How Fair Is BC's New Carbon Tax?
And will it make rich people greener?
Wealthy have bigger eco-footprint: think tank.
One problem with carbon taxes is they tend to have the least effect on the people who most need to be affected.
Consider that the wealthiest 10 per cent of Canadians have a transportation-related ecological footprint that is nine times greater than the poorest 10 per cent of Canadians.
Roughly translated, that means that the rich spew out a heck of a lot more greenhouse gases than the poor.
Problem is, the rich are also the ones who can most easily afford to pay carbon taxes -- taxes like the ones in Tuesday's budget, which are intended to stop people from spewing out greenhouse gases.
Who pays to fight global warming?
The statistic on the relative spew rates of the rich and poor comes from research done for the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives by Hugh Mackenzie and Hans Messinger. Their research is quoted in a CCPA report that raises a question that didn't get asked much in the run-up to the budget.
The report, Searching for the Good Life in a Carbon-Neutral B.C.: Meeting B.C.'s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Targets with Fairness and Equity, looks at the impact that fighting climate change might have on society's most vulnerable.
"Meeting our targets will require major transformations in our economy and daily lives," the report states. "We need to make sure, however, that those transformations do not have unintended consequences -- that some groups in society do not pay an unfair price for our choices.
"We must connect the climate challenge to the other great 'inconvenient truth' of our time -- the growing gap between the wealthy and the rest of us. Many climate-change policies may actually increase inequality, unless this is recognized in policy design."
'A greater sting'
So far, the report says, "B.C.'s climate planning has been an exclusive and secretive process that excludes the perspectives of key groups such as labour unions, anti-poverty groups and others."
The report makes the point that climate change is a social issue as well as an environmental one.
"B.C. is starting from a place where inequality -- in terms of incomes, wealth and carbon footprints -- has grown in recent decades," it says. "Just as poor countries will feel a greater sting from climate change in spite of contributing little to the problem, in B.C. those who have been the largest emitters of GHGs [greenhouse gases] are not necessarily the ones who will pay the greatest costs of adjustment -- unless we ensure otherwise."
Poorer families 'slightly ahead'
Marc Lee, senior economist with the CCPA, said Tuesday the budget seems to have done a reasonably good job of considering economic fairness.
On the face of it, he said, "It looks pretty good."
The budget promises to give back the revenues raised by its new carbon tax by giving tax breaks to businesses and individuals, as well as a one-time $100 payout to everyone in the province.
The plan "pretty much would equalize the situation for lower-income families, if not put them slightly ahead," Lee said. "If you were able to make some purchases that increase your energy efficiency, you could save money on balance."
However, he added, there is not a great deal of detail in the budget documents on how lower-income British Columbians will be affected by the plan down the road.
One potential problem is that the carbon tax is scheduled to increase annually by $5 per tonne of greenhouse gas emissions -- about 1.2 cents on a litre of gas or 1.4 cents on a litre of home heating oil. However, it appears that the offsetting tax credit for lower-income persons will go up only by the rate of inflation, said Lee.
'A very clever budget'
Lee said the budget appears to have been carefully crafted to keep business onside while still putting a price on emissions.
"They were obviously feeling a lot of pressure coming from business in the lead-up to the budget and they've doled out some goodies to basically buy off support.... In terms of striking that balance, I think they've done a very good job. It's a very clever budget."
Lee said he would have preferred a higher carbon tax and fewer breaks for business, but "on balance, it's a pretty good budget as far as these guys go. It's certainly the best budget I've seen coming out of the Liberals."
Related Tyee stories:
- Climate Fix: Who Plans? Who Pays?
Labour left off premier's action team. - Will Voters Turn Politicians Green?
Global warming tops polls, but how much heat do officials really feel? - First Nations Leader to Premier: Carbon Credits 'Belong to Us'
FNs not consulted on new emissions target laws: Porter.
![[Tyee]](http://thetyee.cachefly.net/ui/img/ico_fishie.png){kind=small}
Grumpy
20-02-2008
A tax on the poor
Campbell's tax and spend government has again taxed the poor, the wealthy will hardly notice.
