‘Polluters must pay’: UN chief calls for windfall tax on fossil fuel companies

[Hydrogen]

António Guterres said money raised should be diverted to vulnerable nations suffering losses caused by climate crisis

Countries should impose windfall taxes on fossil fuel companies and divert the money to vulnerable nations suffering worsening losses from the climate crisis, the United Nations secretary general has urged.

António Guterres said that “polluters must pay” for the escalating damage caused by heatwaves, floods, drought and other climate impacts, and demanded that it was “high time to put fossil fuel producers, investors and enablers on notice”.

“Today, I am calling on all developed economies to tax the windfall profits of fossil fuel companies,” Guterres said in a speech to the UN general assembly on Tuesday. “Those funds should be redirected in two ways – to countries suffering loss and damage caused by the climate crisis and to people struggling with rising food and energy prices.”

Guterres’s appeal came in his most urgent, and bleakest, speech to date on the state of the planet, and the will of governments to change course.

His first words were: “Our world is in big trouble.”

“Let’s have no illusions. We are in rough seas. A winter of global discontent is on the horizon, a cost-of-living crisis is raging, trust is crumbling, inequalities are exploding and our planet is burning,” he told the assembly. “We have a duty to act and yet we are gridlocked in colossal global dysfunction. The international community is not ready or willing to tackle the big dramatic challenges of our age.”

The lacerating speech, delivered at the UN headquarters in New York, echoes calls from activists, and the European Union, to tax major oil and gas firms currently enjoying record profits in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. In July, Exxon announced it had made a record quarterly profit of $17.8bn, while Chevron unveiled its own three-month record profit, of $11.6bn. BP, meanwhile, made a $8.5bn profit in the same period.

Under Guterres’s proposal, revenue from the taxes would flow to predominantly developing countries suffering “loss and damage” from global heating, to be invested in early warning systems, mopping up from disasters and other initiatives to build resilience. Vulnerable countries are poised to leverage the UN general assembly week to ask rich nations for a “climate-related and justice-based” global tax to pay for loss and damage.

Guterres has previously accused governments of having an “addiction” to fossil fuels and has called new investments in oil, coal and gas “moral and economic madness”.

But his speech on Tuesday was particularly pointed, delivered on the grand dais of the general assembly and following the secretary general’s recent visit to Pakistan, where floods from what he called “a monsoon on steroids” have submerged a third of the country and displaced millions of people.

“Our planet is burning,” Guterres said, calling on world leaders to to end their “suicidal war against nature”.

“The climate crisis is the defining issue of our time,” he added. “It must be the first priority of every government and multilateral organization. And yet climate action is being put on the back burner – despite overwhelming public support around the world.”

“We have a rendezvous with climate disaster … The hottest summers of today may be the coolest summers of tomorrow. Once-in-a-lifetime climate shocks may soon become once-a-year events. And with every climate disaster, we know that women and girls are the most affected. The climate crisis is a case study in moral and economic injustice.”

Governments must stage an “intervention” to break their addiction to fossil fuels, Guterres said, by targeting not only the extractive companies themselves but the entire infrastructure of businesses that support them.

“That includes the banks, private equity, asset managers and other financial institutions that continue to invest and underwrite carbon pollution,” said the secretary general.

“And it includes the massive public relations machine raking in billions to shield the fossil fuel industry from scrutiny. Just as they did for the tobacco industry decades before, lobbyists and spin doctors have spewed harmful misinformation. Fossil fuel interests need to spend less time averting a PR disaster – and more time averting a planetary one.”

Guterres said it was “high time to move beyond endless discussions” and deliver finance for vulnerable countries and for wealthy nations to double adaption funding by 2025, as they promised to do at UN climate talks in Scotland last year. A further round of talks, known as Cop27, will take place in Egypt in November, in which loss and damage is set to be a central issue.

Although governments have agreed to restrain global heating to 1.5C above pre-industrial times, almost all countries are lagging in their efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions quickly enough to avoid this level of heating and therefore avert catastrophic climate impacts.

