Commentary: Four New Bills to Levy a CarbonTax (April, 2017)

by John McClaughryJohn McClaughry

Not so long ago – 2015 – the carbon tax was all the rage among such organizations as VPIRG, Vermont Natural Resources Council, Conservation Law Foundation, and Vermont Businesses for Social Responsibility.

Their argument was straightforward. Humankind’s penchant for making use of fossil fuels is (so they believe) inexorably driving the planet toward catastrophic warming by the end of this century. The hour is late! “The science is settled”!  Anyone who harbors any doubt is an ignorant yahoo or a tool of the fossil fuel interests!

This must be stopped, and little Vermont must show the world The Way!

The Way, said the “Energy Independent Vermont” coalition, is for the legislature to levy a steadily increasing new “carbon pollution tax” on gasoline, diesel fuel, heating oil, propane and natural gas. This tax ($500 million a year in the tenth year) is designed to price those fuels out of the market for most Vermonters, so they’ll find some other way to drive to work and heat their homes – or move.

Ninety percent of the $2.75 billion to be collected in the first ten years of the carbon tax would subsidize people to pay the now-higher costs of the fuels, reducing the sales and use tax rate, and rebating funds to small businesses.

Ten percent of the proceeds would be skimmed off to support more government programs to weatherize homes and further subsidize renewable energy (notably the solar panel investment tax credit, due to phase out by 2022).

The coalition’s legislative vehicle for this tax attack on cheap energy was H.412. The 2016 House held hearings to allow the supporters of H.412 to make their case. VPIRG sent 55 interns out to canvass the state to build support. The backers predicted that in 2017 (not an election year) the carbon tax would sweep to enactment.

This plan had rough sailing. The new Governor campaigned and won on a pledge to veto a carbon tax. Two sponsors of H.412 were unexpectedly unseated. A carbon tax referendum in Washington state failed 58-42.

So where is this year’s bill to levy a “carbon pollution tax”?  Vanished without a trace.

In its place are four new House bills (with a lot fewer sponsors) to levy a carbon tax. Surprise! It’s no longer a “tax”! Now the tax has been disingenuously rechristened as a “fee”, because “tax” arouses primal instincts among the voters.

 The coalition’s slogan is “tax cuts and climate action”. The four proposals, unlike last year’s H.412, are (supposedly) revenue neutral. That is, you’ll get a “tax cut” (if you’re lucky) to make up for being hammered with… a carbon “fee”.

Rep. Johanna Donovan (D-Burlington) would double the Earned Income Tax Credit, exempt smaller businesses from the corporate income tax, and reduce the lowest-bracket income tax rate for individuals. These “tax reforms” would be paid for with a carbon tax (H.528). She also added that the carbon tax revenue might be needed to cover reductions in Federal aid. Never mind that “revenue neutral” promise!

Rep. Sarah Copeland-Hanzas (D-Bradford) would drop the sales and use tax one percentage point a year for six years, to zero. That revenue loss ($396 million a year) would be replaced by a carbon tax.

Rep. Martin LaLonde (D-South Burlington) would replace the residential school property tax ($589 million a year) with a carbon tax.

Rep. Diana Gonzalez (D-Winooski) proposes to levy a carbon tax and pay all of the revenues out via quarterly dividend checks to individuals and businesses (H.531).

It’s pretty clear that the carbon tax backers are dangling one subsidy or tax reduction after another before the voters, then explaining that – no problem! – the state can recover the lost revenue by enacting a carbon “fee”.

Maybe we just ought to forget about taxing gasoline, diesel fuel, heating oil, propane and natural gas, and look for real tax reform that boosts our state’s economy.

- John McClaughry is vice president of the Ethan Allen Institute (www.ethanallen.org)       

{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }

Jim Bulmer May 1, 2017 at 9:12 pm

When it comes to taxes, why oh why is ALWAYS the Dems who lead the charge???? I know, they are jealously protecting their “TAX & SPEND” mantra.

Reply

Doug Richmond May 2, 2017 at 3:35 am

Nobody uses more fossil fuels than Government at all levels – that is simple. They heat and cool millions of square feet. they own a huge fleet of highway trucks, police cruisers, school busses, “inspectors”, hundreds of pick-up trucks, bureaucrat cars and travel, city busses, their 10’s of thousands of employees all have to comute to work and back 250 days a year.

So how much does the Gov’t budget for carbon tax go up, to make it fair for the rest of us? Obviously an absurd question, isn’t it !!

Reply

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post:

About Us

The Ethan Allen Institute is Vermont’s free-market public policy research and education organization. Founded in 1993, we are one of fifty-plus similar but independent state-level, public policy organizations around the country which exchange ideas and information through the State Policy Network.
Read more...

Latest News

Are We Paying Parents to Keep Kids In Poverty?

by Rob Roper An article in Seven Days reminded us that back in 2007 the Vermont legislature set a goal to cut child poverty in half in ten...

Advocate: Raise Minimum Wage Till It Hurts!

by David Flemming On Sept. 6, David Cooper of the Economic Policy Institute (a Left leaning, Washington-based think tank founded by a coalition of eight labor unions) testified...

Vermont Public Schools Are Failing Most Vulnerable Students

by Rob Roper  The latest standardized test results are out, and the results are pretty disappointing. Overall, scores dropped a bit from where they were last year, and,...

Were Vermonters Voting In New Hampshire?

by Rob Roper The New Hampshire Speaker of the House released data showing that over 5000 people registered to vote in New Hampshire for the 2016 election using...

North Korean Noose Tightens?

by John J. Metzler UNITED NATIONS—Will there be conflict on the Korean peninsula? Shall the long simmering tinderbox finally explode in a nuclear flash? Or shall everybody step...

Video