The CBAM Regulation and US BCA proposals: an analysis across the GATT non-discrimination obligations and the CBDR-RC principle

Abstract Recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports emphasize that there is no ‘silver bullet’ to tackle the global climate crisis. In response, several Members of the World Trade Orgnization (WTO) are adopting policy instruments to internalize the environmental costs of greenhouse gas emissions. Yet, when adopting these policy tools, Members may face concerns about the risk of carbon leakage and the resulting loss of competitiveness. In May 2023, the European Union (EU) adopted Regulation 2023/956, establishing the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM). Shortly thereafter, other WTO Members, including the USA, tabled proposals for national border carbon adjustment (BCA) mechanisms. While BCAs hold potential to advance climate mitigation and incentivize global decarbonization, they also pose complex legal and systemic challenges under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). If not designed and implemented with sensitivity to global disparities, BCAs may impose disproportionate burdens on developing and least-developed countries, potentially undermining their consistency with GATT non-discrimination obligations and the chapeau of Article XX. To ensure that BCAs are genuinely directed towards climate objectives, interpretations of Article XX chapeau must be informed by the Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDR-RC) principle, which must guide States’ climate mitigation efforts. Against this backdrop, this contribution critically examines and compares the core implementation challenges of the EU CBAM and four BCA proposals introduced in the 118th US Congress in 2023. With the EU CBAM nearing full implementation and growing momentum for BCAs in other jurisdictions, including the USA, addressing legal and distributive concerns is imperative to avoid adverse impacts on vulnerable economies. This is particularly pressing also in light of the potential emergence of a ‘BCA coalition’ among politically and economically aligned states. While BCAs can foster international cooperation and make meaningful contributions to climate change mitigation, their legitimacy depends on consistency with the CBDR-RC principle and compliance with the GATT.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
The Journal of World Energy Law & Business
Published
2025-09-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/jwelb/jwaf009
Primary Topic
World Trade Organization Law
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The CBAM Regulation and US BCA proposals: an analysis across the GATT non-discrimination obligations and the CBDR-RC principle

Rachele Magnaghi
The Journal of World Energy Law & Business
World Trade Organization Law
article

The CBAM Regulation and US BCA proposals: an analysis across the GATT non-discrimination obligations and the CBDR-RC principle

Rachele Magnaghi
article en

Abstract

Abstract Recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports emphasize that there is no ‘silver bullet’ to tackle the global climate crisis. In response, several Members of the World Trade Orgnization (WTO) are adopting policy instruments to internalize the environmental costs of greenhouse gas emissions. Yet, when adopting these policy tools, Members may face concerns about the risk of carbon leakage and the resulting loss of competitiveness. In May 2023, the European Union (EU) adopted Regulation 2023/956, establishing the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM). Shortly thereafter, other WTO Members, including the USA, tabled proposals for national border carbon adjustment (BCA) mechanisms. While BCAs hold potential to advance climate mitigation and incentivize global decarbonization, they also pose complex legal and systemic challenges under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). If not designed and implemented with sensitivity to global disparities, BCAs may impose disproportionate burdens on developing and least-developed countries, potentially undermining their consistency with GATT non-discrimination obligations and the chapeau of Article XX. To ensure that BCAs are genuinely directed towards climate objectives, interpretations of Article XX chapeau must be informed by the Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDR-RC) principle, which must guide States’ climate mitigation efforts. Against this backdrop, this contribution critically examines and compares the core implementation challenges of the EU CBAM and four BCA proposals introduced in the 118th US Congress in 2023. With the EU CBAM nearing full implementation and growing momentum for BCAs in other jurisdictions, including the USA, addressing legal and distributive concerns is imperative to avoid adverse impacts on vulnerable economies. This is particularly pressing also in light of the potential emergence of a ‘BCA coalition’ among politically and economically aligned states. While BCAs can foster international cooperation and make meaningful contributions to climate change mitigation, their legitimacy depends on consistency with the CBDR-RC principle and compliance with the GATT.

The Journal of World Energy Law & BusinessVol. 18(5-6)
Openalex Percentile: Top 14%
World Trade Organization Law
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.