To embed a website or widget, add it to the properties panel.

CORSIA phase 1: Credits, compliance, and what comes next

CORSIA phase 1: Credits, compliance, and what comes next

CORSIA phase 1: Credits, compliance, and what comes next

As CORSIA shifts from pilot to active market, learn how it works, what's driving early retirements, and what to watch ahead of Phase 2.

Climate Policy

climate-policy

Climate Strategy

climate-strategy

6 min. read

Jump to section

    Go from climate goal to climate action

    Jump to section

      Go from climate goal to climate action

      Key takeaways

      • CORSIA, the program intended to address international aviation emissions, is currently the world’s largest international compliance carbon market, with approximately 100-200 million tonnes of eligible emissions units (EEUs) expected to be retired for Phase 1 (2024-2026) compliance. 

      • Airlines have already begun retiring significant volumes of credits (clean cookstoves and jurisdictional REDD+) toward their Phase 1 obligations ahead of the January 2028 compliance deadline, signaling that the industry is treating CORSIA as a binding policy mandate.

      • A record 25 carbon standards have applied for eligibility to supply credits under Phase 2 (2027–2035), and the recent approval of two more jurisdictional REDD+ standards for Phase 1 (2024–2026) points to a diversifying pipeline of credits.

      • Legal enforcement of CORSIA at the national level remains uneven. A handful of jurisdictions including the EU, Japan, Brazil, New Zealand, and Canada have established compliance regimes, but it is unclear whether other major aviation markets will implement domestic enforcement requirements by 2027.

      • As CORSIA matures alongside other compliance and voluntary frameworks, strategic engagement increasingly depends on understanding where eligibility overlaps and where the most value can be found.

      Introduction

      The Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA) was established and is managed by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO)—a specialized agency of the UN—and provides a compliance mechanism to reduce emissions from international aviation that do not fall within a single country’s contributions to the Paris Agreement. For years, CORSIA generated more commentary than activity—airlines weren’t required to offset a single tonne of CO₂ emissions (tCO₂) during the pilot phase (2021–2023). That is changing; in early 2026, Singapore Airlines and Japan Airlines retired significant volumes of carbon credits against their Phase 1 (2024–2026) obligations. Increasing authorization announcements from the International Civil Aviation Authority (ICAO) showcase the eligible supply steadily entering the market, and 25 carbon standards have applied for Phase 2 (2027–2035) eligibility. As CORSIA becomes an active compliance market, this article explains how the program works, what is driving the current trends, and what to watch as Phase 1 draws to a close.

      Who is covered

      Because emissions from international aviation are not tied to any individual nation, ICAO adopted CORSIA in 2016 to complement the Paris Agreement framework and address these emissions. CORSIA applies to international airlines operating flights registered between participating countries. During Phase 1, offsetting obligations apply only to routes between the 130 countries that have voluntarily opted in. From Phase 2, participation becomes mandatory for all 193 ICAO member states, except for those below the aviation activity threshold, including with Least Developed Countries, Small Island Developing States, and Landlocked Developing Countries—although they can voluntarily participate. Several major aviation markets, including China, that are not participating in Phase 1 will be required to do so from 2027. 

      Offsetting obligations

      Airlines are required to offset the portion of their emissions that exceeds the program’s baseline on routes subject to offsetting. The key input is the annual Sectoral Growth Factor (SGF), which reflects how much annual emissions on covered routes have grown above the baseline (set at 85% of 2019 emissions). In simple terms, each airline's offsetting obligation is calculated by multiplying its CORSIA-regulated emissions by the SGF.

      For example, an airline that emits 1 million tCO₂ on covered routes in a year when the SGF is 10%, would have an offsetting obligation of 100,000 tCO₂. An airline that emits 500,000 tCO₂ in the same year would have an obligation of 50,000 tCO₂. The actual 2024 SGF was 15.4%, exceeding the baseline and triggering offsetting obligations for the first time since the COVID-induced reduction in international aviation activity. 

      Beginning in 2033, CORSIA’s offsetting formula combined the SGF with an individual component that accounts for each airline's own emissions growth. The individual weighting starts at 15% in 2033 (with an SGF weighting of 85%) and rises to 45% by 2035 (SGF 55%). This progressively ties each airline’s obligations to its own emissions trajectory rather than sector-wide trends alone.

