Activities of Gunnar BECK related to 2020/2043(INI)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION towards a WTO-compatible EU carbon border adjustment mechanism
Amendments (13)
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Believes that the main aim of the carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) should be to support the EU’s green objectives by fighting carbon leakageshelved until COVID has been eradicated and the European economies have fully relaunched, signified by a growth of 2.5 percent of GDP on average during the course of 3 years;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Believes that there is no need for a CBAM under the Paris Agreement since all countries have agreed to implement relevant emissions policies; believes that the introduction of a CBAM would constitute a motion of no-confidence of the EU towards all third countries; recalls that the European Green Deal Communication stipulates that third countries should share the same climate ambition as the EU;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Believes that the introduction of a CBAM protects expensive green production in energy-intensive sectors in the EU from cheaper carbon intensive alternatives, and therefore reduces competitive pressure to drive down the price; rejects therefore the CBAM as a tool fostering green protectionism;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Proposes that the CBAM should not be implemented as an extension of the EU emissions trading system (EU ETS), which would require importers to purchase allowances for the volume of carbon emissions incorporated in their products; notes that the mechanism should ensure a single carbon price, both for domestic producers and importer, especially during the COVID-crisis, since it will inevitably lead to higher consumer prices, which will deteriorate the already precarious financial situation of many EU citizens and families;
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Urges that the proposed CBAM should not apply to allny imports in order to avoid distortion in the internal market;
Amendment 67 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. RequestBelieves that the implementation of the CBAM shwould lead to the progressive phasing out of the free allocation of allowances, following an appropriate transition period, since the mechanism ensures that EU producers and importers would have to deal with the same carbon costs in the EU market; notes that this phasing out should be coupled in parallel with the introduction of export rebates in order to maintain strong decarbonisation incentives, while ensuring a level playing field for EU exportsbe an obstacle to the reindustrialisation of Europe;
Amendment 78 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Stresses that any CBAM implemented on raw materials, semi- finished products and commodities would negatively impact European industry competitiveness; urges that CBAM shall not be implemented on all raw materials, semi-finished products or commodities impossible to produce in Europe and for which there is no made-in-EU alternative solution;
Amendment 79 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses that importers from third countrieEuropean consumers should not pay twice for the carbon content embodied in its productsGreen Deal;
Amendment 83 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls forRejects the inclusion of CBAM revenues into the EU budget, as the EU should be financed from membership fees alone and never obtain the right to raise taxes on its own; recalls that, according to Article 113 and 115 TFEU, all new own resources require the unanimity of Member States and ratification by national parliaments;
Amendment 101 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Believes that the above proposal is compatible with World Trade Organization rules, since it does not discriminate between producers, is based on objective criteria and has a clear environmental objective; therefore, the design of the mechanism should be discussed and negotiated within the WTO.
Amendment 109 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Stresses that the Commission should not pursue a unilateral approach to a CBAM, but should instead engage in bilateral and multilateral discussions with third-countries;
Amendment 112 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8 b. Calls on the Commission to carefully study the compatibility of the CBAM with the FTAs which the EU has concluded;
Amendment 115 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8 c. Rejects the establishment of a carbon border adjustment mechanism.