PDA

View Full Version : Environment Congressional Research Office: Carbon tax would halve the deficit.


Direckshun
09-27-2012, 11:42 AM
I know a carbon tax is unpopular amongst the conservatives here, but if you're a conservative concerned with global warming and the massive deficit before us, this is a two-birds-one-stone solution. Dramatic, effective, and solvent.

http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/258773-report-carbon-tax-could-halve-the-deficit-

Report: Carbon tax could halve deficit
By Ben Geman
09/26/12 12:38 PM ET

Taxing carbon emissions could raise enough money to eventually cut the deficit in half, but policymakers would face tough questions about whether to use the cash to brighten the fiscal outlook or tackle other needs, a report finds.

Carbon tax proposals to help battle climate change are politically dead in Congress right now. But the Congressional Research Service overview nonetheless arrives at a time of renewed interest in the idea from some policy wonks, Democrats, and former GOP lawmakers.

The report finds that imposing an escalating fee that starts at $20 per metric ton could reduce the projected 10-year budget deficit by more than 50 percent, from $2.3 trillion to $1.1 trillion.That estimate relies on the Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO) “baseline” deficit projection.

But the report notes that the same carbon tax would have a much smaller impact on the deficit — cutting it about 12 percent — under CBO’s “alternative” scenario that forecasts a much bigger shortfall.

The report, relying on CBO analysis of carbon costs under a hypothetical cap-and-trade program, estimates that the escalating $20-per-ton tax could raise $88 billion in 2012, rising to $154 billion in 2021.

However, deficit reduction is just one possible use for the cash.

CRS notes that policymakers would face “key trade-offs” in weighing whether to minimize the costs of the tax on society overall “versus alleviating the costs borne by subgroups in the U.S. population or specific domestic industries.”

“Economic studies indicate that using carbon tax revenues to offset reductions in existing taxes – labor, income and investment – could yield the greatest benefit to the economy overall. However, the approaches that yield the largest overall benefit often impose disproportionate costs on lower-income households,” the report finds.

The report delves into other potential uses instead of devoting all carbon tax money to attacking the deficit.

“If Congress were to consider a carbon tax system, a key debate would likely involve the degree to which carbon tax revenues would be returned to households to alleviate the expected financial burden imposed by the carbon tax,” it states.

Also, the tax could hurt energy-intensive manufacturing and other industries that face competition from abroad, so they might need a piece of the pie.

“Policymakers could alleviate this burden through carbon tax revenue distribution or through a border adjustment mechanism. Both approaches may entail trade concerns,” the report notes.

The notion of a carbon tax also raises other tough questions, such as whether it’s levied on sources of fuel like oil production and coal mining, or other points, such as emissions from oil refineries and power plants that burn coal and natural gas, or “downstream” energy uses such as industrial plants and vehicles.

For now, it’s an abstract debate as climate legislation remains frozen on Capitol Hill, where Republicans are seeking to roll back the Environmental Protection Agency’s existing power to regulate carbon emissions.


Cap-and-trade or carbon tax bills face gigantic political hurdles in the current Congress and likely the next one, too.

CRS notes — in somewhat clinical terms — that carbon tax proposals would face strong pushback from powerful industries.

“Certain stakeholders are likely to exercise strong opposition to a carbon tax. These include energy-intensive manufacturers, farmers, and regional energy interests — especially those whose asset values may fall with expected impacts on profitability of owned or leased coal and oil resources,” the report states.

However, there remains an undercurrent of interest in a carbon tax, which advocates call a more straightforward and efficient way to address carbon emissions than cap-and-trade proposals.

Supporters and policy analysts have held a series of meetings to discuss the idea, which has support from some lawmakers.

Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) introduced carbon tax legislation in August.

Reps. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and Ed Markey (D-Mass.) joined with former GOP Reps. Sherwood Boehlert and Wayne Gilchrest in a February Washington Post op-ed that said, “We could slash our debt by making power plants and oil refineries pay for the carbon emissions that endanger our health and environment.”

It called broadly for a “market mechanism such as the sale of carbon allowances or a fee on carbon pollution to lower emissions and increase revenue.”

In addition, former GOP Rep. Bob Inglis (R-S.C.) is using a new role at George Mason University to advocate for his idea of a “revenue-neutral” carbon tax under which taxes on emissions would be offset by reductions in other rates.

SNR
09-27-2012, 11:43 AM
This would hurt the poor and middle class.

Not very Democratic.

