ManoWhisper
Home
Shows
About
Search
Juno News
- October 23, 2020
Canada's inefficient and ineffective carbon tax
Episode Stats
Length
14 minutes
Words per Minute
142.84358
Word Count
2,006
Sentence Count
86
Summary
Summaries are generated with
gmurro/bart-large-finetuned-filtered-spotify-podcast-summ
.
Transcript
Transcript is generated with
Whisper
(
turbo
).
00:00:00.000
you're tuned in to the Andrew Lawton Show.
00:00:10.380
Let's talk about one of my biggest pet peeves,
00:00:12.680
and I suspect one that I share with a great many of you tuning in to this show,
00:00:16.880
the federal government's carbon tax,
00:00:19.160
or as it likes to call it, I believe, the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act,
00:00:23.060
which is basically the tax on everything,
00:00:26.100
the tax on your fuel, on your gas heating at home,
00:00:28.820
the tax on anything you buy that's been produced in Canada,
00:00:32.300
on anything that's been shipped to you.
00:00:33.680
It is literally the tax on pretty much every stage of the supply chain,
00:00:38.960
and it's supposedly going to help save the world from the evil scourge that is a greenhouse gas,
00:00:44.940
but at the same time, this is also not something that I am as optimistic in,
00:00:50.040
and I know a lot of you aren't either.
00:00:52.200
Forgetting about the environmental side of the discussion here,
00:00:54.960
let's focus on the economic aspect.
00:00:57.500
A new report from the Fraser Institute says that this carbon tax that we have in Canada,
00:01:02.440
and in fact, most of the carbon taxes put in by very similar wealthy nations around the world,
00:01:07.460
don't actually economically meet the criteria necessary to say they are efficient and effective.
00:01:13.940
The report is Carbon Pricing in High-Income OECD Countries.
00:01:17.580
The author is Elmira Ali-Akbari, who's the Associate Director of Natural Resource Studies at the Fraser Institute,
00:01:24.680
and the author of this report.
00:01:26.380
Dr. Ali-Akbari, thank you very much for coming on.
00:01:28.880
Good to speak with you.
00:01:29.920
Thanks, Andrew, for having me.
00:01:32.440
So let's start off with what it was you really set out to find.
00:01:35.600
When you decided to bring together these countries around the world, what were you looking for?
00:01:39.540
So it's widely acknowledged that carbon pricing is the most efficient way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions
00:01:47.780
and address the issue of climate change.
00:01:50.780
However, some key conditions must be met for carbon pricing to be efficient,
00:01:56.600
or in other words, to be the least costly approach for reducing emissions.
00:02:01.560
The first condition is something we call revenue neutrality,
00:02:05.420
and that means that all the revenues from carbon pricing should be used to reduce other costly taxes in the system,
00:02:13.360
such as reducing personal or business income tax rates.
00:02:16.940
The second condition, which is also related to the first one,
00:02:20.780
is that governments should avoid subsidizing substitutes for carbon-emitting activities,
00:02:27.360
such as subsidizing wind and solar energy sources,
00:02:31.960
because subsidizing these substitutes will increase the cost of reducing emissions
00:02:37.600
and will defeat the whole purpose of carbon pricing,
00:02:41.220
which is allowing the market and prices to find the right substitutes.
00:02:48.160
And the third condition is that the introduction of carbon pricing
00:02:52.280
should trigger the repeal of the existing and corresponding emissions-related regulations.
00:03:00.100
We shouldn't be adding carbon pricing on top of existing regulations.
00:03:04.440
So in our recent study, we examined existing carbon pricing policies in 31 high-income OECD countries
00:03:12.840
to determine whether these existing systems meet the key conditions of a well-designed carbon pricing policy.
00:03:22.860
And we found that no country has implemented a well-designed carbon pricing policy.
00:03:29.300
More specifically, no country is using all the revenues from carbon pricing to reduce other taxes,
00:03:37.280
which help with, you know, improving economic growth.
00:03:41.200
Our study found that 74% of the carbon tax revenues collected in 14 countries on average
00:03:53.620
are simply used as general revenues for the government.
00:03:58.540
Only 14% of the carbon tax revenues, again on average, were returned to taxpayers.
00:04:06.280
And this suggests that, you know, existing carbon taxes are mainly used as a tool for governments to raise revenue
00:04:15.080
rather than a mechanism to reduce emissions in the most affordable way possible.
00:04:24.040
In addition, we found that no country that introduced carbon pricing
00:04:28.480
has eliminated the existing and corresponding GHG-related regulations.
00:04:34.780
In fact, most countries have done the opposite,
00:04:38.540
and they have introduced even new regulations following the introduction of carbon pricing.
