Canada’s carbon pricing is a fraud
Since the Paris climate agreement is a fraud, it’s only fitting that the looming carbon pricing schemes of Canada’s federal and provincial governments are fraudulent as well.
The reason they are fraudulent is that, with the exception of B.C.’s carbon tax, none are revenue neutral.
Any carbon pricing scheme that is not revenue neutral does not have as its primary purpose lowering greenhouse gas emissions linked to climate change.
Rather, it’s a cash grab by financially incompetent governments.
Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne’s cap-and-trade plan, which starts in 2017 and will raise the price of almost everything, isn’t revenue neutral.
Alberta Premier Rachel Notley wrongly claimed her carbon tax, which will raise taxes on almost everything starting in 2017, is revenue neutral, meaning she’s either misleading Albertans or doesn’t understand what it means.
Revenue neutral means when a government raises taxes in one area, it lowers other taxes by an equal amount so its overall revenue stays the same.
By contrast, Wynne’s and Notley’s carbon pricing schemes will pour billions of dollars more annually into their respective provincial treasuries - Notley’s carbon tax at an estimated rate of $3 billion annually to start, Wynne’s cap-and-trade plan at an estimated rate of $1.3 billion annually to start.
A huge chunk of the money they raise through carbon pricing will actually be paid back to major industrial polluters as public subsidies, to buy their political support for carbon pricing.
As for the rest, Notley and Wynne say they will spend it largely on “green” infrastructure projects such as public transit.
But governments have spent our money for decades on public transit before this wrongly became synonymous with saving the planet. It used to be called capital spending, something all governments have done - competently or incompetently - for generations.
From what Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has said about his carbon pricing plan, the details of which he hasn’t revealed other than it will be done in co-operation with the provinces, we know it won’t be revenue neutral, unlike former Liberal leader Stephane Dion’s Green Shift plan.
Today, the only national party that proposes revenue neutral carbon pricing is the Greens, led by Elizabeth May.
Known as carbon fee and dividend, it raises taxes on consumption (in effect, it’s a sales tax) while decreasing by an equal amount business and income taxes, save for special financial help to the poor because they pay a higher proportion of their income under carbon pricing than the rich.
The purpose of carbon fee and dividend is not to raise money for the government but to change human behaviour through the tax system.
This doesn’t mean everyone gets back in lower income taxes exactly what they spend in higher sales taxes.
Whether an individual ends up paying more, less or the same in total taxes depends on the lifestyle (i.e. purchasing) choices they make.
By imposing higher taxes on carbon-intensive consumption, while lowering income and business taxes by an equal amount, carbon fee and dividend theoretically encourages people to work harder and save more, while buying lower carbon intensity goods and services.
One can debate whether any government would be honest enough to make such a carbon pricing scheme truly revenue neutral, but at least the goal of carbon fee and dividend is to lower emissions.
By contrast, the goal of what Trudeau, Wynne and Notley are doing is a cash grab from ordinary citizens. Period.
source: Canada?s carbon pricing is a fraud | News | Toronto Sun
Since the Paris climate agreement is a fraud, it’s only fitting that the looming carbon pricing schemes of Canada’s federal and provincial governments are fraudulent as well.
The reason they are fraudulent is that, with the exception of B.C.’s carbon tax, none are revenue neutral.
Any carbon pricing scheme that is not revenue neutral does not have as its primary purpose lowering greenhouse gas emissions linked to climate change.
Rather, it’s a cash grab by financially incompetent governments.
Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne’s cap-and-trade plan, which starts in 2017 and will raise the price of almost everything, isn’t revenue neutral.
Alberta Premier Rachel Notley wrongly claimed her carbon tax, which will raise taxes on almost everything starting in 2017, is revenue neutral, meaning she’s either misleading Albertans or doesn’t understand what it means.
Revenue neutral means when a government raises taxes in one area, it lowers other taxes by an equal amount so its overall revenue stays the same.
By contrast, Wynne’s and Notley’s carbon pricing schemes will pour billions of dollars more annually into their respective provincial treasuries - Notley’s carbon tax at an estimated rate of $3 billion annually to start, Wynne’s cap-and-trade plan at an estimated rate of $1.3 billion annually to start.
A huge chunk of the money they raise through carbon pricing will actually be paid back to major industrial polluters as public subsidies, to buy their political support for carbon pricing.
As for the rest, Notley and Wynne say they will spend it largely on “green” infrastructure projects such as public transit.
But governments have spent our money for decades on public transit before this wrongly became synonymous with saving the planet. It used to be called capital spending, something all governments have done - competently or incompetently - for generations.
From what Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has said about his carbon pricing plan, the details of which he hasn’t revealed other than it will be done in co-operation with the provinces, we know it won’t be revenue neutral, unlike former Liberal leader Stephane Dion’s Green Shift plan.
Today, the only national party that proposes revenue neutral carbon pricing is the Greens, led by Elizabeth May.
Known as carbon fee and dividend, it raises taxes on consumption (in effect, it’s a sales tax) while decreasing by an equal amount business and income taxes, save for special financial help to the poor because they pay a higher proportion of their income under carbon pricing than the rich.
The purpose of carbon fee and dividend is not to raise money for the government but to change human behaviour through the tax system.
This doesn’t mean everyone gets back in lower income taxes exactly what they spend in higher sales taxes.
Whether an individual ends up paying more, less or the same in total taxes depends on the lifestyle (i.e. purchasing) choices they make.
By imposing higher taxes on carbon-intensive consumption, while lowering income and business taxes by an equal amount, carbon fee and dividend theoretically encourages people to work harder and save more, while buying lower carbon intensity goods and services.
One can debate whether any government would be honest enough to make such a carbon pricing scheme truly revenue neutral, but at least the goal of carbon fee and dividend is to lower emissions.
By contrast, the goal of what Trudeau, Wynne and Notley are doing is a cash grab from ordinary citizens. Period.
source: Canada?s carbon pricing is a fraud | News | Toronto Sun