KILLER_CLOWN
09-27-2012, 11:50 AM
A tax on breathing would whole the deficit.

bevischief
09-27-2012, 12:43 PM
We all know they would use the money to expand some new social program.

FishingRod
09-27-2012, 01:00 PM
What if Congress just quit spending more than they bring in?

Seraphim
09-27-2012, 02:24 PM
What if Congress just quit spending more than they bring in?

Bullocks! Just keep taxing so you can keep spending. Round and round we go baby!

Donger
09-27-2012, 02:33 PM
So, this amounts to a tax increase on everyone who uses coal-generated electricity?

Brock
09-27-2012, 02:33 PM
No thanks.

Brock
09-27-2012, 02:34 PM
I don't know how freaking dumb you have to be to not understand who's going to pay for that.

Radar Chief
09-27-2012, 02:46 PM
What if Congress just quit spending more than they bring in?

Even with a crap economy this government will take in ~$3Trillion this year and they can’t spend that responsibly.
The issue isn’t income.

Iowanian
09-27-2012, 03:22 PM
This is a government office fart jar.

patteeu
09-27-2012, 03:58 PM
I know a carbon tax is unpopular amongst the conservatives here, but if you're a conservative concerned with global warming and the massive deficit before us, this is a two-birds-one-stone solution. Dramatic, effective, and solvent.

I could be persuaded to support a carbon tax, but not the kind you want.

1. A carbon tax on top of all the other taxes we already pay (which is what you're talking about if you think you're going to halve the defict) would probably cripple our economy and in any event would be seriously anti-growth. That would be a terrible thing to do and would probably end up preventing us from achieving that deficit reduction even if Congress had the discipline to avoid spending the new revenue (which we both know is a pipe dream).

2. I don't care about global warming and won't care about it until countries like China and India announce plans to cripple their own development in order to save the world.

3. I'd support a carbon tax because of all the defense dollars we must spend to protect our access to oil. Right now, those expenditures are not reflected in the price of oil which distorts the oil market. Removing distortions in the oil market would also remove a distortion in the alternative fuel market and give the right incentive to innovators who are working to get us off of oil without the heavy handed government intervention characteristic of the Obama administration.

4. MOST IMPORTANTLY, any new carbon tax would have to completely replace one of our other taxes. A shift from the income tax to a combination consumption tax and carbon tax would be fine by me. It should probably be revenue neutral as a starting point to maximize the benefit to the economy and then we can adjust the rates from there.

ChiTown
09-27-2012, 04:02 PM
Jesus, this is just the tip of the iceberg of the shit we are going to see in the next 4 years. Instead of creating wealth to generate new tax, we are going to tax the ever-living fuck out of everything imaginable. Get ready, because that tax train will get rolling Jan 2013.

stonedstooge
09-27-2012, 04:35 PM
Let the rich fuckers pay for it

vailpass
09-27-2012, 04:44 PM
The report delves into other potential uses instead of devoting all carbon tax money to attacking the deficit.

“If Congress were to consider a carbon tax system, a key debate would likely involve the degree to which carbon tax revenues would be returned to households to alleviate the expected financial burden imposed by the carbon tax,” it states.

Also, the tax could hurt energy-intensive manufacturing and other industries that face competition from abroad, so they might need a piece of the pie.

“Policymakers could alleviate this burden through carbon tax revenue distribution or through a border adjustment mechanism. Both approaches may entail trade concerns,” the report notes.

So they would impose a burdensome tax on citizens and businesses then return that tax money to alleviate the burdens caused by the taxation? Meanwhile they've negatively impacted those industry's ability to compete?
Jesus H. Christ.

ChiTown
09-27-2012, 04:53 PM
The report delves into other potential uses instead of devoting all carbon tax money to attacking the deficit.

“If Congress were to consider a carbon tax system, a key debate would likely involve the degree to which carbon tax revenues would be returned to households to alleviate the expected financial burden imposed by the carbon tax,” it states.

Also, the tax could hurt energy-intensive manufacturing and other industries that face competition from abroad, so they might need a piece of the pie.

“Policymakers could alleviate this burden through carbon tax revenue distribution or through a border adjustment mechanism. Both approaches may entail trade concerns,” the report notes.

So they would impose a burdensome tax on citizens and businesses then return that tax money to alleviate the burdens caused by the taxation? Meanwhile they've negatively impacted those industry's ability to compete?
Jesus H. Christ.

Straight from the Department of Redundancy Department...............

CoMoChief
09-27-2012, 04:54 PM
WTF in their right mind would tax the fucking air?

yeah pay your money to the fucking banks and fucking Al fucking Gore.

