Comments on: A Convenient Tax — Issue #2

By: Carbon Tax Center » A Convenient Tax — Issue #3

Carbon Tax Center » A Convenient Tax — Issue #3 — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 18:09:12 +0000

[...] Carbon Tax Center’s progress in advancing carbon taxes in the United States. (For Issue #2, click here.) These are heady times for CTC. Each week, and sometimes every day, brings a major development in [...]

By: Charles

Charles — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 17:13:14 +0000

To Mikeh9 — the taxpayer rebate you urge is one of two offset approaches we (CTC) advance for keeping a carbon tax revenue-neutral and equitable. (The other is a tax shift against, say, payroll taxes.) We discuss the rebate approach at length here: http://www.carbontax.org/issues/softening-the-impact-of-carbon-taxes/

Here’s an excerpt:

An alternative approach that is unquestionably progressive, as well as
straightforward, is to rebate the carbon tax revenues equally to all
U.S. residents. This would be a national version of the Alaska Permanent Fund,
which once a year sends every resident of that state an identical check
drawn from the state�s North Slope oil royalties… With carbon tax revenues
rebated pro rata, the vast majority of poorer households would get back
more in the rebates than they would pay in the tax.

To Chris C — excellent idea for the near future as the scorecard starts to even out between tax advocates and cap adherents. Right now we’ve got individual and organizational support for taxing carbon listed here: http://www.carbontax.org/who-supports/

Best, Charles (Carbon Tax Center)

By: Chris Chidsey

Chris Chidsey — Tue, 05 Jun 2007 14:00:25 +0000

Excellent work!
Please consider a page dedicated to enumerating the organizations and politicians and their contact info on either side of the cap-and-trade vs carbon-tax debate. I want to know who I should be lobbying. Each of us will have our unique cloat with specific organizations and politicians who care about our support.
My suspicion is that most environmental organizations know that a carbon-tax would be the best approach but have been so wounded by the Bush regime that they are gun shy. They need a constant flow of appeals by all of us that they do the right thing.

By: Mikeh9

Mikeh9 — Tue, 05 Jun 2007 12:29:57 +0000

Wouldn’t it be best to propose that most of the tax income be "returned" to taxpayers in some form of credit? As long as the credit is not based on actual usage, the incentives for conservation and alternative fuels remains intact, but with these advantages:

- It would blunt, to a large degree, the anti-tax arguments that a tax would be a drag on the economy and create numerous hardships- It would make it politically possible to enact a higher tax, enabling faster progress on reducing carbon usage.

By: Scott Sklar

Scott Sklar — Tue, 05 Jun 2007 01:26:11 +0000

Congrats Charles and Daniel for raising this most important issue from the dustbin of environmental initiatives. While Cap and Trade allows carbon emissions by those “who pay”, a carbon tax monetizes the degradation to the health of people and to the global climate. By doing so, allows market forces to drive ‘high value’ energy efficiency and renewable energy. Greenpeace (www.greanpeace.org) and the American Solar Energy Society (www.ases.org) both recently released studies this year showing that energy efficiency (first) followed by renewables can not only bring both the globe and the USA to zero carbon growth status but significantly cut carbon emissions by half (as well as other pollutants, the regulated: NOx, SO2, and particulates, and the unregulated: mercury and carcinogens). Thanks for the effort – Scott Sklar, President, the Stella Group, Ltd. and serves as Steering Committee Chair of the Sustainable Energy Coalition, composed of the renewable energy and energy efficiency trade associations and analytical groups, and sits on the national Boards of Directors of the non-profit Business Council for Sustainable Energy, Renewable Energy Policy Project, and the Sustainable Buildings Industry Council