BUDGET 2026-27 : NA panel questions climate levy
Why this matters: local context for readers following news across Pakistan and the region.
Naveed Qamar says climate funds must not be consumed without projects• Panel seeks stricter recovery of petroleum levies from OMCs• Islamabad token tax hike approved despite middle-class concerns ISLAMABAD: A parliamentary committee on Saturday raised concerns over the proposed carbon levy amid growing climate challenges, warned that reduced duties on scrap could create environmental risks and approved an increase in Islamabad’s token tax that is likely to affect middle-class vehicle owners. The National Assembly Standing Committee on Finance and Revenue reviewed the National Tariff Policy 2025-30 in detail, focusing on the phased reduction in import duties. Lawmakers asked tax authorities to redraft the proposed climate levy, stressing that it must be backed by a clear and defined objective. Commerce Secretary Jawad Paul briefed the committee, while Commerce Minister Jam Kamal remained absent. Since last year, the committee, chaired by MNA Naveed Qamar, has undertaken a clause-by-clause review of the Finance Bill. Last year, it held 12 meetings to review the legislation. The committee took up the petroleum levy and the newly introduced climate support levy amid concerns over Pakistan’s commitments under the IMF’s climate resilience framework. Members debated collection of the carbon support levy from citizens while criticising the absence of concrete climate projects. Finance Secretary Imdad Ullah Bosal informed the committee that an agreement had been signed with the IMF on climate resilience. Committee chairman Mr Qamar, however, criticised the government for collecting levies without initiating any concrete projects, warning that such practices would damage Pakistan’s image. “You take money from the IMF, impose levies, but start no projects,” he remarked. Officials briefed the committee on measures taken under the Resilience and Sustainability Facility programme. Mr Qamar countered that the government’s approach amounted to “lip service” on climate, with policie