FUCK THAT SHIT.....If ANY OF YOU FUCKING IMBICLES even think this is a good idea, go take your families and drive off a cliff.

Radar Chief
09-27-2012, 04:55 PM
Jesus, this is just the tip of the iceberg of the shit we are going to see in the next 4 years. Instead of creating wealth to generate new tax, we are going to tax the ever-living **** out of everything imaginable. Get ready, because that tax train will get rolling Jan 2013.

Yes, the British will show us how to be properly taxed.

CoMoChief
09-27-2012, 04:55 PM
I know a carbon tax is unpopular amongst the conservatives here, but if you're a conservative concerned with global warming and the massive deficit before us, this is a two-birds-one-stone solution. Dramatic, effective, and solvent.

http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/258773-report-carbon-tax-could-halve-the-deficit-

Report: Carbon tax could halve deficit
By Ben Geman
09/26/12 12:38 PM ET

Taxing carbon emissions could raise enough money to eventually cut the deficit in half, but policymakers would face tough questions about whether to use the cash to brighten the fiscal outlook or tackle other needs, a report finds.

Carbon tax proposals to help battle climate change are politically dead in Congress right now. But the Congressional Research Service overview nonetheless arrives at a time of renewed interest in the idea from some policy wonks, Democrats, and former GOP lawmakers.

The report finds that imposing an escalating fee that starts at $20 per metric ton could reduce the projected 10-year budget deficit by more than 50 percent, from $2.3 trillion to $1.1 trillion.That estimate relies on the Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO) “baseline” deficit projection.

But the report notes that the same carbon tax would have a much smaller impact on the deficit — cutting it about 12 percent — under CBO’s “alternative” scenario that forecasts a much bigger shortfall.

The report, relying on CBO analysis of carbon costs under a hypothetical cap-and-trade program, estimates that the escalating $20-per-ton tax could raise $88 billion in 2012, rising to $154 billion in 2021.

However, deficit reduction is just one possible use for the cash.

CRS notes that policymakers would face “key trade-offs” in weighing whether to minimize the costs of the tax on society overall “versus alleviating the costs borne by subgroups in the U.S. population or specific domestic industries.”

“Economic studies indicate that using carbon tax revenues to offset reductions in existing taxes – labor, income and investment – could yield the greatest benefit to the economy overall. However, the approaches that yield the largest overall benefit often impose disproportionate costs on lower-income households,” the report finds.

The report delves into other potential uses instead of devoting all carbon tax money to attacking the deficit.

“If Congress were to consider a carbon tax system, a key debate would likely involve the degree to which carbon tax revenues would be returned to households to alleviate the expected financial burden imposed by the carbon tax,” it states.

Also, the tax could hurt energy-intensive manufacturing and other industries that face competition from abroad, so they might need a piece of the pie.

“Policymakers could alleviate this burden through carbon tax revenue distribution or through a border adjustment mechanism. Both approaches may entail trade concerns,” the report notes.

The notion of a carbon tax also raises other tough questions, such as whether it’s levied on sources of fuel like oil production and coal mining, or other points, such as emissions from oil refineries and power plants that burn coal and natural gas, or “downstream” energy uses such as industrial plants and vehicles.

For now, it’s an abstract debate as climate legislation remains frozen on Capitol Hill, where Republicans are seeking to roll back the Environmental Protection Agency’s existing power to regulate carbon emissions.


Cap-and-trade or carbon tax bills face gigantic political hurdles in the current Congress and likely the next one, too.

CRS notes — in somewhat clinical terms — that carbon tax proposals would face strong pushback from powerful industries.

“Certain stakeholders are likely to exercise strong opposition to a carbon tax. These include energy-intensive manufacturers, farmers, and regional energy interests — especially those whose asset values may fall with expected impacts on profitability of owned or leased coal and oil resources,” the report states.

However, there remains an undercurrent of interest in a carbon tax, which advocates call a more straightforward and efficient way to address carbon emissions than cap-and-trade proposals.

Supporters and policy analysts have held a series of meetings to discuss the idea, which has support from some lawmakers.

Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) introduced carbon tax legislation in August.

Reps. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and Ed Markey (D-Mass.) joined with former GOP Reps. Sherwood Boehlert and Wayne Gilchrest in a February Washington Post op-ed that said, “We could slash our debt by making power plants and oil refineries pay for the carbon emissions that endanger our health and environment.”

It called broadly for a “market mechanism such as the sale of carbon allowances or a fee on carbon pollution to lower emissions and increase revenue.”

