As its Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) enters the final phase on January 1, 2026, the EU has favored the acceleration of carbon regulations elsewhere in the world, several experts recognize, although some countries remain very critical.

What is the carbon tax?

To green its imports, the European Union has developed its MACF (CBAM in English) aimed at making polluting imports from outside the EU pay a carbon price, as companies already do within Europe with a pollution rights mechanism.

The reform therefore intends to “adjust” a carbon price for goods whose production or use emits a lot of gases warming the atmosphere, which enter the Union, particularly in the steel, aluminum, or fertilizer sectors.

Where some of the EU’s competitors cry trade protectionism, Europe responds that it promotes a virtuous policy: adopt your own carbon tax on what is produced at home and you will have little or nothing to pay, it tells its partners, because the fee must not be paid twice.

“Putting a price on carbon is an avenue that we must explore with as many people as possible, as soon as possible,” insisted the European Commissioner for Climate, Wopke Hoekstraduring the COP30 international climate conference in Brazil in November.

Did this encourage others?

After being heavily criticized, the EU is already benefiting from a ripple effect, in the opinion of several experts interviewed by AFP.

“Between last year and this year, we saw a big change,” says April Auroracoordinator of a report on international reactions to the MACF for the International Emissions Trading Association (IETA).

“Several key EU trading partners have actively expanded their carbon pricing system, such as China, or have launched an emissions trading system after several years of preparation,” she continues, like Turkey.

Others have specifically cited the MACF to move forward in this area, such as Japan, notes Nicolas Berghmansresearcher in climate and energy policies at the Institute of Sustainable Development and International Relations (IDDRI), in Paris.

Some countries are also considering setting up their own mechanism based on the European model, like the United Kingdom and Canada.

The merit does not go only to the EU but its project “shortened the deadlines and increased the political importance” of adapting, argues Marios Tokas, trade lawyer at the international law firm Cassidy Levy Kentbased in Brussels, given the size of the European market.

Who is against?

The European mechanism also encounters strong opposition, foremost among which is Russia, which has referred the matter to the World Trade Organization (WTO), believing that the policy contravenes the principles of international trade.

Beijing and its allies from emerging economies, critical of carbon taxes at borders which they see in particular as a protectionist measure, for their part obtained at COP30 the opportunity to discuss trade within the framework of international climate negotiations.

But “the criticisms formulated at the international level do not mean that compliance or adaptation measures are left aside”, slips Aurora D’Aprile, taking the example of China.

There, the development of the carbon market was “designed to align” with new European regulations, she highlights.

Within the European Union itself, industrialists, like Constellationthe aluminum giant, criticized an inflationary mechanism by nature, and a risk of loss of competitiveness.

Is this a victory for the EU?

“It’s a political success,” told AFP Georg Zachmannspecialist in European energy and climate policies at the Brussels Bruegel Institute.

However, according to him, there are unknown areas: the question of the effectiveness of other carbon policies and the number of countries which will ultimately commit to this path.

“I would be careful before declaring victory,” tempers Aurora D’Aprile. “It was very complex for the European Commission to finalize the final implementing rules, and it is not finished,” she adds.

For Nicolas Berghmans, “there is a big challenge regarding the interoperability of systems in the years to come”. According to him “we will have to support progress with a significant diplomatic effort”.