Comments on: B.C. Carbon Tax Backlash: How Real?

By: John

John — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 11:50:20 +0000

This is not revenue neutral to any suppliers outside of BC. You are stuck paying for a tax to the Transportation Provider, which becomes a cost, which is marked up as a cost input, then passed back to the BC client in the form of a higher landed cost of the goods with markup.

It should be abandoned given the current economy and re-thought.

By: Jurgen Hissen

Jurgen Hissen — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 09:00:34 +0000

Miller: BC Hydro’s multi-tiered rate structure is also just a price signal, and so can also hypothetically be ignored by rich people. It is identical to the carbon tax in this regard. However, price signals matter, even for rich people: when there is a choice between two alternatives, the non-carbon one will be get a leg up. Rich people generally do not use "can I afford to" as the defining criteria for a purchase decision. They are not limitted by cash flow. They ask instead "is it worth it?".
BC Hydro’s tiered price is different from carbon taxes in terms of implementation costs, though. Bills are going to get confusing. And they will have to actually measure the meter every time (they can’t do what they’ve done in the past which is over-bill one month and under-bill the next to balance it out.. because now the price curve is nonlinear).
It’s also a bit too reminiscent of central planning (providing guidelines for how much eletricity a house "should" or "should not" consume). Every kWh of electricity costs BC Hydro the same amount, requires the same capital investment, and causes the same amount of environmental disruption as any other kWh. Yet for some reason they are differentiating. It’s strange that they are implementing a nonlinear price curve. All they are going to do is discourage things like heat pumps, and subsidize an "average" home full of incandescent lights.

Jeremy: yes, cap-and-trade is an aweful system. Write your congressman today to tell him you prefer carbon taxes to cap-and-trade. You’re going to be getting one or the other, whether you personally believe in climate change or not.

By: Jeremy

Jeremy — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 03:30:15 +0000

Is this for real? I almost laugh every time i hear these proposals. If you think any tax has ever fixed any problem, just look at almost all government’s records. As far as spending this tax on alternatives, how much will they waste on the programs the lobbyists will be pushing for. How much of it will get spent on things not relating to energy whatsoever. As for buying and selling of Carbon credits, i think that is an even worse proposal, can you imagine a man like Boone T Pickens Buying up a large amount, what that would do to the us and the world. If your still in the global warming camp, you had better sit down, and make sure you really buy this BS that the UN is feeding you. DO the research, the proof is inconclusive at best. Al gore’s movie is full of fallacy and flat out lies (especially the cuddly Polar bears).

By: Miller the doormat taxpayer

Miller the doormat taxpayer — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 17:35:00 +0000

As noted above the BC carbon tax is revenue neutral to the government but not to individual taxpayers, creating something that works for everyone would be an impossible task. The "unfairness" of the BC approach with respect to natural gas use is that those who can most afford to use fossil based fuels will continue to use fossil based fuels regardless of the current tax structure. What is needed is a tax structure providing the incentive for all residential users to reduce usage. BC Hydro has, under approval of the BC Government, developed an inovative tiered residential rate structure for electricity based on average residential usage. The concept is that those using at or below the average residential number of KWH pay less per KWH while all KWH above the average are billed at a higher rate. Reduce your residential usage and reduce your monthly bills. The BC carbon tax, as applied to natural gas, is a flat rate of about $0.50 per Giga-joule. Assuming the average residential usage to be 70Gj per year, the current BC carbon tax would add about $35 annually. Although a residence that uses four times the average (heated pools and hot tubs, large buildings with poor insulation etc…) will pay four times the carbon tax, the question remains: Because I can afford to, do I have the right to create a larger carbon footprint? Why not have a tiered rate structure similar to BC Hydro?

By: Jurgen Hissen

Jurgen Hissen — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 06:01:20 +0000

BCDan: the income tax cuts will (eventually) mean lower labour costs. And that includes costs incurred by other government levels. I therefore challenge your assertion that other levels of government will have to raise their taxes.

Regarding the polls, there are lot of reasons to disapprove of the $100 dividend cheque. It is an obvious gimmick. But that’s not the same thing as disagreeing with the carbon tax shift.
The other question regarding revenue neutrality is a bit strange. It asks if people "believe the government". But you don’t need to believe the government when it says it’s revenue neutral. You can see for yourself. The numbers are all visible on BC’s 2008/2009 budget site that SHOWS the tax is revenue neutral. http://www.bcbudget.gov.bc.ca/2008/bfp/default.html#2
There’s not really any "belief" required (unless one believes the income tax revenue figures reported in the budget are bogus - even though they must surely be readily verifiable by any opposition MLA).

