Mixed Reactions to IMO’s Emissions Deal in the Maritime Sector

Author: Alyssa Maresco
Publish Date: 10.15.2025

The United Nations’ International Maritime Organization (“IMO”) drafted an Emissions Deal (“Deal”) in April 2025 to decrease global carbon emissions in the maritime sector from international shipping.[1] Initially, sixty-three of the IMO member countries passed the Deal with, sixteen countries voting against it and twenty-four countries abstaining.[2] The countries that opposed the Deal, including the United States, have expressed concerns about the Deal’s adoption that will be discussed at the upcoming IMO session in October 2025.[3]

The Deal, which will apply to large-ocean vessels with a gross tonnage of over 5,000, would aid in moving forward some of the IMO member countries’ “Net-Zero Framework” because such vessels collectively account for eighty-five percent of carbon dioxide emissions from the global marine shipping fleet.[4] The ultimate goal of such a framework is to have net-zero emissions from the maritime sector by 2050.[5] The current prediction is that emissions will significantly increase without an agreed mechanism to speed up decarbonization, such as the Deal, because global shipping accounts for nearly three percent of global carbon dioxide emissions and approximately ninety percent of global trade conducted by sea.[6] So, supporters of the “Net-Zero Framework” drafted the Deal with a dual approach that aim to progressively lower the annual greenhouse gas fuel intensity of marine fuels and require high-emitting ships to pay for their excess pollution–creating a market-driven push toward cleaner maritime transport.[7]

However, the United States, who pulled out of the talks in April leading up to the draft of the Deal, is urging countries to reject the Deal because the Trump administration wants to take a bigger role in global shipping to help boost United States economic might.[8] The United States believes that the Deal would be of little help in ultimately reducing emissions and that it would place unnecessary burdens on the shipping industry.[9] To deter countries from supporting the adoption of the Deal at the October IMO session, the United States warned IMO member countries that it will retaliate against the Deal’s supporters by imposing tariffs, visa restrictions, and/or port levies on them.[10]

It is unclear which other IMO member countries, if any, hold a similar position to the United States because the United States has made no comment on “private diplomatic discussions with other countries.”[11] But the United States is currently engaging with its partners and allies to propose they take similar retaliatory measures if the Deal proceeds to be adopted.[12] Moreover, the Netherlands is the only country that has confirmed it received a warning from the United States regarding the retaliatory measures it may face if it supports the adoption of the Deal.[13] The future of the Deal’s adoption, whether successful or not, will be determined at the IMO October session and, depending on the outcome, may raise more concerns regarding carbon fuel emissions and global trade in the maritime sector.[14]

[1] Enes Tunagur et al., UN shipping agency strikes deal on fuel emission, CO2 fees, Reuters (Apr. 11, 2025, 4:40 PM), https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/boards-policy-regulation/un-shipping-agency-strikes-deal-fuel-emissions-co2-fees-2025-04-11/.
[2] Jonathan Saul et al., US tells countries to reject UN ship fuel emissions deal or face tariffs, sources say, Reuters (Sept. 3, 2025, 3:43 PM), https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/us-tells-countries-reject-un-ship-fuel-emissions-deal-or-face-tariffs-sources-2025-09-03/.
[3] Id.
[4] Vibhu Mishra, Countries reach historic deal to cut shipping emissions, United Nations: UN News (Apr. 11, 2025), https://news.un.org/en/story/2025/04/1162176.
[5] Id.
[6] Saul, supra note 2.
[7] Mishra, supra note 5.
[8] Saul, supra note 2.
[9] Id.
[10] Id.
[11] Id.
[12] Id.
[13] Id.
[14] Id.