Fossil fuel subsidies
In 2022, the International Monetary Fund calculated that fossil fuel subsidies reached $1.5 trillion under a narrow definition. A broader calculation including negative externalities like air pollution and climate change pushed that figure to $7 trillion. These numbers represent government actions that lower production costs or reduce prices paid by consumers. Some support comes as tax breaks on natural gas for residential heating. Others appear as tax incentives for oil exploration companies. The scope changes depending on whether analysts count only direct payments or include the cost of burning gasoline and diesel.
The fiscal cost of government support for fossil fuels hit $1.1 trillion in 2023 according to OECD data. Most of this amount relates to consumption rather than production. Residential users received $189 billion in support while manufacturing industries received $103.8 billion. The International Energy Agency estimated global consumption subsidies at $1 trillion in 2022. In 2020, total global subsidies reached $5.9 trillion, which equaled 6.8% of global GDP. Experts project this share will rise to 7.4% by 2025 if current trends continue. Setting prices to reflect true costs could cut global CO2 emissions by 10% by 2030.
Subsidies are estimated to cause hundreds of thousands of deaths from air pollution each year. Underpricing local air pollution accounts for 42 percent of all global fossil fuel subsidies. Global warming costs make up another 29 percent of the total figure. Other local externalities like congestion and road accidents contribute 15 percent. Explicit subsidies account for only 8 percent of the total value. Foregone consumption tax revenue represents just 6 percent. Removing these subsidies would save the carbon budget and help limit climate change. Policy researchers estimate that substantially more money is spent on fossil fuel subsidies than on environmentally harmful agricultural or water subsidies.
The consensus among economists is that wealthy people receive most absolute benefits from fossil fuel subsidies. Poorer citizens do not usually own cars so they miss out on direct savings. However removing subsidies may hit poor people via indirect price increases such as food prices. The International Energy Agency states that high fossil fuel prices hit the poor hardest but subsidies rarely protect vulnerable groups effectively. They tend to benefit better-off segments of the population instead. Producers argue that increasing taxes would cause unemployment and reduce national energy security. Governments say subsidies shield citizens from international price variations even if the targeting remains inefficient.
Despite G20 countries pledging to phase out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies, many continue due to voter demand. Some governments maintain support for reasons of energy security rather than economic efficiency. Setting fossil fuel prices that reflect their true cost would cut global CO2 emissions by 10% by 2030 according to IPCC data in 2023. Yet reforms remain politically difficult because they risk social unrest. Russia faces potential social unrest if it eliminates energy subsidies despite holding the world's third-largest subsidy volume. Many economists recommend replacing consumption subsidies with direct payments targeted at poor households instead.
China spent $2,203 billion on total fossil fuel subsidies in 2020 according to IMF data. The United States provided $662 billion while Russia contributed $522 billion. Iran became the world's largest subsidizer of energy prices under President Rouhani with over 15 percent of its GDP going to subsidies in 2019. Libya held the highest subsidy percentage of GDP in 2020 at 17.5 percent. Canada spent a greater proportion of its GDP on fiscal support for oil and gas production than any other G7 country between 2015 and 2016. In 2018 the Canadian federal government announced $1.6 billion in financial support for the oil and gas sector including loans from Export Development Canada.
Common questions
How much were global fossil fuel subsidies in 2022 according to the International Monetary Fund?
The International Monetary Fund calculated that fossil fuel subsidies reached $1.5 trillion under a narrow definition and $7 trillion when including negative externalities like air pollution and climate change.
What percentage of global GDP did total global fossil fuel subsidies equal in 2020?
Total global subsidies equaled 6.8% of global GDP in 2020, which experts project will rise to 7.4% by 2025 if current trends continue.
Which country spent the most on fossil fuel subsidies in 2020 according to IMF data?
China spent $2,203 billion on total fossil fuel subsidies in 2020, followed by the United States with $662 billion and Russia with $522 billion.
Who receives the most benefits from fossil fuel subsidies according to economists?
Wealthy people receive most absolute benefits from fossil fuel subsidies because poorer citizens do not usually own cars so they miss out on direct savings.
How much did Iran spend on energy price subsidies as a percentage of its GDP in 2019?
Iran became the world's largest subsidizer of energy prices under President Rouhani with over 15 percent of its GDP going to subsidies in 2019.
All sources
65 references cited across the entry
- 7webFossil Fuels Consumption Subsidies 2022 – Analysis16 February 2023
- 9webReforming global fossil fuel subsidies: How the United States can restart international cooperationJohannes Urpelainen — 2021-07-14
- 10journalPolitical leadership has limited impact on fossil fuel taxes and subsidiesCesar B. Martinez-Alvarez et al. — 2022-11-22
- 11newsThe new energy shock: Putin, Ukraine and the global economyDerek Brower et al. — 2022-02-25
- 15webFossil fuel subsidies: Types, measurement, impacts and reform efforts31 March 2022
- 29webFossil fuel subsidies amount to hundreds of billions of dollars a year – here's how to get rid of themNeil McCulloch et al. — 11 February 2021
- 30webDesigning fossil fuel subsidy reforms in OECD and G20 countries: A robust sequential approach methodologyAssia Elgouacem — 2020-10-23
- 32journalPublic acceptance of fossil fuel subsidy removal can be reinforced with revenue recyclingNiklas Harring et al. — March 2023
- 34webJoint report by IEA, OPEC, OECD and World Bank on fossil-fuel and other energy subsidies: An update of the G20 Pittsburgh and Toronto CommitmentsInternational Energy Agency — 2011
- 36webRecent Developments in Energy SubsidiesInternational Energy Agency — 2015
- 37newsFossil fuel industry gets subsidies of $11m a minute, IMF findsDamian Carrington — 6 October 2021
- 40webInternational Monetary Fund; Climate Change; Fossil Fuel SubsidiesIan Parry et al.
- 41webG7 fossil fuel subsidy scorecardJune 2018
- 42webSohi announces $1.6 billion to help Alberta oilpatchCarl Meyer — 2018-12-18
- 46webChina’s 15th Five-Year Plan — Implications for climate and energy transitionLauri Myllyvirta — 2026-03-06
- 51webIran: Largest Fuel Subsidizer in 2018July 16, 2019
- 52webBlind subsidy system costing economy greatlyMarch 5, 2019
- 53webWhy Fuel is Smuggled Out of Iran and Why No One Stops It21 February 2019
- 55journalReducing Energy Subsidies in China, India and Russia: Dilemmas for Decision MakersDansie Grant et al. — 2010-02-01
- 57journalG20 subsidies to oil, gas and coal production: RussiaLuliia Ogarenko — November 2015
- 60journalRevisiting Energy Subsidy Calculations: A Focus on Saudi ArabiaKAPSARC — 2023
- 61webDispelling the Urban Myth of US Fossil Fuel SubsidiesPaul H. Tice — 2026-01-05
- 64webThe EPA just valued a human life at $0. That’s not just a moral crisis — it’s a market crisisAndrew Behar — Fortune — 2026-04-01
- 65newsTrump’s E.P.A. Has Put a Value on Human Life: Zero DollarsMaxine Joselow — 2026-01-21
- 66webMortality Risk ValuationOA — 2014-04-20