      Airlines can also reduce their obligations by reporting the use of CORSIA Eligible Fuel (CEF). In order to qualify as CEF, Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) must meet ICAO’s certification criteria. Offsetting remains a lower-cost option than sustainable fuel procurement, and CORSIA obligations are currently not influential drivers of CEF/SAF uptake compared to supply mandates, such as ReFuelEU Aviation and Singapore’s SAF Levy. However, these dynamics will evolve as CORSIA matures and SAF prices continue to fall. 

      Eligible carbon credits 

      To determine the eligibility of carbon crediting standards and credits issued under those standards, ICAO's Technical Advisory Body (TAB) reviews applications and recommends approval to the ICAO Council, subject to restrictions on methodologies, vintages, and more granular project elements. Currently, no standard is approved without exclusions. Credits eligible for use under CORSIA are known as Eligible Emissions Units (EEUs).

      Standard

      Phase One

      Phase Two

      American Carbon Registry (ACR)

      Eligible

      Eligible

      Gold Standard

      Eligible

      Eligible

      Verra

      Eligible

      Eligible

      Architecture for REDD+ Transactions (ART) 

      Eligible

      Eligible

      Climate Action Reserve (CAR)

      Eligible

      Under review

      Isometric

      Eligible

      Under review

      Premium Thailand Voluntary Emission Reduction Program (Premium T-VER)

      Eligible

      Under review

      Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF)

      Eligible

      Under review

      BioCarbon Fund Initiative for Sustainable Forest Landscapes (ISFL)

      Eligible

      Under review

      Table 1: Carbon standards eligible for CORSIA Phase 1

      TAB broadly excludes some project types across standards, including large-scale grid-connected renewable energy projects and most project-level REDD+ activities. The exclusions reflect TAB's assessments of baselines, safeguards, and quantification gaps. However, these assessments are not static; ICAO updates its determinations as the evidence base improves. For example, in 2025, TAB approved certain direct air capture (DAC) and biochar pathways for the first time.

      A record 25 carbon standards—certifying projects from emissions avoidance to engineered carbon dioxide removal (CDR)—have applied for Phase 2 eligibility in the 2026 assessment cycle, reflecting the scale of the opportunity. The International Air Transportation Association (IATA) projected a demand of 146–226 million EEUs for Phase 1 alone, developers are eager to serve this growing market. Assessment results are expected in October 2026.

      Article 6 and corresponding adjustments

      The biggest bottleneck for eligible supply has been requirements relating to Article 6.2 of the Paris Agreement. CORSIA requires that EEUs carry a host country Letter of Authorization (LoA) confirming that the host country will not count the underlying mitigation toward its Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC). This prevents double counting between CORSIA and national emission inventories, but it also means eligible supply depends on host country authorization, not just meeting methodological requirements. Authorized credits are called Internationally Transferred Mitigation Outcomes (ITMOs). 

      To manage the risk that a host country fails to apply the promised corresponding adjustment, projects must secure legally enforceable insurance policies that either provide replacement EEUs or funds to secure them. Several providers have been approved to insure EEUs registered by Gold Standard and Verra

      Insurance requirements do not apply when the host country has already confirmed the corresponding adjustments in its mandatory Paris Agreement reporting. For example, in March 2026, Madagascar submitted a Biennial Transparency Report (BTR) and annual information report that reflect the application of corresponding adjustments to CORSIA-eligible clean cookstoves credits listed on the Verra registry. According to Verra, BTR accounting is the “highest level of assurance” that ITMOs will not be double counted. 

      The enforcement challenge

      With the authorization bottleneck loosening, market attention is turning to demand. Critically, ICAO has no direct enforcement power; for CORSIA to work, participating countries must pass laws requiring airlines to comply with its requirements. Under CORSIA rules, airlines must retire their Phase 1 EEUs by January 2028, but most are not yet subject to legal sanctions for failing to comply. Where regulations do exist, it remains unclear whether penalties will be stringent enough to matter, or whether they will be enforced at all.

      Where legal enforcement of offsetting requirements does exist, it varies by design. For example, in Brazil, failure to comply attracts a penalty of BRL 50/tCO₂ (US$10/tCO₂) and an administrative fine. Meanwhile, the Canadian Aviation Regulations impose administrative fines capped at CAD 25,000 (US$18,000) per infraction, but there is no specific fine for each tCO₂ not offset. However, absence of a statutory penalty framework does not necessarily mean compliance will not be enforced. For example, New Zealand manages CORSIA participation through an administrative Memorandum of Understanding with Air New Zealand, rather than a dedicated legal regime (though this will change from 2027). Similar informal arrangements may be more common than the legislative record suggests.