00:04:45.760
Emission caps, clean fuel standards, renewable power mandates,
00:04:51.160
these are just some examples of these regulations that undermine the cost-effectiveness of carbon pricing policies.
00:04:59.500
I want to talk about some of the specifics you mentioned a moment ago about how the money is spent.
00:05:05.000
But before then, just getting to really the fundamental thesis of this report,
00:05:09.800
am I correct that you're not saying a carbon tax itself is a bad thing,
00:05:13.760
but just there's a right way and a wrong way to do it?
00:05:15.880
Or is it that so many of these mechanisms you think would be required for it to be better designed
00:05:21.040
are just not happening in carbon tax policies that we see around the world?
00:05:25.040
That's a really great point.
00:05:27.120
So, you know, most economists, including me,
00:05:30.000
believe that carbon pricing is the most efficient way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
00:05:34.480
But we believe that the way we are designing and implementing those policies are really important.
00:05:42.500
While tackling climate change is a priority,
00:05:45.720
we should really pay attention to the way that we are designing and implementing these policies.
00:05:50.940
If we have a well-designed carbon pricing policy,
00:05:54.900
we can reduce greenhouse gas emissions in an efficient and productive way.
00:06:01.440
And this is basically what our report is about.
00:06:05.100
So let's talk about how it's spent,
00:06:07.600
because I know this was a big part of the discussion in Canada
00:06:10.900
about whether the money that the government brings in through the carbon tax
00:06:14.640
had to be used for specific emission reduction programs,
00:06:18.880
or whether it could just go into general revenue.
00:06:22.080
Why does that matter?
00:06:23.160
I mean, in the sense of the effect a carbon tax would have on consumers, on industry,
00:06:28.040
it's the same.
00:06:29.140
How does it matter from an efficiency standpoint,
00:06:31.760
how the government spends the money?
00:06:34.460
So the revenue neutrality condition explicitly says that
00:06:40.240
the collected revenue from carbon tax
00:06:43.120
should be used to reduce other costly taxes in the system.
00:06:47.600
And the reason is that, and this is really important,
00:06:50.920
the reason is that, this is a bit technical, but I try to put it simple.
00:06:55.320
When we introduce a carbon tax or any other form of tax,
00:06:58.860
we create an economic inefficiency,
00:07:01.660
which results in something economists call deadweight loss.
00:07:05.520
Deadweight loss is a cost to society
00:07:08.540
resulting from an inefficient allocation of resources within a market.
00:07:14.140
So the idea is that when we are, basically, when we are having a carbon tax,
00:07:18.400
that creates some efficiency costs.
00:07:20.980
So to mitigate that efficiency costs,
00:07:23.180
we should be using revenues from carbon tax to reduce other costly taxes.
00:07:28.900
And, you know, when, for example, in Canada,
00:07:32.220
the federal government is now using its carbon tax revenues to kind of,
00:07:37.680
it's using 90% of its carbon tax revenues to recycle it back to households
00:07:42.940
through issuing lump sum rebates.
00:07:46.780
While issuing lump sum rebates, you know,
00:07:49.880
generates some economic efficiency benefits,
00:07:53.940
but the benefits would be larger, you know, if we reduce other taxes.
00:08:00.720
Many papers have shown that when we use carbon tax revenues
00:08:06.100
and recycle them back to the economy in a form of tax cuts,
00:08:10.160
that would result in greater economic efficiency
00:08:14.860
compared to a case where we just issue lump sum rebates.
00:08:20.060
So, and the intuition is also simple,
00:08:22.360
because remember those taxes, such as income taxes,
00:08:26.200
they discourage work, they discourage investment and savings.
00:08:30.680
So when we reduce those taxes,
00:08:33.160
we can help more with improving economic growth.
00:08:37.940
And that's why, you know, it's really important
00:08:40.560
that all the revenues that we are collecting from carbon pricing
00:08:45.100
should be used to reduce other taxes.
00:08:47.520
And this is not something that the federal government is currently doing.
00:08:51.900
One thing I'm curious about,
00:08:53.520
and in the list of countries against which you've compared Canada,
00:08:57.260
the 14 OECD countries that have implemented carbon taxes,
00:09:01.220
there's a huge range of what that actual tax rate is.
00:09:04.940
I think Japan was the lowest at $3 per ton of CO2 emissions,
00:09:10.260
all the way up to Sweden at, I think, 127 or so,
00:09:14.420
and Canada on the lower end at $15.
00:09:17.140
And I mean, obviously, as a Canadian taxpayer,
00:09:19.420
I just don't like tax in general.