Emissions have already rebounded to pre-pandemic levels and an analysis this week showed there are plenty of known fossil fuel reserves in the world still left to burn – enough to unleash 3.5tn tons of greenhouse gases, which would smash the carbon budget before we get to 1.5C seven times over.


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/sep/20/un-secretary-general-tax-fossil-fuel-companies-climate-crisis

....


Like the legendary Robin Hood, high ranking UN members are calling for tax hikes on oil companies. They want to tax wealthy fossil fuel enterprises so they can share greater wealth with the poor.

This path could take the UN on a collision course with china. Tax hikes on oil companies will make global shipping and trade more expensive. If cost of shipping becomes untenable, local sources of manufacturing and supply will be sought to replace centralized production abroad. The trend could diminish china's role as the world's centralized production hub. The two paths appear to conflict. I wonder if we'll see a compromise or resolution to this dilemma anytime soon.

Much of china's strength is built upon deregulation coupled with cheap oil and shipping costs to boost manufacturing exports. This war the UN is waging on on fossil fuels and global shipping could jeopardize china's export markets. It will be interesting to see which course of action they take to mitigate these risks.

Also I'm interested to know how public opinion views these topics. I have a feeling public sentiment on climate change and alternative energy have shifted a little over the last 2 years. Things are changing. Hopefully for the better.

[buwaytress]

You mean to ask if this will have an impact on Bitcoin mining or price? Nah.

You must be new to the UN. They make several hundred calls every few years, makes scores of pledges, pass many resolutions and sometimes even adopted by the Security Council (which technically makes them legally binding, but hey, doesn't matter).

You ask about public sentiment? Towards the climate crisis or towards the UN, COPxx and co.?

[Not disagreeing that it's the right call, just questioning that the UN really is at war with fossil fuel]

[Upgrade00]

I would be waiting to see if any action is actually taken as regards rising carbon emissions. The U.N has become largely reactive in recent years, not taking action to prevent situations, condemning them after it happens and still not taken concrete actions.
I would expect less from U.N considering any action would put them against China. In a separate situation China is ready with countermeasures should U.N make any anti-China motion agants their alleged crimes against humanity

Also I'm interested to know how public opinion views these topics. I have a feeling public sentiment on climate change and alternative energy have shifted a little over the last 2 years. Things are changing. Hopefully for the better.

Climate change is a global issue that needs to be addressed and fast. With continued advancement in technology, the waste disposal also increases, reducing quality of life on the planet.

[teosanru]

In my country the oil companies don't even pay for their credit card facilitation charges that also is recovered by from the customer in form of surcharge you expect they will be bearing these taxes? All of them will eventually reflect in the price of the oil at retail level and oil being such an essential item all this would increase the overall inflation as it will be increasing the cost of transportation directly.

On your other question things are changing but only in developed countries and that too at a very gradual pace so I doubt you will see any large scale change anytime soon.

[eaLiTy]

I would be waiting to see if any action is actually taken as regards rising carbon emissions. The U.N has become largely reactive in recent years, not taking action to prevent situations, condemning them after it happens and still not taken concrete actions.
I would expect less from U.N considering any action would put them against China.  

If they impose huge tax on China they will divert that tax to the companies that are responsible for the pollution and they can target manufacturing units of Nike, Cisco, IBM, Apple and there are several other US and European companies that are running their manufacturing units in China .

Like the legendary Robin Hood, high ranking UN members are calling for tax hikes on oil companies. They want to tax wealthy fossil fuel enterprises so they can share greater wealth with the poor.

Those taxes will be upon the end users rather than these companies taking any loss.  

This path could take the UN on a collision course with china. Tax hikes on oil companies will make global shipping and trade more expensive. If cost of shipping becomes untenable, local sources of manufacturing and supply will be sought to replace centralized production abroad. The trend could diminish china's role as the world's centralized production hub. The two paths appear to conflict. I wonder if we'll see a compromise or resolution to this dilemma anytime soon.

