The UN insists on the 'Global Carbon Tax,' while Trump keeps that 'he will not tolerate this new green tax.'

The International Maritime Organization (IMO), a UN agency, is promoting a global mechanism to tax carbon emissions from maritime transport. The proposal, presented as a "green" measure, states that ships would pay according to their level of CO₂ emissions, with fees that could reach up to $380 per ton emitted. The declared "objective": to create a global fund that would collect between $10 billion and $13 billion annually to finance the "energy transition" in developing countries, as if such countries did not have other urgent needs. 

The project was preliminarily approved in April with 63 votes in favor, 16 against, and 25 abstentions, but without consensus. In order to enter into force in 2028, it must be ratified again by a qualified majority.

Trump: "The U.S. WILL NOT tolerate this new green tax"

U.S. President Donald Trump was categorical. In statements reproduced by Swissinfo, he said: "I am outraged that the International Maritime Organization intends to approve a global carbon tax this week in London." He warned: "The U.S. WILL NOT tolerate this new green and fraudulent tax on maritime transport and will not adhere to it in any way."

Trump also emphasized that his administration "will not tolerate price increases for American consumers," alluding to the inflationary impact that the tax would have on logistics costs and the prices of essential goods.

Economy, inflation, and fiscal sovereignty

The position of the United States combines economics and principles. Such an international tax increases global logistics costs and is passed on to the shelf: higher freight costs mean more expensive food and goods, just as the world is fighting inflation. The U.S. administration itself has been warning that a tax of this kind "would impose substantial economic burdens" and would put pressure on prices.

Moreover, the "global tax" approach collides with fiscal sovereignty: there are no national parliaments voting on a levy that will affect consumers and businesses worldwide, but rather a multilateral design that seeks to impose rates from an international body. For the U.S., that design results in climate bureaucracy without democratic control and in opaque transfers with an uncertain destination.

What it means for Argentina and the region

Resistance to the global tax is spreading in Latin America. This week, Paraguay officially rejected the proposal during discussions at the IMO. According to Diario Hoy Paraguay, the country considers it "a direct threat to national sovereignty and the competitiveness of regional trade," effectively aligning itself with the position of the United States.

The government of Santiago Peña warned that "a tax of this nature will disproportionately affect landlocked countries, increasing the cost of exporting food and raw materials," pillars of its economy. 

For economies seeking to open up, such as Argentina, a global tax on transport means more imported inflation, less competitiveness, and less investment. Raising freight costs impacts production, the final price of food, and export profitability.

Javier Milei's government has defended economic sovereignty and freedom of trade in international forums, principles that are incompatible with global tax schemes designed by bureaucrats who do not even have popular sovereignty. 

Under the environmental discourse, the "global carbon tax" hides an attempt to centralize power and resources in international organizations, weakening national democratic institutions.