Army.ca Forums

The Mess => Canadian Politics => Topic started by: FJAG on October 25, 2018, 14:04:50

Title: Federal Carbon Tax
Post by: FJAG on October 25, 2018, 14:04:50
As a resident of Ontario I'm going to be effected by the Federal carbon Tax.

While I'm not a climate change denier, I'm a great sceptic of the whole carbon tax/exchange concept. This most recent initiative by the Federal government is leaving me somewhat confused.

As I understand it the Feds will be collecting a carbon tax levied on all the big carbon generators (which in effect is primarily energy producers and manufacturers) which will trickle down their price increases to us consumers. To offset these costs we're all getting a rebate from the government which, theoretically, will make the cost neutral on us consumers.

My question is how does this money traveling in a circle reduce carbon emissions? Being the cynic that I am all I see is a shadow play to make it look like the government is actually doing something about pollution while leaving the ordinary voter with the false impression that it is not costing them anything (or even worse that the government is actually giving them something). In the meantime our industries will be less competitive then they already are against their international competitors who merrily pollute the world while turning out cheap products. (Let's not forget that Ontario became a manufacturing powerhouse because of cheap electrical energy in the 1950s - an advantage which has long since been stripped away by successive stupidity on the part of various Ontario governments)

Am I missing something or is this program really such a superficially shallow shell game?

 :stars:
Title: Re: Federal Carbon Tax
Post by: GAP on October 25, 2018, 14:09:23
Election 2019
Title: Re: Federal Carbon Tax
Post by: ModlrMike on October 25, 2018, 14:22:38
You're not missing anything. What's missing is the public's realization that there is only one source of tax revenue, and that's the individual. It doesn't matter if you say you're going to tax polluters, corporations or whatever the demon-de-jur is. The costs are passed on down stream to the great unwashed.

This is nothing more than an attempt to bribe us with our own money.
Title: Re: Federal Carbon Tax
Post by: kratz on October 25, 2018, 14:32:42
CBC.ca (https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/tasker-carbon-tax-plan-trudeau-1.4874258)

It's important to note, not all Canadians will receive a Carbon Tax rebate if you live in:
Quote
...Quebec, Alberta, B.C., Nova Scotia, P.E.I. and Newfoundland and Labrador.



The only provinces not participating with Ottawa's plan are:
Quote
...Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario and New Brunswick starting in April 2019, and Yukon and Nunavut as of July 2019.

Title: Re: Federal Carbon Tax
Post by: PuckChaser on October 25, 2018, 18:19:33
We could cut our emissions by 50% tomorrow, and only lower the global emissions by 0.8%. Microscopic change. We're going to bankrupt Canadian companies and citizens to change global emissions by less than 0.25%.
Title: Re: Federal Carbon Tax
Post by: Xylric on October 26, 2018, 00:46:31
Charging Canadians a tax like this is completely baffling if you know the slightest bit about ecology, sustainability dynamics (which my sister-in-law has a Master's Degree in), and environmental economics. Because of our absurdly low population density, we live in the planet's biggest carbon sink, since we've got the largest continuous forest on the planet.

We should get it so that other countries pay *us.*
Title: Re: Federal Carbon Tax
Post by: Jarnhamar on October 26, 2018, 01:57:11
Give someone your money and they promise you'll get a even more money back.

Classic Nigerian Prince stuff right there.


Carbon tax is a scam. Companies that go over the limit just end up paying a small fine. Proceeds from thaf fine are supposedly used to pay for very ambiguous "climate change research" and programs.

Think I'd trust sending money to a Nigerian Prince first.
Title: Re: Federal Carbon Tax
Post by: YZT580 on October 26, 2018, 10:14:50
The EU has had a carbon tax for years now.  Are there any statistics to demonstrate that there has been one scintilla of reduction with the exception of industry loses from plant closures or re-location?
Title: Re: Federal Carbon Tax
Post by: Pusser on October 26, 2018, 12:15:41
Folks seem to be missing the difference between the new federal carbon tax and the old Ontario cap and trade program.  They're not the same thing. 

Under cap and trade, Ontario companies were capped at how much carbon they could produce with impunity.  If they went over their cap, they would have to pay a fee.  However, smaller carbon producers could trade away (i.e. sell) the unused portion of their caps to larger carbon producers, presumably for less than the fines that would be charged for over-production.  The overall cap would represent an overall reduction in carbon emissions, but it could be spread around so that large carbon producers would not be saddled with the impossible goals that an across the board demand for reduction would entail.  Sounds nice in theory, but cap and trade has been widely criticized for being ineffective.  What makes it really silly is that it was not limited to Ontario.  Ontario companies could (and apparently did) actually buy carbon credits from companies in California.  As I see it, this system doesn't actually encourage companies to develop technologies to reduce emissions.  They can simply buy their way out of it.

