Blog: U.K. Government Split Over How to Charge Polluters After Brexit – Bloomberg

Rishi Sunak

Rishi Sunak

Photographer: Simon Dawson/Bloomberg

Photographer: Simon Dawson/Bloomberg

Sign up to receive the Green Daily daily newsletter and follow us @climate.

U.K. Chancellor Rishi Sunak’s Treasury is locked in a battle with Alok Sharma’s Business Department over how to ensure polluters pay for their emissions after Brexit.

Explore dynamic updates of the earth’s key data points

Million metric tons of greenhouse emissions, most recent annual data

Renewable power investment worldwide in Q2 2020

+0.​94° C

Aug. 2020 increase in global temperature vs. 1900s average

42%

Carbon-free net power in the U.S., most recent data

Parts per million CO2 in the atmosphere

-39.​68%

Today’s arctic ice area vs. historic average

Soccer pitches of forest lost this hour, most recent data

Meerut, IndiaMost polluted air today, in sensor range

The Treasury is pushing to replace the European Union’s cap-and-trade system with an economy-wide carbon tax, which would come into effect after Britain exits the bloc in January. The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy is drawing up a new emissions-trading system to start in January similar to the EU program that the U.K. currently participates in.

One person familiar with the debate predicted that an ETS was a likely option, and a hybrid is also being considered. A decision is expected soon. It is likely to be announced by Dec. 12, when Prime Minister Boris Johnson will co-host a United Nations meeting on climate action, where he is expected to reveal a new 2030 climate pledge and encourage other countries to set their own goals to bring net emissions to zero.

But with just a little over two months to go before the U.K. leaves the EU and no deal agreed upon, businesses are becoming increasingly concerned over the lack of certainty for how they’ll be charged for their pollution and whether the U.K. system will be linked to the EU’s ETS.

“We’re really running tight on time if they want to implement an ETS,” said Jahn Olsen, analyst for BloombergNEF. “A tax has a lot of obvious disadvantages.”

The U.K. is still negotiating to find a way that could tie a U.K. cap-and-trade system to the EU ETS — if it does opt for that system. But if no deal can be struck, BEIS officials say a standalone U.K. ETS would be just as effective. The EU ETS is the world’s biggest carbon market.

Some of the U.K.’s biggest emitters are lobbying against a carbon tax, saying it would put them at a competitive disadvantage to EU rivals. They’re more comfortable with an ETS, since they’ve had to deal with the EU system since 2005. Olsen said a U.K. ETS would probably have excess allowances at first since the economy is in recession and the number of certificates issued in the system would probably be set for more normal times.

An oversupplied ETS in the U.K. may mean companies could buy carbon allowances for around 15 pounds ($19.60) a ton, Olsen said. That’s lower than the average of 24 euros ($28) a ton in the EU system over the past year.

“The proposed carbon-emissions tax is much less flexible than an Emission Trading Scheme and will lead to an unnecessarily higher tax burden for British steel companies,” said Frank Aaskov, energy and climate change policy manager for the U.K. Steel industry group.

READ MORE: Why Pricing Carbon Is Still More Theory Than Reality

Under the terms of the Withdrawal Agreement, the U.K. will remain in the EU ETS until the end of the transition period at the end of this year, and U.K. participants must fulfill their obligations to surrender allowances by April 30, 2021.

Another option being considered is a hybrid model which would see the U.K. adopt both new economy-wide carbon taxes and an ETS, according to the people. That idea is being advocated by Ben Caldecott, who is advising the government on climate finance ahead of the next round of global climate talks, known as COP26, which are due to be held in Glasgow in November 2021.

“The choice is not between one or the other — carbon taxes or carbon markets,” Caldecott said. “We need to ambitiously reform both. We should deliver carbon pricing reform, not simply carbon tax reform. In our enthusiasm to introduce new carbon taxes, we mustn’t throw the baby out with the bath water.”

— With assistance by Ewa Krukowska

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s