In 2008, as the-then B.C. Liberal government was poised to bring in Canada’s first carbon tax, the B.C. NDP staunchly opposed it, saying a climate plan should not tax consumers but target major industrial producers such as the gas, oil, cement and aluminum industries.
misinformation aside, tax the industry simply increase their cost and they can still just offset to the consumers no? since consumer don’t have others down the chain to offset that cost. I know on the sheet you can’t list tax as cost, but if the tax come when you buy the fuel, then it becomes part of the cost for say, a truck fleet company. If you tax the oil/fuel companies for how much they produced/shipped, they will have to raise the cost to account for the lost of potential tax to make the balance sheet or projection look nicer. I can’t think of a way to tax carbon and those cost won’t trickle down. But tax at the source would make overall consumption reduced since the gov artificially drive up the cost of that resource.
In short, consumer would still foot the bill, but the goal to reduce carbon based fuel stays the same.
misinformation aside, tax the industry simply increase their cost and they can still just offset to the consumers no? since consumer don’t have others down the chain to offset that cost. I know on the sheet you can’t list tax as cost, but if the tax come when you buy the fuel, then it becomes part of the cost for say, a truck fleet company. If you tax the oil/fuel companies for how much they produced/shipped, they will have to raise the cost to account for the lost of potential tax to make the balance sheet or projection look nicer. I can’t think of a way to tax carbon and those cost won’t trickle down. But tax at the source would make overall consumption reduced since the gov artificially drive up the cost of that resource.
In short, consumer would still foot the bill, but the goal to reduce carbon based fuel stays the same.
The entire point of the tax is to increase the price so that individuals and industries will use alternatives. If companies raise the costs to offset the hit to their profits, assuming the Federal Cons win the next election and remove the federal tax causing the NDP to remove consumer side carbon tax, you as the consumer choose to use less of it or none at all.
Which in the end is exactly the intent of a carbon tax. Make the products cost more so people aren’t so inclined to use them.
Yeah, I am talking in macro scale. The things as consumer can choose to avoid:
- change to non-carbon fuel vehicle or get rid of personal vehicle and choose public transport if available.
- do less things to increase carbon foot print. (like dial the thermo stat and put on more clothing in winter. )
- buy stuff from company that have goals toward carbon neutral.
But as consumer I can’t avoid:
- increased price of grocery/goods from manufacturing or shipping
- the way companies decide to approach their own cost cutting/offsetting.
The important part is, where the carbon tax go? Do they go into hands that actually have goals and plan/milestone to meet? Or they go into some paper green RnD subsidiaries of big oil?
Where the money goes
The money is returned to the province or territory where it is collected. Provinces and territories with their own carbon pricing systems will use their proceeds as they see fit. The Government of Canada does not keep any direct proceeds from pollution pricing.
Consumers also have a choice not to support companies as they see fit. Shopping locally sourced goods goes a very long way.