The Democrats’ Border Carbon Adjustment Proposal

Jul 23, 2021

Reading Time : 5 min

By: Kenneth J. Markowitz, Clete Willems, Gabriel Harrison (Public Policy Specialist), Isabel Root (Intern)

On Monday, July 19, 2021, Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE) and Rep. Scott Peters (D-CA-52) introduced The FAIR Transition and Competition Act of 2021 (S. 2378). The bill would, among other things, amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, by establishing a Border Carbon Adjustment (BCA). As proposed, the BCA may be likened to a value-added tax (VAT) and is intended to address the phenomenon known as “carbon leakage,” wherein market actors attempt to avoid the cost of greenhouse gas regulations by sourcing products from less regulated jurisdictions. Proponents of border tax adjustments argue that they level the playing field for manufacturers in the United States whose emissions are subject to regulation1. The proposed legislation is expected to be included as part of the Democrats’ infrastructure reconciliation package.

What is in the Democrats’ proposal?

The bill outlines a plan to levy a tax on:

  1. Imported goods from the steel, aluminum, iron and cement industries (sectors).
  2. The production and products derived from petroleum, natural gas and coal (covered fuel).
  3. Any other goods deemed necessary by the Secretary of the Treasury based on reliable emissions data and United States’ interest.

For covered fuel, the tax would be levied beginning January 1, 2024, equaling the “domestic environmental cost incurred in the production of such fuel,” multiplied by “the upstream greenhouse gas emissions of such fuel.” For the aforementioned sectors, the tax would be calculated by the same formula, unless the product was produced in a sector for which reliable emissions data is unavailable, in which case benchmark emissions would be used in the formula. Exemptions include:

  1. “Any country included on the list of Least Developed Countries on the most recent Development Assistance Committee List of Official Development Assistance Recipients published by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.”
  2. “Countries that do not impose BCAs on the United States and have laws and regulations to reduce or eliminate greenhouse gases that are at least as ambitious as the United States.”

Revenue raised from The FAIR Transition and Competition Act would pay for its implementation. If revenues exceed implementation costs, half of the excess revenues would fund researching and developing technologies to reduce greenhouse gases, and half would be used to create a so-called “Resilient Communities Grant” for each state. Such state grants would be distributed no later than April 1, 2025, based on factors including a state’s population, climate vulnerability, and population of the workforce employed by the fossil fuel industry. These grants may be used by states to:

  1. Provide job training for workers transitioning out of the fossil fuel industry.
  2. Assess climate vulnerability.
  3. Implement projects to combat climate vulnerability.
  4. Assist frontline climate communities.
  5. Alleviate historical burdens imposed on low-income communities and communities of color by environmental hazards.
  6. Provide relocation assistance for climate refugees.
  7. “Assist small businesses disproportionately affected by the BCA”.

Below is a timeline of the bill’s implementation:

July 1, 2023 (and annually thereafter)

  • The Secretary of the Treasury will “determine the domestic environmental cost for each sector and the production of covered fuel based on the average cost” of complying with the United States federal, state, and local laws and regulations. These policies include the Clean Air Act, greenhouse gas emissions regulations for vehicles, and local fees on carbon.
  • The administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency will also determine the baseline emissions for sectors by measuring the average greenhouse gas emissions of each sector to assess progress. To set “benchmark emissions,” the administrator will “publish the production greenhouse gas emissions for the top 1 percent of the emitting production sites within each sector in the United States during the prior calendar year.” These benchmark emissions are used to calculate the BCA tax in the absence of reliable data for products and industries.
  • The Secretary will publish a report of countries exempt from the tax.

January 1, 2024

  • The BCA is implemented.

April 1, 2025

  • The Resilient Communities Grant is implemented and provided annually.

Quotes on The FAIR Transition and Competition Act of 2021

“We must ensure that U.S. workers and manufacturers aren’t left behind and that we have tools to assess global progress on climate commitments” – Sen. Coons (New York Times)

“The FAIR Transition and Competition Act will facilitate a race to the top among U.S. companies to produce the next generation of clean energy and technology. The move would ensure we remain a key player in international cooperation on climate action and show the world that the U.S. is fully committed to addressing the climate crisis at home and abroad.” – Rep. Peters

“Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the majority leader, said he included the tariff because ‘it prevents other countries from polluting.’” – Sen. Schumer (New York Times)

“This legislation will assert American leadership on the climate crisis, but we also can’t be ‘Uncle Sucker’ where other countries, led by China, take advantage of what we are going to ask our country to undertake.” – Sen. Markey (New York Times)

“I’m finding out there’s a lot of language in places they’re eliminating fossil…It’s very, very disturbing.” – Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) (Roll Call)

“The principle here is at least a methane fee, some kind of border adjustment, although there are serious technical challenges there,” Schatz said. “Our major hurdle is how to make it operate properly.” – Sen. Brian Schatz (D-HI) (Roll Call)

“If some country doesn’t have any constraints on carbon, is producing a product in an extremely dirty manner, and in your … country you’re putting in some more carbon restrictions — well that gives that foreign business an unfair advantage.” – Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) (Roll Call)

“They’re proposing a border tax because they know punishing regulations and taxes will drive U.S. businesses overseas.” – Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY) (New York Times)

Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Mike Braun (R-IA), Mitt Romney (R-UT) and Susan Collins (R-ME) considered a carbon border tax in June.