If I understand it correctly, the new federal carbon tax is an across the board tax on carbon production.  If you produce a lot, you'll pay a lot.  This would be an actual incentive to reduce emissions if you want to keep your costs down.  Of course, there is only one taxpayer and these increased taxes will be passed onto the consumer.  In order to offset, the federal government will be giving rebates to individuals.  This is a key point.  The companies are not getting the rebates, individuals are.  In other words, production costs will remain high for carbon producers, encouraging them to reduce emissions, but the effect of them passing the cost onto consumers should be minimal.  At least that's the theory...
Title: Re: Federal Carbon Tax
Post by: Blackadder1916 on October 26, 2018, 13:42:13
CBC.ca (https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/tasker-carbon-tax-plan-trudeau-1.4874258)

It's important to note, not all Canadians will receive a Carbon Tax rebate if you live in:

Quote
...Quebec, Alberta, B.C., Nova Scotia, P.E.I. and Newfoundland and Labrador.


I can't speak to the other provinces, but in Alberta we receive a carbon rebate from the provincial carbon levy program.

https://www.alberta.ca/climate-carbon-pricing.aspx
Title: Re: Federal Carbon Tax
Post by: FJAG on October 26, 2018, 15:14:20
If I understand it correctly, the new federal carbon tax is an across the board tax on carbon production.  If you produce a lot, you'll pay a lot.  This would be an actual incentive to reduce emissions if you want to keep your costs down.  Of course, there is only one taxpayer and these increased taxes will be passed onto the consumer.  In order to offset, the federal government will be giving rebates to individuals.  This is a key point.  The companies are not getting the rebates, individuals are.  In other words, production costs will remain high for carbon producers, encouraging them to reduce emissions, but the effect of them passing the cost onto consumers should be minimal.  At least that's the theory...

If the company can and does pass on the cost of the tax to the ultimate consumer then what incentive is there for the company to reduce emissions?

The problem is compounded if off-shore products appear in competition with the domestic company's. In a free enterprise system consumers will always gravitate to the least expensive option (assuming quality is comparable). Consumers will generally not "pay" out of their own pockets for something as nebulous as that. I recently booked some flights where I was given an option to a) voluntarily pay the carbon offset for my seat, b) voluntarily pay the carbon offset for the whole flight, or c) pay nothing. Which one do you think I picked?

 :cheers:
Title: Re: Federal Carbon Tax
Post by: Pusser on October 29, 2018, 11:49:04
If the company can and does pass on the cost of the tax to the ultimate consumer then what incentive is there for the company to reduce emissions?


 :cheers:

Theoretically, I suppose, it's an incentive to the company because they still have to pay, but the ultimate burden on the taxpayer is removed by the rebate.  Note that I'm not defending this as a viable plan, just explaining it as I understand or perceive the logic.  Whether it works remains to be seen.  Frankly, most taxpayers will likely not see the connection between the $1.50 they pay at the pump and the $600 rebate they see on their income tax returns.
Title: Re: Federal Carbon Tax
Post by: Furniture on October 29, 2018, 13:35:38
Theoretically, I suppose, it's an incentive to the company because they still have to pay, but the ultimate burden on the taxpayer is removed by the rebate.  Note that I'm not defending this as a viable plan, just explaining it as I understand or perceive the logic.  Whether it works remains to be seen.  Frankly, most taxpayers will likely not see the connection between the $1.50 they pay at the pump and the $600 rebate they see on their income tax returns.

The $600 is better kept in my pocket, and used as I see fit rather than being gifted back to me by the government. The same government that can decide on a whim the $600 per person would make a nice dent in their deficit, or can be better spent buying votes elsewhere or in another way.

It appears to be a way to make it look like they are "doing something" without actually having to do anything. Adding yet more complexity to an already complex tax system is not the way to save anything but CRA jobs.
Title: Re: Federal Carbon Tax
Post by: George Wallace on October 29, 2018, 16:44:52
 :goodpost:
Title: Re: Federal Carbon Tax
Post by: Colin P on October 29, 2018, 17:10:39
The $600 is better kept in my pocket, and used as I see fit rather than being gifted back to me by the government. The same government that can decide on a whim the $600 per person would make a nice dent in their deficit, or can be better spent buying votes elsewhere or in another way.

It appears to be a way to make it look like they are "doing something" without actually having to do anything. Adding yet more complexity to an already complex tax system is not the way to save anything CRA jobs.

Is that $600 considered taxable?
Title: Re: Federal Carbon Tax
Post by: George Wallace on October 30, 2018, 01:29:25
Is that $600 considered taxable?

