Quote:
Originally Posted by Slava
^ Res, first let me say that is a great post. You've obviously done a lot of digging here and I will admit that I haven't had a chance to review each of these links!
That being said, it looks like the thing missing from the equation here is the tax cuts that are embedded into the program. No one is arguing that there won't be some increased cost for consumers...I think that speaks for itself in the program. The plan does call for enormous tax reductions however to offset these costs.
This also forms the main reason that Albertans are not shafted with this plan; the increased costs are spread through out the country (from the emitters), and everyone across the country uses virtually the same amount of energy, and all get the same tax breaks as well.
|
Tax cuts will not offset the lower income that people will be making in this province after the carbon tax lowers netbacks at many of our province's employers who provide high income jobs. The corporate tax breaks will do nothing for emerging companies that do not pay tax as they do not make taxible income yet. The carbon tax proposal does nothing to help them because they will have a higher cost base without any 'savings'. Just like a balanced budget in of itself doesn't necessarily indicate the best use of capital (as you can have a high taxing and high spending regime), a "revenue neutral" tax doesn't necessarily mean the net effect on people will be zero or even close to it. Ultimately what it will work out to is less income, higher costs, but we get a token tax savings that doesn't make up the difference of both.