The carbon tax will enrich bureaucrats and give politicians more money for dubious projects, that in the end will demand more taxes.
Maybe BC's slogan should be - BC, the most taxed place to be!
puppyg
20-02-2008
Gordon Campbell and his
Gordon Campbell and his "every molecule counts" CO2 blather is enough to give anyone flatulence.
Liquified natural gas (LNG), the latest monster-child of the energy industry, is coming to the west coast. Much too close for comfort is the company, Westpac, whose investors hope to stick a LNG storage and burning facility on Texada Island in the Georgia Strait. (One of Westpac's directors, Geoff Plant, is a former minister in Campbell's BC
Government.)
The plan is to ship the gas to Texada from all over the world: Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria etc.. and, according to company spin, all this will be 'carbon neutral'. By that, they really mean to say that, once the right plan has been concocted:
1) the LNG tankers will arrive every week at Texada at great energy expense after having spewed emissions across thousands of miles of ocean,
2) locals will bear the physical risk, pollution and ferry service disruptions,
3) the gas will be burned for energy sales, mainly for the US market, generating huge profits for Westpac's investors, and
4) the Provincial Government will declare Westpac to be a net non-polluter because it has given a portion of its profits to Campbell's carbon-offset fund.
Tough luck for the people of Texada, who have overwhelming rejected the LNG proposal. The Government actually went so far as to declare it illegal for Texadans to host a referendum on the issue. Locals drew up their own petition instead.
Among the BC Government's other initiatives (100% downloadable to the tax payer, of course) is one going after schools. In its quest to meet Mr. Campbell's net emission targets, the Provincial Government will be using its newly developed SMARTTool software to calculate how much schools must pay to offset carbon generated from school buses, etc., all the while urging children to recycle and reduce their consumption.
Perhaps they could also turn off the heat in classrooms and shake down the kids for their lunch money. It is, after all, about the revenue stream.
No doubt, the Alberta Government will do something similar with their schools while fast tracking oil sands (soon to be the largest carbon polluter on Earth).
If this spin job, this smokescreen, seems fantastic, that's because it is. In the eyes of the BC Premier, it is we, the children, who are the problem, not the energy corporations. (And, as a bonus, every tax lash across little bottoms - ours, not theirs - will be helping Olympic athletes pursue their dreams.)
Gordon Campbell claims he wants BC to go green, but he shows, once again, that he is better at putting his fingers on the cash than his thumb on the problem.
Ronald Pagan
20-02-2008
Since when should poor
Since when should poor people be exempt from abating GHG emissions?
realisticman
20-02-2008
This is fun
Tom Barrett
I wonder who figured that one out. This is pure convoluted comedy. The CCPA loves this budget and congratulates The Liberals. The super-green Sightline Institute in Seattle is gobsmacked and stands and salutes Gordon Campbell.
http://www.sightline.org/daily_score/archive/2008/02/19/bc-s-carbon-tax-shift/
I wonder where this leaves the NDP on the 'green' file?
Skywalker
20-02-2008
Forget the $100 bribe and the pennies in tax cuts
For the average person this increase in taxes will keep growing. This is another money grab with the government trying to pretend it is for a green cause. We are all suppose to be able to afford to go out and buy an expensive hybrid to replace our means of transport, pay more for every product we need to live because it is trucked to our communities, more to heat our homes and all that won't cost more than a one time $100 bribe. Sure..
I think even the Suzuki Inst. needs a reality check as much as Campbell with his 54% raise. Maybe David and Gordon can do all that but what about us ordinary folk.
tricia58
21-02-2008
Carbon Tax???
Well I am not impressed with the budget. The low end of the pay scale cannot afford to buy the items to save on the sales tax end of it. Greener items are more costly than those not so green. Also it leaves it up to the individual to cut green house gases. The government does nothing to help that. Everyone needs to heat their homes in the winter regardless of the cost. I would rather see that carbon tax used then to give rebates for replacing windows, furnaces and such. That would reach a lot more people and help them become more green.
As for the $100 per person there are better uses for that little amount of money. Our health care, education and housing to name a few could use that money. This government really is only looking after the rich. If you can afford the expensive gas and home heating, private health care, private education etc then you are smiling.