). Wouldn’t be surprised if it gets defunded before Trump is done, all for it.
I was taught, in elementary school, that the UN was a place that nations could meet and “talk” their differences out instead of using guns, bombs and soldiers.
Yeah, and how’s that working out?
Any countries that want to talk, they have this thing called the telephone (now the internet).
That was the original purpose. But bureaucracy blossomed and we now have something different, and uglier.
The UN is a case of “Pournelle’s Iron Law of Bureaucracy”….very common…very noticeable once you see it… like the gorilla in the basketball game.
They are using tax payer money from western countries in highly ineffective ways to bribe poorer countries into submission and giving up sovereignities to create a new normed commie human being all around the world.
If they don’t import Cholera into Haiti than their heavily armed troops enjoy watching genocides.
In Rwanda the perpetrators had only Machetes.
A few hundred amputations as result of legshots would have saved one million+ lives, but they did nothing.
It is obviously no coincidence that the UN is located on the same tiny island that financed Hitler and the Bolshewik revolution(Anthony Sutton wrote 2 great boks about that),
and that this island is located in that country that has participated in 75% of all wars since end of
WW2.
Transfers western taxpayers’ $$$$$$s to shithole countries by any means they can cook up.
However, they always need complicit enablers within the Western countries power structures.
Leftist governments always fulfill that function.
Prove me wrong, as Charlie would say.
It provides sinecures for politicians who would otherwise be unable to find employment.
I do believe their charter is to stop wars. They have expanded into One World Governance. If you read their Agenda 21/30 manifesto that’s exactly what it says, written in plain English, no guessing or reading between the lines necessary.
I think from the language it’s pretty clear what President Trump will do which will to be sanction offending parties and ban them from the US financial system in the same way Russia is currently treated. I suspect that will bring the UN to it’s knees because even if they have money from dues they won’t be able to spend it in USA or associated countries.
I am actually curious how the UN ever got in a position to effectively impose a world tax, it’s a violation of each countries sovereignty so I have some catch up reading to do.
This is the first “world tax” the UN is trying to impose and it’s not going to work because Trump doesn’t want it to work.
I imagine if Joe Biden or Kamala, or any other Democrat were president now, the U.S. would eagerly go along with allowing the UN to control citizens of the United States.
I think Trump will fight this tooth and nail.
Agree with you both. More so I believe that the U.N. seeks to put its Satan-driven-evil foot in the door of American sovereignty no matter how or for what. Once their evil foot is in the door of,American sovereignty, their evil body is sure to follow – not allowed by President Trump, but by some Pink-O Commie, post-Trump, president. For example, the U.N. has been pushing for the United Nations Small Arms Treaty (ATT), a seemingly well-meaning agreement that in reality is a Trojan horse for a sweeping global gun control agenda.
China is emitting one third of global emissions, and rising. So the question is, how are they proposing to deal with China.
A lot of clearing of throats….
IMO – the International Maritime Organization – is the United Nations specialized agency with responsibility for the safety and security of shipping and the prevention of marine and atmospheric pollution by ships. IMO’s work supports the UN sustainable development goals.
The UN tells the IMO, we need this much money to support UN “sustainable development goals”, therefore increase your IMO tax. There would be no end to it.
That extortionist UN/IMO tax will increase each year.
The US should impose an extra % trade tariff on any country voting for the IMO tax, in addition to the measures mentioned in the article, which are focussed on the ships, crews, visas, etc., but they do not have a vote, countries have a vote.
CO2 IS AN ABSOLUTELY VITAL FOR GROWING FLORA AND FAUNA; NET ZERO IS A SUICIDE PACT
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/co2-is-an-absolutely-vital-gas-ingredient-for-growing-flora-and
By Willem Post
.
The IPCC, etc., has dubbed CO2 as having magical global warming power, based on its own “science”
The IPCC, etc., claims, CO2 acts as Climate Control Knob, that eventually will cause runaway Climate Change, if we continue using fossil fuels.
The IPCC, etc., denies the Little Ice Age, uses fraudulent computer temperature projections.
.
Governments proclaimed: Go Wind and Solar, Go ENERGIEWENDE, go Net zero by 2050, etc., and provided oodles of subsidies, and rules and regulations, and mandates, and prohibitions to make it happen.
.
Net-zero by 2050 to-reduce CO2 is a super-expensive suicide pact, to:
1) increase command/control by governments, and
2) enable the moneyed elites to become more powerful and richer, at the expense of all others, by using the foghorn of the government-subsidized/controlled Corporate Media to spread scare-mongering slogans and brainwash people, already for at least 40 years; extremely biased CNN, MSNBC, NPR, PBS, NBC ABC, CBS come to mind.
.
CO2, just 0.042% in the atmosphere, is a weak absorber of a small fraction of the absorbable, low-energy IR photons.
CO2 has near-zero influence on world surface temperatures.
CO2 is a life-giving molecule. Greater CO2 ppm in atmosphere is an absolutely essential ingredient for:
1) increased green flora, which increases fauna all over the world, and
2) increased crop yields to better feed 8 billion people.
Please do not use photons that way.
Photons are a mathematical construct defined as a specific quantum of energy absorbed or emitted by valence electrons. Photons are not particles. Zero size. Zero rest mass.
If you strike the word photons from your sentence it will be correct and perfect.
Allowing international bodies to impose taxes is a terrible precedent. This is exactly the issue of taxation without representation over which we fought in 1776. Unlike the World Bank and other organizations where we make voluntary contributions, these fees would be controlled by folks whose main interest is soaking the US.
Another element in this case is that the agencies in charge would undoubtedly have different fees for “wealthy” (nearly bankrupt) western nations versus developing nations (China, India, etc.).