      According to 2024 data, US-based airlines account for around 15% of CORSIA-covered emissions. However, there is no indication that the federal government will implement CORSIA penalties under the current administration. It is unclear how non-compliance by a major economy will impact market confidence or enforcement by other governments, but uncertainty about US participation in multilateral climate programs is not new

      What to watch

      • Global enforcement: As Phase 2 approaches, the prospects for CORSIA enforcement in key aviation markets will become clearer. China, which has not participated in the voluntary phase and has raised objections to CORSIA’s design on grounds of fairness, presents an uncertain picture for domestic transposition. The UK government has consulted on a draft legal amendment that would penalize non-compliance for UK airlines at £100/tCO₂ (US$130/tCO₂), but has not published updates since February 2025. 

      • EU ETS Review: By July 2026, the European Commission will assess whether CORSIA is sufficiently incentivizing aviation decarbonization. If the answer is no, the EU may extend its ETS to cover flights departing from the European Economic Area (EEA), rather than those entirely within the region. To prevent double charging of emissions on routes covered by both programs, the ETS would take precedence over CORSIA, reducing CORSIA’s credibility and offsetting demand. 

      • Supply financing vehicles: The LEAF Coalition—which purchases credits verified under the CORSIA-eligible ART TREES standard—has signed over US$1.5 billion worth of purchase agreements with host countries. The Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) and BioCarbon Fund Initiative for Sustainable Forest Landscapes (ISFL), both CORSIA-approved for Phase 1 in early 2026 (and under review for Phase 2 eligibility), have built jurisdictional REDD+ pipelines across dozens of countries. As projects mature, it will be worth watching how issued credits are marketed across compliance and voluntary channels.

      Strategic considerations

      Avoided emissions credits dominate early CORSIA supply—and consequently demand—principally from avoided deforestation and clean cooking projects. As there is no regulatory premium for higher-cost CDR, this is not surprising. But as the market matures and supply diversifies, airlines are likely to begin differentiating on geography, co-benefits, and environmental performance. Corporate interest is growing in projects that abate non-CO₂ super pollutants, due to their outsized near-term climate impact. As many of these projects are based in countries actively issuing LoAs, this may soon translate into a supply of super pollutant EEUs. Some airlines are reluctant to procure aggressively now, anticipating the upcoming availability of higher-quality credits.

      Credits that hold value across multiple frameworks could carry a strategic premium. A credit also eligible for Singapore's carbon tax, Switzerland's CO₂ Act, or SBTi neutralization claims may offer more durable demand than one tied to a single use case. While specific requirements vary significantly, we are beginning to see convergence around broad principles, such as the need for Article 6 authorization for credits used in compliance markets tied to NDCs. Procurement and project development strategies could begin to favour credits that confer wider market optionality. 

      The precondition for all of this is policy stability. Longer-term offtake agreements, portfolio strategies, and meaningful investment in project development depend on confidence that CORSIA rules will hold. Efforts to soften emissions regulations in response to energy price shocks are now testing this confidence, from proposed changes to the EU ETS to Singapore's deferral of its SAF levy. Tracking price signals, enforcement developments, and authorization trends will be essential for identifying firm demand and where the opportunities lie.

      Conclusion

      Effective engagement with CORSIA requires more than developing quality projects. It means understanding methodological eligibility requirements, navigating Article 6.2 authorization processes, tracking a network of overlapping national regulations, and staying ahead of a rapidly evolving market landscape. Carbon Direct brings together policy, market, and scientific expertise to help clients on all of these fronts.

      2024 Edition

      Integrating Superpollutant Mitigation into Corporate Climate Action

      Superpollutants drive 35–50% of today's warming. Learn how pairing superpollutant abatement with durable carbon removal can transform climate strategy.

      2024 Edition

      Integrating Superpollutant Mitigation into Corporate Climate Action

      Superpollutants drive 35–50% of today's warming. Learn how pairing superpollutant abatement with durable carbon removal can transform climate strategy.

      Related insights

      Connect with an expert

      Get answers to your decarbonization questions and explore carbon management solutions.

      Connect with an expert

      Get answers to your decarbonization questions and explore carbon management solutions.

      Connect with an expert

      Get answers to your decarbonization questions and explore carbon management solutions.