What the IMO’s Carbon Deal Means for U.S. Policy and Global Trade

An overlooked yet very significant climate agreement moved forward last week related to shipping carbon emissions. In a landmark decision earlier this month, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) approved draft amendments to its air pollution treaty—marking the first time a global carbon pricing framework will be applied to an entire industry. To put it into context, maritime shipping is responsible for nearly 3% of global greenhouse gas emissions.

The new framework does two things: it caps emissions through fuel intensity targets, and it places a price on excess carbon starting in 2028. Ships that fail to meet emissions targets will face a tiered carbon fee ranging from $100 to $380 per ton, depending on their compliance with ambitious fuel intensity benchmarks for greenhouse gas emissions. A new IMO Net-Zero Fund, expected to raise up to $13 billion annually, will support cleaner vessel adoption, green fuel innovation, and climate resilience projects—especially for poorer countries heavily reliant on maritime trade.

If adopted in October 2025, the rules will go into effect in 2027 and apply to ships over 5,000 gross tons, covering about 85% of the sector’s emissions.

The United States formally withdrew from the negotiations, citing concerns over cost burdens on American shipping companies and the potential for trade disruption. U.S. officials called the framework “blatantly unfair” and raised flags over the use of emissions trading rather than direct taxation. So what does this mean for U.S. policy and American companies?

• Regulatory divergence could lead to higher compliance costs for American vessels operating internationally, especially if the U.S. doesn’t develop a compatible framework. We’re seeing this with stronger European compliance standards that require companies to operate under drastically different regulatory regimes.

• Federal agencies may come under pressure from ports, environmental groups, and coastal states to take action through the EPA or MARAD. While this administration is likely to refuse to comply, companies operating internationally will be held to the IMO standard.

• Trade policy implications could be impacted. If other major trading partners (like the EU) embrace the IMO framework, the U.S. could face retaliatory measures or carbon border adjustments if it opts out.

For organizations navigating climate, trade, and transportation policy, this is a space to watch. While the decision won’t be final until October, IMO is sending a clear direction that should put the industry on alert.