Canada to increase carbon tax to $170/tonne by 2030

[ABMax24]

Carbon tax portion on a liter of gasoline will be $0.37.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/carbon-tax-hike-new-climate-plan-1.5837709

 

[begreen]

State tax on gasoline in WA state is 49.4¢ With none of your carbon tax benefits.

 

[ABMax24]

That will be $0.37/liter on top of the $0.355/liter we already pay in fuel tax.

Which is $0.725/liter, or $2.77/gallon, which is much higher than what WA state is.

CO2 reduction might be the only benefit. Job loss, economic recession, reduced competitiveness for Canadian manufacturers, and loss of foreign investment will be the detrimental impacts on every Canadian.

 

[begreen]

Yes, WA state is high, due to the additional federal tax on top of the state tax, but it's per gallon. The per liter tax bumps it up almost 4x.

 

[ABMax24]

Still cheap, our current $0.355/liter is the equivalent of $1.34/gallon.

 

[SpaceBus]

Change is painful. Industry has had decades to reduce carbon without being forced. This is much like the EPA 2020 standards that mfg's complained about despite ample warning. I do agree that this will come at high cost to the consumer. The federal and state governments of the world need to get some stones and hold all of the "robber barons" accountable instead of pushing the cost onto taxpayers.

 

[begreen]

Change can be painful if one doesn't adapt, but exciting if one does. Yes, there will be jobs lost, but there will also be lots of jobs and opportunities created.

I was in the professional photo lab business in the early 80's, but I saw the handwriting on the wall and knew the industry would be going digital sooner or later. In 1985 I bought myself an Amiga and immersed myself in all facets. The early days were a steep learning curve but I stuck with it and within a few years was designing a digital retouching wing for the lab. I kept on learning and jumped into 3D on the PC. Eventually, this led to a new and better-paying career. Change is inevitable, it's how you roll with it.

 

[ABMax24]

The problem is it isn't just industry it's everybody that's affected.

If there was a viable option to replace our vehicles with electrics I'd be looking at it. I've already made energy efficiency upgrades to our house, and it was more efficient than most before we started, and this tax will still hurt. But for most this isn't an option, they simply don't have the income to buy a new vehicle, or spend thousands on upgrading their homes.

I also don't know how our farmers would operate without diesel powered equipment, how some would plant and harvest 20,000+ acres in a matter of weeks. Most run their farm yard on marginal electrical service anyway, never mind trying to charge electric machines even if they existed.

I feel like this is a cart before the horse scenario. I'd feel a lot better if there were alternative options out there, but in many cases these don't exist yet.

I'm not to worried about work, yet, the world still needs oil and gas, and our costs in this immediate area are lower than most. I've been considering a change of career eventually anyway, so to me that's not the worrying part.

 

[begreen]

These are some good points. I thought that the carbon levy didn't apply to dyed diesel or gasoline for farming use. Did I get that wrong? Still, chemical fertilizer is made from natural gas and that has a tax as does the transportation of their goods to market.

 

[ABMax24]

You're correct, for the time being dyed gasoline and diesel used in farm vehicles and farm equipment is exempt. Whether this will continue is the subject of debate though.

Natural gas and propane used for the heating of farm building and for use in grain dryers is not exempt though.

 

[Eureka]

The government steals your money. Then they tell you that you can’t work. Then they say how hard they are fighting for you in congress and it’s the other side preventing some of your money being given back to you. Then they both agree to take 98% of that money for themselves and give you 2% back then tell you that you can’t work again. Your government loves you.

 

[SpaceBus]

The government steals your money. Then they tell you that you can’t work. Then they say how hard they are fighting for you in congress and it’s the other side preventing some of your money being given back to you. Then they both agree to take 98% of that money for themselves and give you 2% back then tell you that you can’t work again. Your government loves you.

Where are you getting the 98% from?! I think you are overpaying

 

[Eureka]

Where are you getting the 98% from?! I think you are overpaying

Sorry, I guessed. My phone won’t divide 600 by 900 billion.

 

[Nealm66]

Man, I can’t imagine that much tax on fuel. That’s criminal

 

[SpaceBus]

Let's say there's a guy in your neighborhood, and also assume you live in a neighborhood for this example, who just won't stop spraying toxic chemicals out of his car. Every day he drives his car to work spraying toxins all over everyone's house, children, cars, yards, etc. then drives home for lunch, drives back to work, drives home from work, then drives all over town just for fun. Now imagine that is everyone, everywhere. This is the reality. How do you stop everyone from toxifying the air that every thing on this planet has to use?


I remember a while back there was a "meme" going around about small candy. Several people were asking the question of "Would you eat out of a bowl of skittles if you knew 5% would cause instant death?" when referring to the human beings fleeing war and death in various parts of the world. Not a scenario I agree with, but many people said they wouldn't eat the skittles and we shouldn't let the immigrants come. Well, what do those people propose we do about all the the people who were born here that are causing illness, injury, and death every day they use fossil fuels? More people die from atmospheric pollution than are killed by Islamic terror groups, by a huge amount.

7 million deaths every year are caused by atmospheric pollution and the only way to stop people from causing the pollution seems to be to price them out of the market.

 

[ABMax24]

Let's say there's a guy in your neighborhood, and also assume you live in a neighborhood for this example, who just won't stop spraying toxic chemicals out of his car. Every day he drives his car to work spraying toxins all over everyone's house, children, cars, yards, etc. then drives home for lunch, drives back to work, drives home from work, then drives all over town just for fun. Now imagine that is everyone, everywhere. This is the reality. How do you stop everyone from toxifying the air that every thing on this planet has to use?


