Barbara Boxer pledges to push carbon tax as part of tax reform

After being rebuffed on the carbon tax, California Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer said she will try to pass it again through tax reform.

Boxer’s carbon tax bill from earlier this year does not have the 60 votes necessary to pass the Senate unimpeded, reports the Hill newspaper. She claims a carbon tax would enable other tax rates to be lowered.

“We are looking at tax reform to see whether there is a possibility to utilize a fee on carbon that could be returned to the people in dividend form, such as the Bernie Sanders bill and there are others like it. So, we are really mostly working toward the tax reform issue,” Boxer said.

Republicans have vehemently opposed the idea of a carbon tax “swap” where certain tax rates — like corporate or income tax rates — are lowered in exchange for implementing a gradually rising tax on carbon emissions.

“Other countries are running from similar policies, the most recent example being Australia’s rejection of a carbon tax in their last election,” said Louisiana Republican Sen. David Vitter. “That’s because a carbon tax is clearly a failed idea that could significantly ruin any chance for the United States to have a full economic recovery.”

A spokesman for Michigan Republican Rep. Dave Camp, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, told The Daily Caller News Foundation that the chairman opposes a carbon tax “either as a standalone or as part of a larger package.”

At the beginning of his second term, President Obama called on Congress to pass market-based solutions to lower U.S. carbon dioxide emissions or he would use his executive authority to tackle the issue himself.

Soon after, Boxer and Vermont independent Sen. Bernie Sanders introduced carbon tax legislation to slap a gradually rising tax on carbon emissions that would start at $20 per ton in 2014, rising to $35 per ton over twelve years.

Via: Daily Caller

Continue Reading....

Australian election won’t deter U.S. carbon tax supporters

American carbon tax supporters are undeterred by Australian election results that were widely interpreted as a repudiation of the tax.

“We would say the Australian experiment shows precisely the wrong way to implement a carbon tax,” Ray Lehmann, spokesman for the R Street Institute, told The Daily Caller News Foundation. “Simply laying a new tax on top of citizens’ existing burdens is never going to be either popular or economically productive.”

Conservatives contend that the Australian election should serve as a warning to U.S. policymakers who seek to impose such a tax on the carbon dioxide emissions at home.

“Australia is a great example of how not to do [a carbon tax]: not revenue-neutral, not coupled with regulatory and tax reform, and using a bad structure in cap-and-trade,” R Street’s Andrew Moylan said.

R Street bills itself as a group which supports “free markets; limited, effective government; and responsible environmental stewardship.” The group has been trying to muster up support for a $20 per ton carbon tax among conservatives, and contends that a carbon tax could be beneficial if coupled with regulatory and tax reform.

“I myself would certainly vote to repeal it were I an Australian MP or senator and would have voted Liberal0National were I a voter,” R Street’s president Eli Lehrer told TheDCNF.

Even liberal Vermont independent Sen. Bernie Sanders is not backing down from his support of a carbon tax in the aftermath of the Australian election.

The Daily Caller

Continue Reading....

Carbon Tax: Won’t Reduce Deficit or Temperature

The Congressional Research Service (CRS) released a report that should be a cause for concern to all who believe in limited government. In it, CRS argues that a new tax on carbon could cut the deficit in half.

There is nothing special about a carbon tax in terms of raising revenue. CRS could have written that significantly increasing the income tax or payroll tax could cut the deficit in half. They could’ve written the same thing about instituting a new value-added tax as well.

But cutting the deficit isn’t as simple as increasing taxes. Higher taxes hurt the economy. CRS failed to mention the devastating impact that higher taxes would have on the economy. The extra revenue that would result from a carbon tax would certainly be lower than CRS estimates after considering the economic slowdown that would no doubt result.

About 85 percent of America’s energy needs are met by fossil fuels. A carbon tax would directly raise the cost of electricity, gasoline, diesel fuel, and home heating oil. This would disproportionately hurt lower-income families, who spend nearly a quarter of their budgets on energy.

But the economic pain for consumers doesn’t stop there. Businesses, faced with higher energy costs, would pass those costs on to consumers. Higher sticker prices for products lower consumer demand, and as a result, businesses must cut production and jobs.

Supposedly, the goal of a carbon tax is to reduce carbon emissions and do something about global warming, not to raise extra revenue. However, reduction in carbon dioxide emissions would yield negligible benefits in terms of temperature reduction.

Via: The Foundry]

Continue Reading...