United Nations Imposing Shipping Carbon Taxes? (Now VeChain Connection Makes Perfect Sense)

avatar

source

Every cloud has a silver lining and even though the United Nations is looking at imposing carbon taxes on shipping we have to look deeper in areas where bad news can become good news.

This idea that the United Nations can tax the shipping industry is actually a big deal when it comes to the United Nations which is funded through contributions by all the member countries. If the UN became self funding then it would set a dangerous precedent of what could follow and what type of influence and power this could bring. Those contributions they receive do vary quite considerably however with the top 10 shown below responsible for 72% with the bulk of the 193 members paying in very little. 28 countries paid the minimum being a 0.001% rate which is $35000. When you break it down these contribution payments are quite staggering with 172 countries paying an average of $5.8 million each.

source

Next week the IMO or International Maritime Organisation which is a specialist organisation run by the United Nations is having a vote with regard to implementing carbon shipping taxes. This is major as this would generate somewhere in the region of $10-$12 billion per annum. The UN would be self funding and one can only imagine how bad things would be having them in charge. This would only be the start and having the UN with large funds would be a problem knowing their agendas and woke mind set.

source

This vote next week has to fail, yet we all know it will not as the benefactors are the ones voting. As far as I know this goes against everything the UN stood for and I do find this rather scary especially when it effects all of us.

What does this really mean for us as the consumer and in a nutshell the $12 billion will come out of our pockets through increased logistical costs for items shipped. The carbon tax cost will be $380 per ton which will average out at around $70 per container shipped. This may sound insignificant, but these $70 add up very quickly with vessels transporting as much as 22000 containers per voyage. Iron ore shipped from Australia to China would be roughly an extra $2million per trip or $8 per ton. This is not just containers, but would involve all shipping.

The UN has had so many agendas over the years and very few have been good with
many projects rife with corruption. I expect the US to fight this and to rightly walk away from the UN if they are not listened to being the largest donor of wealth to this failed organisation. The US should have walked away years ago.

How Can We Benefit From This As We Know This Is Going To Happen?

With all this news about the UN and carbon emission taxes I now know why the VeChain (VET & VTHO) are involved and closely aligned within the UN organisation. We know they are on the inside with the EU and CBAM (Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism) which goes live in January 2026. This was not clear and obvious why they were helping the UN last year and there had to be a benefit somewhere and now we know.

It is no wonder there is no news coming out of VeChain as their future is already taken care of controlling the carbon emission taxes. VeChain does not need to sell itself to investors when they know the guaranteed big money is around the corner. They knew this was coming and this is where the value of VET and VTHO will sky rocket. You don't have to be a genius to see where all their transactions are going to be coming from because just these two carbon tax projects (EU and UN) alone will sustain the blockchain over and above every partnership they have already. This would make it deflationary with insufficient VTHO (gas token) being produced daily so the price would have to rise accordingly.

Posted Using INLEO



0
0
0.000
2 comments
avatar

Sounds an awful lot like taxation without representation to me.

However, I'm not sure the actions the U.S. government is proposing make much sense or will help. A joint statement by the Secretary of State and Secretary of Energy mentions an up to 10% increase in the cost of shipping and the impact on pricing. Yet the things being proposed (mostly in the form of additional fees on shipping from countries that support this) would also increase costs. See https://www.state.gov/releases/office-of-the-spokesperson/2025/10/taking-action-to-defend-america-from-the-uns-first-global-carbon-tax-the-international-maritime-organizations-imo-net-zero-framework-nzf

0
0
0.000