00:09:21.080
So even if it's lower than other countries,
00:09:23.220
I would still say that there's a question of whether it's too high.
00:09:26.820
But are all of these countries comparable?
00:09:29.280
I mean, does Canada, with its industry that's heavily resource-focused,
00:09:33.240
have a place and have an ability to compare it with the economies
00:09:36.980
and greenhouse gas emissions plans in Sweden, Japan, and so on,
00:09:41.420
where they don't have that resource sector as strongly as we do?
00:09:44.700
So we cannot directly compare those taxes among countries due to some reason,
00:09:50.180
because there are differences in those programs.
00:09:52.940
For instance, in terms of, in some countries,
00:09:55.780
some sectors get compensation,
00:09:58.040
or some sectors get exempted from paying carbon taxes.
00:10:01.440
Or in some countries,
00:10:02.880
we see that the taxes apply to all the emissions basically generated in the country,
00:10:10.680
whereas in some other countries, it's only a share of emission,
00:10:14.120
a portion of emission, not the whole, basically, emissions generated.
00:10:20.120
So because of those differences within countries,
00:10:23.520
we cannot really directly compare those carbon taxes between countries.
00:10:29.640
So I guess the big question is, I mean,
00:10:33.380
are we talking about tweaks that could be made to Canada's carbon tax
00:10:38.700
in order to bring it alignment with what you're saying?
00:10:40.800
Or would it really have to go back to the drawing board
00:10:43.080
and start from scratch to qualify as being an effective and efficient plan?
00:10:48.280
Yeah, I think we can make some tweaks or reforms, you know,
00:10:52.220
to make it basically a well-designed carbon pricing policy.
00:10:55.980
Another main issue in Canada is that the federal carbon tax
00:11:01.180
is accompanied by so many other regulatory measures.
00:11:06.400
For example, we have a regulation,
00:11:08.480
and all those regulations have the same target or objective,
00:11:12.440
and that's actually the issue.
00:11:14.560
For example, we have a regulation to phase out coal-fired power plants by 2030.
00:11:20.100
We have a regulation on methane emissions in the oil and gas sector.
00:11:24.980
We have an ethanol regulation to reduce greenhouse gas emissions
00:11:30.800
in the transportation sector.
00:11:33.040
The federal government has also, you know,
00:11:35.520
proposed this sweeping regulation called clean fuel estender
00:11:39.620
to decarbonize fuel use in the country.
00:11:44.300
So all these regulations that have the same objective,
00:11:48.320
they have the same target.
00:11:49.640
When we accompany those regulations with the federal carbon tax,
00:11:54.780
all those regulations are going to increase the cost of reducing emissions
00:12:01.160
without generating any significant marginal benefit.
00:12:07.440
So that's one of the main issues with federal government's carbon tax.
00:12:12.600
The other issue is, as I discussed,
00:12:15.780
is that the way the federal government is recycling its carbon tax revenues
00:12:21.780
is not ideal.
00:12:23.340
This is not what economists have in mind.
00:12:25.760
The federal government should be using carbon tax revenues
00:12:29.360
to reduce other costly taxes,
00:12:32.000
such as personal or business income tax rates.
00:12:35.700
Again, this is not happening in Canada.
00:12:38.180
And we have also seen that the federal government
00:12:40.160
is now using 10% of its carbon tax revenues
00:12:47.160
to basically pursue some environmental goals
00:12:52.460
because that 10% goes to small and medium-sized companies
00:12:58.900
and some other organizations such as schools and hospitals
00:13:04.140
for their energy efficiency programs,
00:13:07.900
meaning that the government is kind of using that revenue
00:13:11.560
to pursue some environmental goals.
00:13:15.180
And this is not something that we should be doing.
00:13:18.760
Again, we should be having a well-designed carbon pricing policy
00:13:25.220
so that we can deliver emission reductions in an efficient way.
00:13:31.880
The report from the Fraser Institute,
00:13:34.040
Carbon Pricing in High-Income OECD Countries,
00:13:37.260
and you can check that out online.
00:13:39.540
We'll have a link in the description box.
00:13:41.600
The author of the report, Dr. Elmira Aliakbari,
00:13:44.400
Associate Director of Natural Resources for the Fraser Institute,
00:13:47.380
joins me on the line now.
00:13:49.120
Dr. Aliakbari, thank you very much for coming on today.
00:13:51.700
Great to speak with you.
00:13:53.680
Thanks for having me.
00:13:55.320
Thanks for listening to The Andrew Lawton Show.
00:13:57.480
Support the program by donating to True North
00:13:59.440
at www.tnc.news.
Link copied!