…Congress Introduces Carbon Tax…
Rep. Theodore Deutch, (D-FL) introduced H.R.7173: Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act of 2018.
“This bill amends the Internal Revenue Code to impose a fee on the carbon content of fuels, including crude oil, natural gas, coal, or any other product derived from those fuels that will be used so as to emit greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.”
“The fee is imposed on the producers or importers of the fuels and is equal to the greenhouse gas content of the fuel multiplied by the carbon fee rate. The rate begins at $15 in 2019, increases by $10 each year, and is subject to further adjustments based on the progress in meeting specified emissions reduction targets. The bill also imposes a specified fee on fluorinated greenhouse gases.”
“The bill includes:
- exemptions for fuels used for agricultural or non-emitting purposes,
- rebates for facilities that capture and sequester carbon dioxide, and
- border adjustment provisions that require certain fees or refunds for carbon-intensive products that are exported or imported.
“The fees must be deposited into a Carbon Dividend Trust Fund and used for administrative expenses and dividend payments to U.S. citizens or lawful residents. The fees must be decommissioned when emissions levels and monthly dividend payments fall below specified levels.”
A reading of the text indicates:
- Payments from the Carbon Dividend Trust Fund are taxable.
- The carbon fee is to end when greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions have been reduced by approximately 90% from 2015 levels.
- The first target year will be the year 2022 and will require a reduction in GHG emissions of 5% of 2015 emissions. The 5% annual target continues until 2031 when the target is reduced to 2.5%.
- The carbon fee in 2022 would be $55 if the Bill is enacted during 2019.
US Senators Chris Coons (D-Del.) and Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) introduced a similar bill in the Senate.
Legislation imposing a carbon fee on GHG emissions in the United States has been introduced in Congress and is currently in various Committees. It has sponsors from both parties.
It should be noted that the bills were introduced in the last Congress and will need to be reintroduced. This is likely to take place soon given the rhetoric of new members of Congress.
At present, all U.S. citizens will be eligible for payments from the Carbon Trust Fund, less administrative expenses. Payments will be taxable.
Past discussions had indicated low-income persons would receive the bulk of payments, though the Bill does not indicate this.
Carbon fees on GHG emissions will result in higher costs for all products stemming from the use of carbon fuels. The cost of electricity will obviously increase, however building and construction costs and any product that uses energy or materials dependent on energy, for example, plastic bottled water, will also increase.
Housing costs will rise because of higher costs for materials, which will surprise the supporters of the Green New Deal.
The Bill demonstrates that the effort to control energy production and use, and to impose more government regulations on Americans, has support in Congress.
It is part of the Green New Deal tied to Socialism. See Climate Change and Socialism
. . .
That is as last Congress
Thanks, I will make it clear the Bills need to be reintroduced.
One of the most insulting bills ever. These guys are now paleo climatologist? I say tax the crops they will flourish
Thanks for your comments.
Taxes of any kind stifle the economy. A carbon tax will cause even greater harm.
In New Zealand where we have a so-called competitive electricity market, the effect of a carbon tax is to increase the cost of power from alcohol fired power station. In most cases, this will increase the wholesale price which everyone gets. So our hydropower stations which provide 65% of the power, will make windfall profits. So virtually all of the generators will have a powerful inducement to make sure that our coal fired station continues to burn coal. And, of course, the poor consumers will pay more.
Thanks for your comment. Can you expand on the meaning of alcohol power station?
I goofed! COAL FIRED!
Note: I use a voice recognition system. It is not perfect and neither is my editing. Therefore you may see some strange words that sound roughly like what I really said and some short words that I did not say.
Maybe I’m just a little thick headed, but as I see it the CAGW crowd has been at this for over 40 years (Charney report in 1979) and they do not have a solid handle on their favorite flag: increased atmospheric CO2 causes a similar increase in global average temps. Without that rock solid link, how do they “know” that decreasing atmospheric CO2 will cause a decrease in temp? Windmills and PV have been installed at breathtaking speed, but the Keeling curve still goes up at about the same (or even greater) rate than it did a decade ago. How can that be? The CO2 is some 40% greater now than in 1999, yet the temps have budged very little. What is holding them in check? Certainly not CO2. So, if they hugely tax the CO2 there will be more money to send to the lower economic groups. This will help their re-election hopes, but do nothing to change the slope of the Keeling curve. If after a decade or two the CO2 doesn’t start falling, then what? And the real point is to reduce average temperature. To me, this has disaster written all over it. Temperature might decline because the sun meddles less in our atmosphere, or any of a number of competing reasons.
Thanks for your comment.
Good questions. Why are temperatures essentially constant while atmospheric CO2 continues to rise.