The $600 would have to have come from your taxable income, and of course taxed once again when you spend it -- Already double taxed. 
Title: Re: Federal Carbon Tax
Post by: Brad Sallows on November 01, 2018, 00:34:20
>My question is how does this money traveling in a circle reduce carbon emissions?

It follows the general belief that "whatever you tax, you get less of", and the knowledge that there are very few people who are thoroughly rational about economics (few will directly connect the increase and the decrease and conclude they need not change anything).  The expectation is that people will respond to increased costs by reducing consumption; the reduction in emissions by the producers is indirect (less consumption, so less production).   To the extent that people respond by reducing consumption, some of the rebated funds are available for other uses; this is a benefit.  But some of the cost increases will be included in the final price of things like transported goods, and to the extent that people try to control those costs, there will be economic contraction (not a benefit).  And some of the consumption is inelastic - I doubt many people change their home heating habits, or commuting habits.  (I suppose that for most people, time and convenience heavily outweigh cost of fuel.)

I have no idea what to expect how it will all play out, other than I always expect unintended consequences.
Title: Re: Federal Carbon Tax
Post by: Jarnhamar on November 02, 2018, 12:40:10

Feds say carbon price not exempt from GST despite promise it would be revenue neutral

OTTAWA -- The federal government's impending national carbon price could bring in more than $250 million in GST revenues next year but Ottawa doesn't intend to account for those funds in its rebate program.

https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/feds-say-carbon-price-not-exempt-from-gst-despite-promise-it-would-be-revenue-neutral-1.1162075
Title: Re: Federal Carbon Tax
Post by: FJAG on November 02, 2018, 12:47:20
Feds say carbon price not exempt from GST despite promise it would be revenue neutral

OTTAWA -- The federal government's impending national carbon price could bring in more than $250 million in GST revenues next year but Ottawa doesn't intend to account for those funds in its rebate program.

https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/feds-say-carbon-price-not-exempt-from-gst-despite-promise-it-would-be-revenue-neutral-1.1162075

Anybody out there that still thinks that this whole thing isn't just one big tax-grab?

 :deadhorse:
Title: Re: Federal Carbon Tax
Post by: Colin P on November 02, 2018, 13:45:37
>My question is how does this money traveling in a circle reduce carbon emissions?

It follows the general belief that "whatever you tax, you get less of", and the knowledge that there are very few people who are thoroughly rational about economics (few will directly connect the increase and the decrease and conclude they need not change anything).  The expectation is that people will respond to increased costs by reducing consumption; the reduction in emissions by the producers is indirect (less consumption, so less production).   To the extent that people respond by reducing consumption, some of the rebated funds are available for other uses; this is a benefit.  But some of the cost increases will be included in the final price of things like transported goods, and to the extent that people try to control those costs, there will be economic contraction (not a benefit).  And some of the consumption is inelastic - I doubt many people change their home heating habits, or commuting habits.  (I suppose that for most people, time and convenience heavily outweigh cost of fuel.)

I have no idea what to expect how it will all play out, other than I always expect unintended consequences.

Time is a major factor for me, driving to work costs me about $5-7 more a day, but saves me at least an hour total on the commute. That hour adds up, plus I can stop along the way and pick up items or even go a round about route and  get those items, something that would add hours to my commute, not minutes. So yes I get punished for valuing time over carbon.
Title: Re: Federal Carbon Tax
Post by: Remius on November 02, 2018, 15:09:40
Time is a major factor for me, driving to work costs me about $5-7 more a day, but saves me at least an hour total on the commute. That hour adds up, plus I can stop along the way and pick up items or even go a round about route and  get those items, something that would add hours to my commute, not minutes. So yes I get punished for valuing time over carbon.

And this is the issue.  Where I live the local government pushes the public transit and bike paths.  Time is the big issue.  A 15 min car ride translates into a an hour and half bus ride.  A carbon tax won't change my mind at all about using my car. 

It works for those centered in the city's central core but forget it outside of that.  Taking the bus isn't worth the three hours I'd lose. 
Title: Federal Carbon Tax
Post by: kev994 on November 03, 2018, 14:13:26
And this is the issue.  Where I live the local government pushes the public transit and bike paths.  Time is the big issue.  A 15 min car ride translates into a an hour and half bus ride.  A carbon tax won't change my mind at all about using my car. 

It works for those centered in the city's central core but forget it outside of that.  Taking the bus isn't worth the three hours I'd lose.
But maybe the next time you buy a car the fuel consumption will be a bigger concern because of the increase in fuel price. The assumption is that this will be the case for at least some people and  the carbon tax will have done what it was meant to do.
Title: Re: Federal Carbon Tax
Post by: Furniture on November 03, 2018, 18:00:30
But maybe the next time you buy a car the fuel consumption will be a bigger concern because of the increase in fuel price. The assumption is that this will be the case for at least some people and  the carbon tax will have done what it was meant to do.