I remember a while back there was a "meme" going around about small candy. Several people were asking the question of "Would you eat out of a bowl of skittles if you knew 5% would cause instant death?" when referring to the human beings fleeing war and death in various parts of the world. Not a scenario I agree with, but many people said they wouldn't eat the skittles and we shouldn't let the immigrants come. Well, what do those people propose we do about all the the people who were born here that are causing illness, injury, and death every day they use fossil fuels? More people die from atmospheric pollution than are killed by Islamic terror groups, by a huge amount.

7 million deaths every year are caused by atmospheric pollution and the only way to stop people from causing the pollution seems to be to price them out of the market.

Although that may be a good analogy, this carbon tax isn't about pollution in that form, it's trying to limit the amount of CO2 being produced. There may be a secondary effect of reducing the emissions of particulates, VOC's, PAH's, NOx, and SOx, however.

Canada lacks consistent regulation and enforcement in regards to air quality, and unfortunately monitoring is so sporadic that there is incentive to cheat or disregard the regulations entirely. Unless something has changed in the last few years we're not even required to keep the emissions equipment on diesel trucks in Alberta, although you could be fined if your truck becomes louder from the delete.

There's an argument to be made that this tax is about the environment and limiting global warming, which it will limit CO2 output. There's also another to be made that this tax is a very effective way to reverse the massive deficits the government has created for itself over the last 5 years.

 

[SpaceBus]

Although that may be a good analogy, this carbon tax isn't about pollution in that form, it's trying to limit the amount of CO2 being produced. There may be a secondary effect of reducing the emissions of particulates, VOC's, PAH's, NOx, and SOx, however.

Canada lacks consistent regulation and enforcement in regards to air quality, and unfortunately monitoring is so sporadic that there is incentive to cheat or disregard the regulations entirely. Unless something has changed in the last few years we're not even required to keep the emissions equipment on diesel trucks in Alberta, although you could be fined if your truck becomes louder from the delete.

There's an argument to be made that this tax is about the environment and limiting global warming, which it will limit CO2 output. There's also another to be made that this tax is a very effective way to reverse the massive deficits the government has created for itself over the last 5 years.

Sounds like it's not the worst deal in the world to have cleaner air and a government that won't operate in a deficit. Maybe you are right that I should have focused on the carbon. It's a steep tax, that I do agree with you, but sometimes it takes a big change to get people to alter their lifestyles. I'm a car enthusiast, but I know plenty of "non car people" that spend their free time just driving around. This is not to mention all of the mass transit, shipping goods, etc. Folks will really be considering getting an electric vehicle. Maine even offers rebates for buying a PHEV or BEV, with the latter being larger rebates.

 

[ABMax24]

Sounds like it's not the worst deal in the world to have cleaner air and a government that won't operate in a deficit. Maybe you are right that I should have focused on the carbon. It's a steep tax, that I do agree with you, but sometimes it takes a big change to get people to alter their lifestyles. I'm a car enthusiast, but I know plenty of "non car people" that spend their free time just driving around. This is not to mention all of the mass transit, shipping goods, etc. Folks will really be considering getting an electric vehicle. Maine even offers rebates for buying a PHEV or BEV, with the latter being larger rebates.

Sure, you and I both have budgets, we spend money in accordance with the amounts we have/earn. The government of Canada is operating differently, they spend with no regard for debt or revenue and worry about the consequences later, well now it's later and they have to come up with revenue schemes to fix the spending problems.

 

[SpaceBus]

Sure, you and I both have budgets, we spend money in accordance with the amounts we have/earn. The government of Canada is operating differently, they spend with no regard for debt or revenue and worry about the consequences later, well now it's later and they have to come up with revenue schemes to fix the spending problems.

I guess the roads will just fix themselves then.

 

[Brian26]

Canada’s $170/Ton Carbon Price Makes Heat Pumps Financial Winners

Canada's $170/Ton Carbon Price Makes Heat Pumps Financial Winners - CleanTechnica

Canada's new $170 per ton carbon price will save commercial building owners who switch from natural gas to heat pumps up to $6,000 per year.

cleantechnica.com

 

[ABMax24]

I guess the roads will just fix themselves then.

Assuming our roads actually get fixed it will be by the provincial government, not the federal government.

 

[Nealm66]

I heard locally they are going to introduce another type of capital gains tax. I suspect there will be a lot of government scrambling to try and recoup after covid. Trying to squeeze it out of fuel like that seems counter productive to heal the already suffering

 

[SpaceBus]

Assuming our roads actually get fixed it will be by the provincial government, not the federal government.

Do you have no federal roadways? Providences cover all of the roads? I was under the impression Canada had it's own "Autostrada/Autobahn/Interstate" system.

 

[SpaceBus]

I heard locally they are going to introduce another type of capital gains tax. I suspect there will be a lot of government scrambling to try and recoup after covid. Trying to squeeze it out of fuel like that seems counter productive to heal the already suffering

Capital gains tax would not be hurting the poor. It would only force those who don't work for a living pay a little more on their passive income.

 

[CaptSpiff]

I guess the roads will just fix themselves then.

Sadly, that same Govt collecting money in the name of "roads" puts only a fraction of those collections into roads or infrastructure.
Even when the legislators create a specific fee or tax to be placed into a "Special Protection Fund", it becomes a glimmering golden pot that's too easy to reach into.

It has already become a bit vague for me, but this past November election our County put a referendum on the ballot to tap into a special fund (set aside I think to buy and preserve open space for the underground aquifer protection), and redirect that money into General Fund expenditures to prevent tax increases next year (due to Covid under collections). It was defeated. Thank you to the original fund authors who wrote strong language requiring the Legislators to "ask the people" before unintended use for that money.