In addition, former GOP Rep. Bob Inglis (R-S.C.) is using a new role at George Mason University to advocate for his idea of a “revenue-neutral” carbon tax under which taxes on emissions would be offset by reductions in other rates.

Fuck you dickhead.

Seriously.......go fuck yourself if you think this is a good idea.

SNR
09-27-2012, 05:04 PM
RAWR DIRECKSHUN SUCKS AIDSY MIDGET PENIS

HonestChieffan
09-27-2012, 05:07 PM
Huge redistribution move.

“If Congress were to consider a carbon tax system, a key debate would likely involve the degree to which carbon tax revenues would be returned to households to alleviate the expected financial burden imposed by the carbon tax,” it states.


Pure and simple redistribution and vote buying forever.

Mr. Plow
09-27-2012, 05:08 PM
The report delves into other potential uses instead of devoting all carbon tax money to attacking the deficit.

“If Congress were to consider a carbon tax system, a key debate would likely involve the degree to which carbon tax revenues would be returned to households to alleviate the expected financial burden imposed by the carbon tax,” it states.

Also, the tax could hurt energy-intensive manufacturing and other industries that face competition from abroad, so they might need a piece of the pie.

“Policymakers could alleviate this burden through carbon tax revenue distribution or through a border adjustment mechanism. Both approaches may entail trade concerns,” the report notes.

So they would impose a burdensome tax on citizens and businesses then return that tax money to alleviate the burdens caused by the taxation? Meanwhile they've negatively impacted those industry's ability to compete?
Jesus H. Christ.


Hey, do you have $20 I can borrow? I owe vailpass $20 and I need to get him paid back.

DementedLogic
09-27-2012, 05:11 PM
I don't know how freaking dumb you have to be to not understand who's going to pay for that.

These are the same people that believe that deficit spending is the way to get out of debt.

CoMoChief
09-27-2012, 05:16 PM
This kinda shit really makes my ****ing blood boil.

I'm in the mood to fight someone.......and if i was in a political argument w/ Direkshun about this.....it'd come to blows and he'd be down for the ****ing count.


****ing liberal douchebag. Taxing the ****ing air. WTF is wrong with you pussy?

You would think taxing every step that you took would be a good idea if Obama told you it was a good idea....think about it.....you could wear a govt issued step counter...and it'd tax you for every step you took!!!! THINK ABOUT IT....WE'D BE OUT OF A NATIONAL DEBT CRISIS IN NO TIME...WE'D HAVE AN IMPROVED ECONOMY!!!!FAN****INGTASTIC!!!!

HonestChieffan
09-27-2012, 05:38 PM
This kinda shit really makes my ****ing blood boil.

I'm in the mood to fight someone.......and if i was in a political argument w/ Direkshun about this.....it'd come to blows and he'd be down for the ****ing count.


****ing liberal douchebag. Taxing the ****ing air. WTF is wrong with you pussy?

You would think taxing every step that you took would be a good idea if Obama told you it was a good idea....think about it.....you could wear a govt issued step counter...and it'd tax you for every step you took!!!! THINK ABOUT IT....WE'D BE OUT OF A NATIONAL DEBT CRISIS IN NO TIME...WE'D HAVE AN IMPROVED ECONOMY!!!!FAN****INGTASTIC!!!!

All you righties do is want to cut spending. Racists.

Direckshun
09-27-2012, 05:40 PM
WTF in their right mind would tax the ****ing air?

yeah pay your money to the ****ing banks and ****ing Al ****ing Gore.

**** THAT SHIT.....If ANY OF YOU ****ING IMBICLES even think this is a good idea, go take your families and drive off a cliff.

**** you dickhead.

Seriously.......go **** yourself if you think this is a good idea.

This kinda shit really makes my ****ing blood boil.

I'm in the mood to fight someone.......and if i was in a political argument w/ Direkshun about this.....it'd come to blows and he'd be down for the ****ing count.

****ing liberal douchebag. Taxing the ****ing air. WTF is wrong with you pussy?

You would think taxing every step that you took would be a good idea if Obama told you it was a good idea....think about it.....you could wear a govt issued step counter...and it'd tax you for every step you took!!!! THINK ABOUT IT....WE'D BE OUT OF A NATIONAL DEBT CRISIS IN NO TIME...WE'D HAVE AN IMPROVED ECONOMY!!!!FAN****INGTASTIC!!!!

LMAO

RAWR DIRECKSHUN SUCKS AIDSY MIDGET PENIS

ROFL

stonedstooge
09-27-2012, 05:41 PM
Who orders studies done by the Congressional Research Office?

