Analysts continue to assess the costs of the Russian economy in case of introduction of the EU carbon border tax on carbon-intensive imports. After KPMG gave their assessment of the consultants BCG. If in respect of losses of cash, they are comparable, then part of the loss of government and business time to prepare for the innovations estimates of BCG markedly more pessimistic. Russia, which ignores the application of the EU tightening carbon regulation for more than ten years, now second to China, which was preparing for the advent of tax in partnership with the European Union.In the report “As a border carbon collection EU can affect global trade” consultants BCG report that the most significant losses from the introduction of such regulation will incur the Russian exporters — the Russian Federation ranks second after China on carbon-intensive supply in the EU. The introduction of EU tax at $30 per tonne, analysts expect BCG in late 2021 to early 2022. This will not only affect carbon-intensive delivery (in 2019 the Russian export to the EU amounted to $180 billion, or 42% of its total volume), but also indirectly all sectors of the Russian economy.This 100-160 million tonnes out of a total 179 million tons, supplied by Russia. In addition, the calculations assume be subject to collection will be the whole volume of emissions, but likely it will be circulated on the amount of excess emissions over the established EU benchmark by product. The oil and gas sector can annually lose us $1.4–2.5 billion sector of ferrous metals and coal — $0.6–0.8 billion, non — ferrous metal us $0.3–0.4 billion and the rest us $0.8–1.1 billion Digits received BCG, similar to the estimates of losses made earlier KPMG by order of the RSPP: the Union of entrepreneurs, in turn, asked to calculate the possible losses from the introduction of carbon tax in EU economy (see “Kommersant” on June 11). Russian subsidiary of KPMG scenario of doing tax in 2022 considers pessimistic and base takes 2025. On the background of low-carbon breakthrough (“European green course”) on the basis of “palkovicevo” recovery of the EU economy and the EU presidency from Germany July 2020 (the country advocates for tougher climate regulation), the introduction of the tax in the near future is becoming increasingly likely (see “Kommersant” on 16 July). The idea enjoys the support of European producers, who since 2005 have to pay for emissions.So, in BCG indicate that because of the greater carbon intensity of Russia can cede part of the oil market of the EU Saudi Arabia due to the declining profitability, and for producers of nitrogen fertilizers carbon tax may be prohibitive high, reaching 40-65% of the current export value of fertilizers. The market became Russian producers have a competitive cost structure and a lower carbon footprint comparedNIJ with China, the report said.Losses of the Russian economy may exceed Chinese just because of the lack of effort of the authorities and business on the creation of a domestic carbon market and mechanisms of compliance with international requirements. Although the possible occurrence of such a tax in the EU have warned for more than a decade, and the Russian carbon regulation the same continues to be under discussion. In June 2020, the President’s special representative for climate Ruslan Edelgeriev reported that they “limit the buildup of now almost exhausted” (see “Kommersant” on June 11). “The proactive approach taken by China, which, being the largest exporter, started to address the issue in 2013. In 2020 it is planned to launch the Chinese ETS, which in 2014 was conducted with the expert support of the EU”,— noted in the BCG.Note that in the HSE, examined the carbon intensity of foreign trade of the Russian Federation, concluded: “Two thirds of the export of emissions from Russia — is a result of its technological gap with developed countries (and not volumes.— “B”), and the responsibility for these emissions should lie on Russia.”Alexey Shapovalov