Complete agreement. Perhaps we should go back to sails? I wonder if, after Trump calls BS on the UN’s plan, other shipping outfits will stop shipping under, say, the Liberian flag and register under the US flag?
World Government anyone?
It seems to me it’s magical thinking that paying a tax will have an effect on climate, but I may certainly be wrong. Can anyone tell me if the global climate tax will actually have a measurable effect on climate? If yes, by when can we expect the effect to take place?
Well they are burning money like it is going out of style, so there is that contribution to the climate.
Did “carbon cap and trade” reduce anything?
Did “carbon credits” reduce anything?
Both of those were/are in effect taxes. The difference is those had middlemen who got rich.
One has to wonder who the middle men will be in this IMO tax and who is the Big Guy who gets the 10%?
In addition to the stick for those countries that comply with the UN tax, the US should offer a carrot to those that don’t (as long as they aren’t terrorist states, or are in some way undesirable to do business with).
Yet again idiots at UN want to collapse global trade.
They are not idiots. They are doing this for a purpose. Libertines seems a better choice over idiots.
Libertine:
A person who is unrestrained by convention or morality, often leading a dissolute life.
This lifestyle is characterized by an extreme form of hedonism and liberalism, with a focus on physical pleasures and a rejection of social norms and responsibilities.
Yep, I agree, idiots.
I agree with Nova Sparta. They’re not idiots, they’re doing what their globalist handlers want them to do: de-industrialize the West.
That is exactly what idiots do.
I believe the correct term is “useful idiots.”
More wealth redistribution. The UN has passed its’ use by date a long time ago. The last time Congress voted on ceding authority/sovereignty to an international organization not a single, not one, person in Congress voted for it. I have a hard time seeing how any developed country that relies on trade would go along with this.
We should remember that the IMO has given us the IMO 2020 Regulations on sulphur in marine fuels which are now being blamed for an increase in global warming. Now we have proposals to filter sunlight by injecting SO2 into the atmosphere. Perhaps we should just go back to normal marine fuels and disband the IMO.
I should have pointed out that IMO2020 already resulted in a large increase in the cost of bunker fuels and modifications to ships engines to use them. Probably the fact they got away with that emboldens them to go for the tax.
The nation with the largest number of tonne-miles of shipping freight is of course China. But their logic is different.
China, on the other hand, supports the greenhouse gas reduction proposal. China accounts for a majority of global newbuilds, and stronger fuel regulations could bring a windfall if orders for eco-friendly ships increase. According to Clarksons Research, a British shipbuilding and shipping market analysis firm, China took 56% of the world’s cumulative orders from January to September this year
I am waiting for Greta to take this one on.
Ya gotta love Donald. Is he the last sane voice in the world?
Trump isn’t the only sane voice, he is just the loudest and most persistent.
Real, successful leaders beget other leaders, who see the example set, understand it, see the value in it, and follow in the footsteps.
Republicans have a lot of good, sober leaders, who look at the world like Trump, waiting in the wings.
Radical Democrats have the Leftwing Media Propaganda Organ as their only strength. It’s powerful, but can’t seem to overcome Trump. Thank the Good Lord for that!
“‘The power to tax is the power to destroy,’ a quote by John Marshall,”
“John Marshall (September 24, 1755 – July 6, 1835) was an American statesman, jurist, and Founding Father who served as the fourth chief justice of the United States from 1801 until his death in 1835. He remains the longest-serving chief justice and fourth-longest-serving justice in the history of the U.S. Supreme Court, and he is widely regarded as one of the most influential justices ever to serve.”
The power to tax only exists where there is an ability to enforce tax collection. Considering that the U.N. has no police force of its own, I see no ability for the UN to extract any taxation either directly or indirectly through an NZF scheme via quasi governmental organizations such as the IMO.
The first and most obvious action for the United States: ignore any proposed or implemented “international agreement” issued by the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO) with which the US disagrees.
In which case, what’s the IMO going to do?
— Arrest the US?
— Fine the US?
— Take the US to the International Court, and to what end?
— Impound US shipping vessels on the high seas?
— Fight it out with the US Navy?
The IMO, like the UN, is a straw puppet.
A wan Kier signs up the UK:
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/starmer-defies-trump-by-backing-global-net-zero-tax/ar-AA1OxKo0
And they wonder why the economy is collapsing. TIme for some education from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
He’s not defying Trump, he’s defying logic.
Yes, Starmer may want to surrender his freedom of action to the United Nations, but Trump certainly does not, and will not.
Trump will definitely make an issue of it. Does Starmer really want to be on the other side of that argument? Is he that afraid of CO2?
They tried cap and trade.
Then they tried carbon offset credits.
Rinse, spin, repeat.
Really is too bad the tax was not in place before the Freedom Flotilla set sail.
Why? The wealthy backers wouldn’t care and I’m sure there will be exemptions for Greta and her ilk
Estimates of the CO2 emissions by the flotilla are equivalent to some 200 air flights between London and Tel Aviv.
Greta, the comical child crusader for climate lies would have been caught in an inescapable net.
If media chose to even notice.
What can I say government sucks and international government sucks way more. The US should consider withholding funds for all international organizations. There are probably some we need but I don’t know which ones.
The UN can levy all the taxes it wants, but what will it do to countries that refuse to pay it since they would just view it as another wealth redistribution gimmick? That’s the reason that the UN’s climate recommendations, mandates, and scare tactics are consistently scoffed at and wind up achieving nothing but more determination by most of the world in general to refuse to abide by any attempts to increase their operating costs by an unelected body. The majority of their citizens feel the same because any such levies would undoubtedly lead to higher living costs.
Follow the money proves to be the best tracker and predictor of behavior again.
How much of the revenue will go to Houthie missiles aimed at certain shipping?
But, but but, we only target carbon emitters!
/sarc