You're undoubtedly correct, but the situation is extremely nuanced. I found the conclusion from this article [1] very interesting Territorial emissions account

You're undoubtedly correct, but the situation is extremely nuanced. I found the conclusion from this article [1] very interesting Territorial emissions accounting might not be perfect, Mabey says, but in terms of simplicity it is the more practical approach. Lord Deben, chair of the UK’s Committee on Climate Change, told the BBC the UK only has direct control over its home-grown emissions, whereas manufacturing methods and energy choices in China are outside our control. Barrett says consumption accounting brings additional information to the table, but agrees there’s no need to abandon territorial accounting methods. Instead, he says consumption emissions highlight how hard it is to decouple emissions from economic growth. That’s why many commentators were so surprised that carbon emissions stalled in 2014, even as the global economy expanded. For a good chance of limiting warming to below two degrees, the challenge of decoupling emissions from growth will have to be cracked. Countries control what they can measure, which is where we are currently. However, fixing climate change requires a completely coherent and coordinated global response, which will have hugely implications for economic growth. Essentially, our economic & political models won't allow us to apply the fix we really need. Without that, we are left with countries trying to do the best they can individually. [1] - https://www.carbonbrief.org/are-the-uks-emissions-really-falling-or-has-it-outsourced-them-to-china https://www.carbonbrief.org/are-the-uks-emissions-really-fal...