1 It is worth noting that the concept of a carbon border tax or adjustment is relatively new and that, to our knowledge, no country has passed or implemented such a tax. As a result, the effectiveness of such a tax is inherently speculative. Nevertheless, an analysis of 25 studies found that a carbon border tax could reduce leakage by an average of six percentage points. That said, the United States is not alone in considering this option: on July 14, the European Commission announced plans for its first carbon border tax, calling it the “Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism”, which would require foreign companies to pay a fee, already required for European companies, for each ton of carbon dioxide produced.

Share This Insight

Previous Entries

Speaking Sustainability

February 19, 2025

Wind energy projects along the coasts are facing uncertainty due to President Trump’s Presidential Memorandum1 issued on January 20, “Temporary Withdrawal of All Areas on the Outer Continental Shelf from Offshore Wind Leasing and Review of the Federal Government’s Leasing and Permitting Practices for Wind Projects.” This Memorandum introduces substantial policy changes that impact both onshore and offshore wind development.

...

Read More

Speaking Sustainability

January 24, 2025

Beginning on Monday, there have been a flurry of executive orders from the Trump administration reversing Biden-era energy policies, emphasizing oil and gas production, lifting the liquified natural gas (LNG) export permitting pause and withdrawing from all accords and commitments under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) including the Paris climate agreement. The orders also target electric vehicles (EVs), wind energy, international climate aid and the use of the social cost of carbon in agency decision making. For close tracking of these orders and more to come, visit the Akin Trump Executive Order tracker. Concurrently, President Trump’s nominees for the Department of the Interior (DOI), Department of Energy (DOE) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have each passed their initial rounds of committee confirmation votes, and now await votes before the Senate floor.

...

Read More

Speaking Sustainability

January 10, 2025

In the final days of his term, President Joe Biden has taken significant steps to solidify his administration’s climate legacy. The administration finalized rules for various clean energy tax credits established under the Inflation Reduction Act. However, these rules, intended to stimulate clean energy advancements through 2032, face opposition from Congressional Republicans, who are considering scaling back or repealing the credits through budget reconciliation.

...

Read More

Speaking Sustainability

December 19, 2024

The twilight hours of the Biden administration and the 118th Congress have been marked by intense legislative and regulatory activity, underscored by President-elect Trump’s derailment of last-minute congressional budget talks, and stalled progress on energy permitting reforms.

...

Read More

Speaking Sustainability

December 11, 2024

The Biden administration’s environmental policies and the future of infrastructure projects are facing pivotal legal challenges and political shifts. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit questioned the viability of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) 2024 power plant emissions rule, particularly its reliance on carbon capture technology, while the 6th Circuit overturned the EPA’s rejection of Kentucky’s smog plan, which comes only three days after the EPA issued its defense of its “good neighbor” smog control plan responding to the Supreme Court’s decision to halt its implementation in June. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court’s handling of the first National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) case in some time, Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, could substantially alter the scope of environmental reviews, with potential immediate implications for the oil & gas industry. These judicial reviews may be influenced by a potential change in administration and Congress, as Trump-era officials, including Vivek Ramaswamy, advocate for scaling back NEPA regulations to expedite infrastructure projects. Additionally, the Department of Energy’s recent clarity on liquified natural gas (LNG) export authorizations underscores the broader tension between expanding fossil fuel infrastructure and adhering to environmental regulations amidst a polarized political and legal landscape.

...

Read More

Speaking Sustainability

October 3, 2024

NYC Climate Week included over 900 events with an estimated 100,000 participants swarming the City. While indicative of growing interest in climate action, some note that the record turnout foreshadows a smaller presence at COP 29 in Azerbaijan.

...

Read More

Speaking Sustainability

September 19, 2024

Recent legislative and regulatory developments reflect ongoing tensions between environmental policies and economic priorities in the U.S. energy landscape. The House Energy and Commerce Committee’s advancement of three resolutions targeting Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rules on power plants, vehicle emissions and air quality standards marks a broader Republican effort to counter President Biden’s environmental agenda, though these resolutions face likely vetoes. In contrast, House Speaker Mike Johnson has signaled openness to retaining certain green energy tax credits, reflecting a pragmatic approach as some Republican districts benefit from these investments. Simultaneously, bipartisan efforts to boost critical mineral production, led by Senators Hickenlooper and Tillis, aim to reduce U.S. reliance on Chinese imports, while the White House has raised tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles and solar products, a move seen as both protective of domestic industries and potentially disruptive to supply chains. Legal battles continue, as seen in the judicial blocking of the Interior Department’s methane rule in five states and ongoing litigation over EPA’s cross-state pollution rule, which the agency has been allowed to revise. Meanwhile, grid operators have expressed concerns that the EPA’s carbon emissions rule could threaten power plant operations, pushing for legal revisions to protect grid reliability. Together, these developments reflect the broader debate over balancing environmental regulations with economic and energy security concerns.

...

Read More

Speaking Sustainability

September 12, 2024

After a recent permitting reform bill was passed out of a Senate Committee, House Republicans took steps to draft their own permitting reform legislation. Rep. Westerman (R- AR) held a hearing to discuss his draft bill, which most notably places limitations on the environmental permitting process for energy projects. This comes as both parties position energy policy as a key election issue, with Vice President Harris recognizing a role for oil and gas production during the Presidential debate in response to Republican criticism of her climate policies. Meanwhile, former President Trump vowed to pull back unspent dollars approved for greenhouse gas reduction and energy transition projects under the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). The IRA has already spurred significant renewable energy investment, particularly in rural electric co-ops using the funds to replace coal generation with clean energy and battery storage.

...

Read More

© 2025 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.