The thing to remember, also, is that the opposition party (the NDP) are also in favour of a carbon tax (I heard it straight from their leader when I ran into her on the ferry). Everyone’s having a good time with their "axe the tax" mantra right now. But come election time, when the rubber hits the road and people start to actually look at the issues, I think the NDP is going to have a hard time really differentiating their Climate Change plan from the Liberals’. So I would be surprised if the anger people are feeling (let’s be honest, it originates from the "market-based" rise in gasoline prices, not the carbon tax) actually translates significantly into electoral activity.

By: BCDan

BCDan — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 20:59:40 +0000

The fallacy with these ‘carbon taxes’ is that they are ‘revenue neutral’. That will only be the case for governments, not for individuals. The indirect consequences, are that junior government bodies (municipal, regional, crown corporations, et al) will have to also charge back to taxpayers to recover their additional costs brought on by this regressive tax. Once again, the individual gets screwed, by a leftwing policy from a formerly rightwing government, that seems to have a leader that has lost his collective mind

By: A. Clausen

A. Clausen — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 20:49:19 +0000

I realize you’re proponents of the tax, but questioning the polls comes off as pretty pathetic wishful thinking. My very anecdotal evidence suggests that, if anything, the poll may actually understate it. Part of this is, of course, because taxpayers usually don’t believe the phrase "revenue neutral". Even if true (which I am pretty skeptical of), it’s only statistically so. I live out in the country, about three miles or so from the nearest grocery store. The carbon tax will not be revenue neutral for me. For people living in truly rural areas, such as in the Peace River, the tax will likely be downright regressive.At the end of the day, BC is a government of the people, by the people and for the people. If there is this much discontentment to the legislation, then the Liberals had better figure out a way to convince not only rural British Columbians, but apparently a heck of lot of folks in larger urban areas (which appears to be their power base) that this is a good idea. To my mind, the first start would be to start making industry pay its far share. Secondly, as the Federal Liberal’s plan suggests, rural residents should see a bit of a break. We rural citizens are a rather important part of the province’s economy, and are being unfairly targeted in what the Finance Minister dismissed in an interview a couple of months ago as merely being "lifestyle choices". In the end, the BC Liberals have until about the end of February 2009 (when I usually do my taxes) to show me that it hasn’t cost me a dime. If I calculate that it has, they’ve lost my vote.

By: bc'er

bc'er — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 17:39:58 +0000

It’s worth noting that the BC Liberal party is actually the right-of-centre party in BC, and the left-leaning opposition NDP has traditionally captured more of the green vote than the Liberals. The Liberal party introduced very large tax income and business tax cuts in their first term, which the NDP opposed. One has the impression that the NDP has lost their ideals and that the Liberal party is actually the one better positioned for the election next spring, despite grumbling about the carbon tax.It’s disheartening that the carbon tax is not popular but, fortunately, the Liberal party appears to be rock-solid committed to it and they’re likely to remain in government to see it through.

By: Ryan Bernard

Ryan Bernard — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 04:42:36 +0000

A carbon tax? We all knew this was coming. Tax people more so government will have more to waste to enrich their friends and stay in office.Liberalism is truly a mental disorder!Oh, and while we "little people" pay the tax and ride our bikes or walk to work, the political and business elites will continue to ride in black Suburbans and fly in private jets.Did you know that Nancy Pelosi and other "dignitaries" flew to Montana on 7/25 to attend San Francisco mayor Newsome’s wedding? They got their in the Google Corp. jet — a 757 with 7 "livingrooms". Check the story on SFGate.com. Written by another "dignitary on the plane" Willie Brown — millionaire former mayor of San Francisco.Are you people that stupid to want to tax this country into oblivion so we can while our politicians and corp elites continue to waste resources on their lavish lifestyles?I’ve got no problem if wealthy people want to fly private or drive Hummers. That’s their business. But our politicians who are "public servants" and work for us? I don’t think so.I feel a classic French Revolution coming down the pipe.Global Warming? You people are nuts.

By: Bill Tieleman

Bill Tieleman — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 20:22:27 +0000

Thanks for the reference to my columns in 24 hours weekday newspaper. All of my 24 hours columns since February’s BC budget are available on my blog, along with additional items. The polling is also still on my blog. [Thanks Bill, we've added that link. -- C.K.]
As to your points, every poll save one national poll done for the environmental group the Pembina Institute has shown strong opposition to the carbon tax. The Vancouver Sun reported an Ipsos-Reid poll back in June that showed 59% opposed the tax, following an earlier March Ipsos poll that had 61% saying the carbon tax was a "bad" idea.
The reality in BC is that people do not support the carbon or gas tax.