Brock
09-27-2012, 06:00 PM
Fits right in with the oblivious "tax corporations more, durr" argument.

vailpass
09-27-2012, 06:45 PM
Hey, do you have $20 I can borrow? I owe vailpass $20 and I need to get him paid back.

Perfect illustration.

J Diddy
09-27-2012, 07:09 PM
This kinda shit really makes my ****ing blood boil.

I'm in the mood to fight someone.......and if i was in a political argument w/ Direkshun about this.....it'd come to blows and he'd be down for the ****ing count.


****ing liberal douchebag. Taxing the ****ing air. WTF is wrong with you pussy?

You would think taxing every step that you took would be a good idea if Obama told you it was a good idea....think about it.....you could wear a govt issued step counter...and it'd tax you for every step you took!!!! THINK ABOUT IT....WE'D BE OUT OF A NATIONAL DEBT CRISIS IN NO TIME...WE'D HAVE AN IMPROVED ECONOMY!!!!FAN****INGTASTIC!!!!

ROFL

How them clown shoes fit?

petegz28
09-27-2012, 07:31 PM
The report delves into other potential uses instead of devoting all carbon tax money to attacking the deficit.

“If Congress were to consider a carbon tax system, a key debate would likely involve the degree to which carbon tax revenues would be returned to households to alleviate the expected financial burden imposed by the carbon tax,” it states.

Also, the tax could hurt energy-intensive manufacturing and other industries that face competition from abroad, so they might need a piece of the pie.

“Policymakers could alleviate this burden through carbon tax revenue distribution or through a border adjustment mechanism. Both approaches may entail trade concerns,” the report notes.

So they would impose a burdensome tax on citizens and businesses then return that tax money to alleviate the burdens caused by the taxation? Meanwhile they've negatively impacted those industry's ability to compete?
Jesus H. Christ.

And if they give the money back to the people then what goes towards the deficit?

HonestChieffan
09-27-2012, 07:40 PM
And if they give the money back to the people then what goes towards the deficit?

Re
Dis
tri
bu
tion



What deficit? Obama is a low spend guy and everyone has jobs. Dont you keep up with facts?

Dayze
09-27-2012, 08:31 PM
A sun tax would rid us of the deficit

qabbaan
09-27-2012, 08:35 PM
zomg! Tax everything on the periodic table then! I'm voting 'bama!!

mikey23545
09-27-2012, 08:37 PM
Sweet Jeebus, we need to get these insane fuckers out of office before it's too late.

Chiefspants
09-27-2012, 09:20 PM
We would also lose thousands of manufacturing jobs. C'mon, I lean to the left as well, but this is a jobs killer if there ever was one.

LOCOChief
09-27-2012, 09:21 PM
Sweet Jeebus, we need to get these insane ****ers out of office before it's too late.

it is too late.

KILLER_CLOWN
09-27-2012, 11:24 PM
Who orders studies done by the Congressional Research Office?

Top Paid Congressional advocates.

KILLER_CLOWN
09-27-2012, 11:25 PM
Hold your breaths, you may not be able to afford to breathe anymore.

Seraphim
09-28-2012, 01:06 PM
This foolishness is why Romney would be better.

J Diddy
09-28-2012, 01:09 PM
This foolishness is why Romney would be better.

You obviously didn't read the bottom if you think this is all Dems.

Seraphim
09-28-2012, 01:13 PM
You obviously didn't read the bottom if you think this is all Dems.

I'm sure it's not all Dems, but I guarantee more Republicans would be opposed to this than Democrats, ergo it will never pass.

Garcia Bronco
09-28-2012, 01:32 PM
"You can heal the symptoms but not affect the cause, it's quite a bit like trying to heal a gunshot wound with gauze"

alnorth
09-28-2012, 01:41 PM
So, this amounts to a tax increase on everyone who uses coal-generated electricity?

Yeah, I'm confused as to why the OP is treating this like a brilliant revolutionary idea.

If we increased income taxes by another 15% for all brackets, that would probably halve the deficit pretty quickly. Doesn't mean we're going to be able to do that.

KILLER_CLOWN
09-28-2012, 01:42 PM
"You can heal the symptoms but not affect the cause, it's quite a bit like trying to heal a gunshot wound with gauze"

The symptoms are a collapsing economy, the cure is a nuclear device known as carbon tax. Samuel L. Bronkowitz presents Now that's Armageddon!

<iframe width="854" height="510" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/sm8txY989Iw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>