If it is meant to make us all poorer, and have more restricted lifestyle it will be mission accomplished. Won't save the environment, but that appears to be secondary to making more tax money to buy votes.

When the industries and countries contributing far more to pollution are exempted from a tax like this it has no hope of doing anything for the environment. All it will do is allow our hopefully future former PM  to fly off to all corners of the world and proclaim how "green" we are. Of course Canadians will be green, with envy at what our neighbours ot the south can afford to do because they won't be saddled with a massive tax imposed for political posturing.
Title: Re: Federal Carbon Tax
Post by: E.R. Campbell on November 04, 2018, 07:20:30
But maybe the next time you buy a car the fuel consumption will be a bigger concern because of the increase in fuel price. The assumption is that this will be the case for at least some people and  the carbon tax will have done what it was meant to do.


This is the theory behind all so-called "sin taxes:" they aim to change our behaviours by making something we do more expensive and, therefore, less desirable.

The 1973 oil crisis gave this theory a lot of impetus ... the economy car segment of the market grew exponentially, to the advantage of Asian (then largely Japanese) auto makers and at the expense of the American 'big three' who were unprepared to meet that demand.
Title: Re: Federal Carbon Tax
Post by: Jarnhamar on November 04, 2018, 09:19:56
But maybe the next time you buy a car the fuel consumption will be a bigger concern because of the increase in fuel price.

Seems elitist.  Bigger cars are only for the rich and well off and will become even more of a status symbol.
Title: Re: Federal Carbon Tax
Post by: Fishbone Jones on November 04, 2018, 14:43:12
Anybody out there that still thinks that this whole thing isn't just one big tax-grab?

 :deadhorse:

My thoughts?

That's exactly what it is, in my mind.

Trudeau's shell game is just that, a shell game. Give us back more than we put in? A fallacy at best, a pyramid scheme at it's worst.

The CO2 emission argument is a mumbo jumbo boogy man. Pushing them down, lowering they call it, at the expense of vegetation and agriculture growth and oxygen output of the same. Canada's trees alone nearly put us in a carbon deficit, if not into the negative. We should be paid by the rest of the world for being the carbon scrubber that we are. Not paying others to ignore the protocol and increase carbon output on our dollar.

I think, the liberal government has wasted so many billions of our dollars, they've run out of cash to give away for their UN seat project and they need a fresh influx of cash to take care of their benefactors.

Our PM grew up privileged and without want. He has no concept of cash flow. It's just easier to keep reaching in the bag, without looking at how empty it's gotten.

Taxing us is easier than turning on the printing presses at the Canadian Mint.

I'm waiting for Ford to roll out his carbon plan. It will be wonderful, if he can exceed the liberal targets and goals, while not impinging on personal finances the way the liberal plan does.

If it does turn out to be better, will the liberals adopt it and drop their tax? They should, but I don't think they will. This tax was never designed to go fight climate change. It was designed to fleece the citizen and donate to liberal favoured financial giveaways.

The fact that the liberals have moved us to a trillion dollar deficit where our surpluses no longer cover that debt, has effectively bankrupted us.

Harper left a surplus and the best recovered world economy after the recession, and in three years under the liberals, we are now a red headed stepchild to the likes of Greece, that financial powerhouse of the EU  ;) .

Taxes are the preferred means of liberals to collect free money They've taxed and spent us into the poor house, but they just keep taking.
Title: Re: Federal Carbon Tax
Post by: Will M on November 10, 2018, 11:18:02
As with all taxes they go into the big pot and later decisions aim the $$$. Chances are ZERO $$ will be effectively spent on a debatable idea of climate change, even the name is changed from global warming. There is some science to it, political spin to remove $$ from our pockets.
The truth is elusive and no time in the history of mankind did anyone spend $$ on trying to change living conditions long after the people would have passed on. What humans do best is adapt, but we react to fear the most and govt knows this and uses this to extract even more tax.
Title: Re: Federal Carbon Tax
Post by: Thucydides on November 14, 2018, 14:44:08
Since the idea of a "carbon tax" is to attack energy use, the changes in the rprice of energy could throw a real wrench into plans:

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/money/topstories/crude’s-collapse-is-sending-shockwaves-across-global-markets/ar-BBPI3B4?ocid=spartanntp

The effects of the collapse of crude prices are different across the economy and around the world, but the primary effect will likely be to reduce the amount of tax the Feds can grab from consumers, at least in the short term.