Article 6 Authorisation: What Corporate Buyers Must Verify Before Paying a Premium
Virginia Njeri
Managing Director
Corresponding adjustments and ITMO language are now appearing in corporate carbon credit procurement. This guide explains what must be verified before a buyer pays for Article 6 authorisation.
Article 6 authorisation is becoming a premium feature in carbon credit transactions. Buyers are being offered credits described as authorised, correspondingly adjusted, ITMO-ready, Paris-aligned, or compliance-grade. Those terms are not interchangeable. A buyer should not pay an Article 6 premium unless the authorisation pathway is documented and the intended claim actually requires it.
Source verification
Based on official UNFCCC Article 6 materials, the Paris Agreement Crediting Mechanism pages, UNFCCC Article 6.2 reference material, and VCMI claims guidance for corporate credit use.
What Article 6 Authorisation Does
Article 6 enables countries to cooperate voluntarily in achieving their climate targets. Under Article 6.2, countries can transfer mitigation outcomes internationally as ITMOs. Under Article 6.4, a UN-supervised crediting mechanism can issue Article 6.4 emission reductions. Where a mitigation outcome is authorised for use toward another country's NDC or other international mitigation purposes, the host country must apply the relevant accounting treatment to avoid double counting.
For a corporate buyer, the practical point is this: authorisation is not merely a project developer statement. It is a host-country act. It must be traceable to the competent national authority and aligned with the rules for reporting, tracking, first transfer, and corresponding adjustments.
When a Corporate Buyer May Need It
Not every corporate carbon credit purchase requires Article 6 authorisation. Many voluntary claims can be made with high-quality non-authorised credits, provided the company follows credible claims guidance, retires the credits transparently, and does not imply use toward a national target. The need for authorisation rises when the buyer's claim involves international mitigation purposes, compliance schemes, sovereign-linked procurement, or a buyer policy that explicitly requires corresponding adjustments.
A buyer should investigate Article 6 authorisation where:
- The purchase is intended for use in a compliance or sovereign-linked programme
- The buyer is claiming an internationally transferred mitigation outcome
- The buyer's internal policy requires corresponding adjustments for voluntary credit use
- The transaction documents use terms such as authorised, adjusted, ITMO, Article 6.2, or Article 6.4
- The credit price includes a premium for host-country authorisation
The Documents to Request
The buyer should request the host-country authorisation letter or equivalent official confirmation, the registry record, the relevant project documentation, the transfer or first transfer terms, and the seller's explanation of how the host country will report the authorised mitigation outcome. If the seller cannot identify the competent national authority, the authorisation status should be treated as unverified.
A serious Article 6 due diligence file should include:
- The host-country authorisation document or clear evidence of the authorisation process
- The project identifier, registry account, methodology, vintage, and serial numbers
- The authorised use: NDC use, other international mitigation purpose, or another specified use
- The timing and definition of first transfer
- The party responsible for any corresponding adjustment reporting and evidence of how this will be tracked
Contract Language Matters
A purchase agreement should not simply say that credits are Article 6 aligned. It should define the authorisation status, specify whether credits are authorised before delivery or only expected to be authorised later, state what happens if authorisation is delayed or refused, and allocate replacement or refund rights. If the buyer is paying a premium, the premium should be linked to delivery of verified authorisation evidence.
“Article 6 risk is not solved by a label. It is solved by evidence, registry tracking, host-country process, and contract remedies.”
, Virginia Njeri, Supacare Solutions
Sources & further reading
More from Carbon Markets & Policy
June 2026 · 9 min read
Corporate Carbon Credit Procurement: A Board-Level Due Diligence Checklist
A practical procurement framework for companies buying carbon credits: how to test credit quality, claims risk, delivery risk, and whether a purchase is aligned with ICVCM, VCMI, Oxford and registry requirements.
June 2026 · 10 min read
Validation-Ready Carbon Projects: The Evidence File Auditors Expect
A carbon project is not validation-ready because the concept is strong. It is validation-ready when the evidence file proves the baseline, additionality, monitoring plan, safeguards, stakeholder engagement, and ownership of emission reductions.
Work With Us
Speak to the team behind this analysis.