Nearly 200 shipping companies have joined forces in an unprecedented call for the world’s maritime powers to adopt the first-ever global fee on greenhouse gas emissions from ships—a move that could reshape international trade and the fight against climate change. As the International Maritime Organization (IMO) prepares for a pivotal meeting in London from October 14 to 17, 2025, the stage is set for a showdown between industry, governments, and environmental advocates over the future of green shipping.
The Getting to Zero Coalition, an alliance that brings together companies, governments, and intergovernmental organizations, is spearheading this push. According to The Associated Press, the coalition’s statement was shared exclusively ahead of the upcoming IMO session. “Given the significance of the political decision being made, we think it is important that industry voices in favor of this adoption be heard,” said Jesse Fahnestock, who leads decarbonization work at the Global Maritime Forum, which manages the coalition.
What’s at stake? The proposed regulations would impose a minimum fee for every ton of greenhouse gases emitted by ships above certain thresholds and set marine fuel standards to encourage the use of cleaner alternatives. If adopted, these rules would become mandatory in 2027 for large oceangoing vessels over 5,000 gross tonnage, which are responsible for a staggering 85% of the sector’s carbon emissions, according to the IMO. The shipping industry, often overlooked in climate debates, currently accounts for about 3% of global greenhouse gas emissions—a figure that has grown over the past decade as ships have become larger and more reliant on fossil fuels.
For many in the industry, the proposed global framework offers something that’s been sorely lacking: certainty. The Chamber of Shipping of America, representing U.S.-based shipping interests, has voiced support for a single, unified system. Kathy Metcalf, the chamber’s president emeritus, explained that a patchwork of regional regulations could result in vessels being charged multiple times for the same emissions, depending on their routes. “We want one global system, not multiple regional systems that could double charge vessels for their emissions depending on the route,” Metcalf told The Associated Press.
The push for regulation is not just about environmental stewardship—it’s about investment. Shipping companies say clear, predictable rules will allow them to confidently invest in cleaner technologies, from alternative fuels to new ship designs. The International Chamber of Shipping, which represents over 80% of the world’s merchant fleet, has also thrown its weight behind the proposal, advocating for adoption at the crucial IMO meeting next month.
But the proposed regulations have run into fierce opposition from the Trump administration, which has unequivocally rejected the framework and threatened a suite of retaliatory measures if it is adopted. In a joint statement issued in August 2025, the U.S. Secretaries of State, Commerce, Energy, and Transportation described the plan as “effectively a global carbon tax on Americans levied by an unaccountable U.N. organization.” The State Department has warned that the U.S. is “actively engaging with countries on the extremely flawed proposal,” and is preparing to act on potential remedies, including tariffs, visa restrictions, and port levies. The department has even suggested that U.S. allies should consider similar steps.
“Fellow IMO members should be on notice,” the secretaries said, “the U.S. will not hesitate to retaliate or explore remedies for our citizens” if the proposal moves forward. They argue that ships will face fees for failing to meet what they call “unattainable fuel standards and emissions targets,” and claim that the new fuel standards would “conveniently benefit China.” China, for its part, is recognized as a leader in developing and producing cleaner fuels for shipping—an advantage that has become a flashpoint in the debate.
Despite U.S. opposition, the regulatory framework appears to have broad international support. Faig Abbasov, from Transport and Environment—a Brussels-based environmental NGO—told The Associated Press that while U.S. pressure cannot be dismissed, most countries currently favor the regulations. Abbasov acknowledged that the deal reached in April was “not ambitious enough,” but called it a crucial opportunity to launch the sector’s decarbonization, with room for improvement in the future.
The IMO, which regulates international shipping, has set a target for the sector to reach net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by about 2050. The April agreement among member states on the regulatory framework was a notable milestone, especially as the IMO typically seeks consensus but was forced to hold a vote due to the contentious nature of the proposal. The United States was notably absent from that vote, though the State Department has indicated it will send a delegation to the upcoming London meeting.
Environmental groups warn that failure to adopt the regulations could have dire consequences. Delaine McCullough, president of the Clean Shipping Coalition and Ocean Conservancy shipping program director, cautioned, “The chance of the sector playing a proper and fair part in the fight to keep global heating below dangerous levels will almost certainly be lost.” Delaying action, advocates argue, would hinder the sector’s decarbonization and further jeopardize efforts to limit global warming.
The debate has also exposed a rift within the U.S. itself. While the federal government remains staunchly opposed, U.S.-based shipping companies are breaking with Washington by supporting the global framework. For them, the risk of fragmented, overlapping regional regulations—and the uncertainty that comes with it—outweighs the costs of a single, predictable system. The industry’s willingness to embrace the new rules reflects a broader recognition that the future of shipping is inexorably tied to the global effort to combat climate change.
On the international stage, the question remains: can the IMO’s member states bridge their differences and agree on a path forward? With the world watching, the outcome of the London meeting will have far-reaching implications—not just for the shipping industry, but for the global fight against climate change. The next chapter in this high-stakes saga is about to unfold, and both the industry and the planet are waiting to see what happens next.
As the clock ticks toward October, the shipping sector stands at a crossroads—caught between economic interests, environmental imperatives, and geopolitical rivalries. The decisions made in London could determine whether the industry becomes a leader in decarbonization or remains part of the problem. For now, all eyes are on the world’s maritime powers, and the stakes could hardly be higher.
