PolicyLens

Conservative - Energy tax

Abolish carbon taxes and CBAM

Remove selected carbon-pricing measures, including the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism where applicable.

Last updated: May 2026.

Read the policy-specific methodology note

Policy baseline

The pledge refers to carbon taxes and CBAM, but does not define the full list. The central case removes a substantial share of carbon-pricing receipts while leaving some legacy levies intact.

  • Receipts depend on which instruments are repealed.
  • Energy-intensive firms gain directly.
  • Emissions and future abatement costs rise.

Core trade-offs

Firms and consumers facing carbon costs may gain lower prices. The Exchequer loses receipts and emissions incentives weaken, increasing the likelihood of higher future abatement costs or missed targets.

  • Energy-intensive users gain cost relief.
  • Treasury loses environmental receipts.
  • Climate targets become harder to meet.

Fiscal impact by 2028-29

+GBP 1.5bn to +GBP 6.0bn. Central estimate: +GBP 3.0bn.

  • Positive numbers mean net fiscal cost; negative numbers mean Exchequer savings.
  • Main cost is lost carbon-pricing receipts.
  • Lower business costs may recover small receipts.
  • Instrument list is not specified.
  • This is not an official costing.

Economic impact by 2028-29

  • Jobs: Some exposed firms benefit; clean-sector jobs and investment face pressure.
  • Wages: Limited broad wage effect; sectoral gains and losses differ.
  • Prices: Some energy and industrial prices may fall if cost reductions pass through.
  • GDP / productivity: Near-term relief possible; long-run productivity negative if clean innovation falls.

Assessment

Carbon-pricing repeal may lower some business costs, but it removes a revenue source and weakens incentives to reduce emissions. Without an alternative abatement plan, future fiscal and regulatory costs likely rise.

Confidence: Low. Revenue baselines exist, but the policy does not define which carbon instruments are abolished.

Main risks

  • Target failure: Removing carbon prices makes emissions targets harder to meet without heavier regulation.
  • Investment loss: Clean-energy and industrial-decarbonisation investment may fall.
  • Border risk: Repealing CBAM while others use border measures can disadvantage UK exporters or importers.

Safeguards

  • List every tax and levy repealed.
  • Publish replacement emissions pathway.
  • Separate household relief from industrial relief.

Academic evidence

Goulder and Parry, Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 2008

Environmental policy design

Instrument choice matters: taxes, permits and standards differ in efficiency and distributional effects.

Relevant to carbon pricing, CBAM and ZEV mandate choices.

Instrument Choice in Environmental Policy (2008)

Dechezlepretre and Sato, Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 2017

Regulation and competitiveness

Environmental regulation can impose costs but competitiveness effects are often smaller than claimed.

Relevant to deregulation claims around net zero and ESG.

The Impacts of Environmental Regulations on Competitiveness (2017)

UK government evidence

Office for Budget Responsibility, 2024

OBR October 2024 forecast

The OBR scores fuel-duty, EPL and environmental-receipts measures and discusses oil-and-gas uncertainty.

Anchors energy and motoring estimates.

Economic and fiscal outlook: October 2024 (2024)

Office for Budget Responsibility, 2026

OBR fiscal forecast

The OBR forecast sets the macro, borrowing and receipts baseline used for broad fiscal context.

Prevents treating tax cuts or spending changes as self-financing.

Economic and fiscal outlook: March 2026 (2026)

Sources

Other Conservative policies

PolicyLens estimates are illustrative and should not be treated as official costings.