In a hypothetical situation if China ask these companies to stop their manufacturing units citing carbon emissions, will these companies search for another country to set up their manufacturing units and what benefit is there by increasing all these taxes which becomes unbearable for everyone else. If the resolution should be to save climate, they need to work on that aspect rather than planning to implement more tax and the rate of pollution will carry on as usual.

[Rruchi man]

Also I'm interested to know how public opinion views these topics. I have a feeling public sentiment on climate change and alternative energy have shifted a little over the last 2 years.

In addition to plans by the UN chief to tax these companies they should also put pressure on them for them to be more involved in creating awareness about climate change and how everyone can contribute to arresting this challenge we all stand to face as well as conducting regular environmental exercise that involves environmental evaluation and remediation where necessary. If companies are involved in environmental duties, they will make an effort to reduce the amount of pollution they let out.

[Oceat]

If they did that then there's another price hike for oils in the future or maybe not?
But somehow, these people at the top are doing something that the minorities would do for them even if these minorities will suffer. Although, if their main goal was just to tax these business oil owners then there's no problem with that but I somehow feel that it will affect the whole economy globally.

[Sithara007]

This can't get anymore retarded. Only a small fraction of the profits end up with companies such as Exxon, Chevron and BP. And these companies provide employment for millions of people around the world. 95% of the profits end up with national governments of oil/gas producing nations such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Russia, who in turn use these revenues to wage wars in third world nations such as Yemen, Syria and Ukraine.

And by imposing additional taxes on oil companies, these retards are driving prices further up, thereby boosting the profits of fuel exporting countries. I am not surprised with all this. In general, human IQ seems to be on a downward slide since the end of WW2.

[blue_hurricanger]

This can't get anymore retarded. Only a small fraction of the profits end up with companies such as Exxon, Chevron and BP. And these companies provide employment for millions of people around the world. 95% of the profits end up with national governments of oil/gas producing nations such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Russia, who in turn use these revenues to wage wars in third world nations such as Yemen, Syria and Ukraine.

And by imposing additional taxes on oil companies, these retards are driving prices further up, thereby boosting the profits of fuel exporting countries. I am not surprised with all this. In general, human IQ seems to be on a downward slide since the end of WW2.

It seems like an attempt to justify or give fossil fuel companies a good reason to raise their price. I don't know, called myself a paranoid or conspiracy theory follower but I always thought the green party have some agenda not as green as they said.

They have to realize that only developed countries could afford green solutions, to quickly replace the traditional source of energy from fossil fuels with renewable energy or 'green'. For developing countries, renewable energy is very tricky and requires a huge amount of initial capital to build along with electricity infrastructure. This is why even countries like China or some developed countries still use coal for the winter. Or in the EU zone with natural gas. Stupid shit like this going to hurt developing countries because it made them pay more for electricity, lower human living standards in those countries. And in turn,  foods or manufacturing goods that to export to developed countries going to scale up the price.

F!ck this.

[Gyfts]

This can't get anymore retarded. Only a small fraction of the profits end up with companies such as Exxon, Chevron and BP. And these companies provide employment for millions of people around the world. 95% of the profits end up with national governments of oil/gas producing nations such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Russia, who in turn use these revenues to wage wars in third world nations such as Yemen, Syria and Ukraine.

And by imposing additional taxes on oil companies, these retards are driving prices further up, thereby boosting the profits of fuel exporting countries. I am not surprised with all this. In general, human IQ seems to be on a downward slide since the end of WW2.

UN is a globalist organization that paddles around the world on their sanctimonious sailboat telling the developed world that they need to act in accordance to their own virtues. Recall that the UN, among other things, has criticized Israel for constructing a wall for national security, but will not provide much scrutiny to China for its human rights abuses.

Targeting the fossil fuel companies seems next on the agenda because it's popular to be a climate change extremist in 2022. I notice in the article they regurgitate the usual talking points of "record profits" in order to justify these taxes. Seems on par with these folks.