省碳税今天正式取消

[Calgary]

汽油价格立刻下降了,

[TORONTO VANCOUVER]

扯蛋，油价从60跌倒53. 汽油价应该是反涨或坚挺。

[jo jo]

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opin...-claims-to-be/

No, Alberta didn’t scrap its carbon tax

Trevor Tombe is an associate professor of economics at the University of Calgary and research fellow at the School of Public Policy.

Many Albertans might believe they woke up on May 30 to a province free of carbon taxes. It’s an understandable perception: The United Conservative Party, after all, won the last election in no small part because of its opposition to such policies. A vow to “scrap the job-killing carbon tax” resonated with many, and Premier Jason Kenney has styled himself “Canada’s fiercest carbon-tax killer.”

There’s just one problem. In action, Mr. Kenney is no such assassin – and his government won’t scrap the tax, certainly not any time soon.

I’m not referring to the federal carbon tax here. That’s not yet in place in Alberta, and it faces an uncertain future at the ballot box in October. Instead, I’m referring to Alberta’s own provincial carbon tax, one that’s not being opposed, let alone nixed, by the UCP government.

Alberta will continue to levy a carbon tax on more emissions than any other province: specifically, a $30-a-tonne charge on nearly 140 million tonnes of greenhouse-gas emissions from the province’s largest emitters, including oil-sands projects, power generators, petrochemical facilities and more. This represents half of Alberta’s emissions and roughly one-fifth of Canada’s total.

In short, a carbon tax remains central to Alberta’s climate policy, even under the UCP. In a political environment lacking in nuance and rife with partisanship and hyperbolic rhetoric, this fact deserves attention.

Yes, Bill 1 – An Act to Repeal the Carbon Tax – removes the carbon tax from certain fuels used daily by many individuals and businesses. Gasoline consequently costs roughly 7 cents a litre less, and natural gas for home heating is cheaper by $1.51 a gigajoule.

Emissions from sources covered by the fuel levy, though, amount to a quarter of Alberta’s total. Instead of repealing “the” carbon tax, Bill 1 repealed “a” carbon tax and kept the other, larger one – effectively reducing Alberta’s carbon-tax coverage from three-quarters of emissions to roughly one-half.

The government won’t say this, of course. The carbon tax they favour goes by the name “compliance price” within the Carbon Competitiveness Incentive Regulation.

Theirs is not a full embrace, to be sure. They plan to make changes soon, having outlined details in their election platform.

First, they’ll change its name to the Technology Innovation and Emissions Reduction regime. Second, they’ll lower the tax rate from $30 to $20 a tonne and change how the revenue is spent – that is, the government won’t use the proceeds to lower other taxes, but will instead fund technology initiatives to the tune of nearly $600-million by 2020-21, and establish a marketing "war room.” While many economists, myself included, tend to favour lower income taxes over tech subsidies, others, such as the government, disagree. Fair enough.

Finally, the UCP carbon tax will change, but continue, subsidies for large emitters. This is important. Carbon taxes do raise costs, which in our open and trade-exposed economy raises legitimate competitiveness concerns. If firms simply shift operations elsewhere to avoid the carbon tax, then there is little environmental gain globally, yet real economic costs in Alberta. Using carbon-tax revenue to subsidize firm output, which buffers their costs, is one way to mitigate competitiveness concerns without undermining the incentive to lower emissions.

But instead of subsidizing, say, Cenovus’s barrels at the same rate as Nexen’s, as is currently done, the UCP is proposing larger subsidies for dirtier facilities and smaller subsidies for cleaner ones. This is unfortunate. It distorts private investment and business decisions, and undermines some of the incentive to lower emissions. It is better for policy to be neutral, and for governments to keep the playing field level.

Ultimately, carbon pricing remains a centrepiece of Alberta’s climate policy, and for good reason: It’s generally the most cost-effective way to lower emissions because it leaves decisions over how and whether to lower emissions to individuals and businesses, rather than to government. So carbon taxes, in one form or another, are here to stay.

The political challenges are clear, though. When voters see the costs of a policy – almost any policy – it loses popularity. But the UCP isn’t killing Alberta’s carbon tax – it’s only shrinking it, changing it, then hiding it from view.

There is no right or wrong way to price carbon, but there are important pros and cons to consider in terms of coverage, price level and the use of revenue. This is where the debate should be, where it needs to be – and where voters should demand it to be. Claiming victory over carbon pricing’s corpse, when the body is very much alive, is a disservice to all.

[lotusleaf]

it did cancel individual carbon tax tho~ better than nothing ....

[jo jo]

赶紧囤油油？fed version应该很快就imposed了

[mulanl]

汽油价格是跌了，是不是长久的不知道。。。

[Hotdogy]

我们的utility 是不是也该降了。

[Hotdogy]

卡城市长上任就宣布加税，阿省省长就职就减税，这差距还是蛮大的。

[mulanl]

是有差别的。。。

[Calgary]

作者: Hotdogy

卡城市长上任就宣布加税，阿省省长就职就减税，这差距还是蛮大的。

卡城市长是NDP的理念。 在他任上，地税涨了50%-100%。

[bigdog69]

作者: Calgary

卡城市长是NDP的理念。 在他任上，地税涨了50%-100%。

他現在在批評省政府，地稅太高有害小生意，要省政府負責，結尾還加了一句，我是説真的。

[mulanl]

卡屯的选民为什么那么喜欢南希?卡屯就没有好的市长了?

[Hotdogy]

作者: bigdog69

他現在在批評省政府，地稅太高有害小生意，要省政府負責，結尾還加了一句，我是説真的。

这是公开承认政府在做伤害卡城商户及市民的事情，做完了坏事却把屎盆子扣在省俯身上。

[bigdog69]

下周一，市府前有抗稅集會，多數市議員有提案周一表決減商業稅，看來不少議員也經意識到民眾的不滿，當然南希除外。

[Hotdogy]

到了官逼民反的时候才想着有所减免，市府及议员是超级渎职腐败。
这样的政府官员应该就地割职，叫他们继续领导卡城无疑与认同他们继续胡作非为，坑害百姓。

市民否了奥运但没有割职领导，所以就有了不仅地税上涨，垃圾费也要一袋卖3块钱，这是只想从市民身上诈钱的官僚。什么不涨？居民倒垃圾要涨，办公楼排污费也涨，只有想不到没有涨不到。
现在拿1亿9做补偿不过是玩欺瞒过市的把戏，风头一过照税不误。
所以，换人才是根本。

[Hotdogy]

作者: bigdog69

下周一，市府前有抗稅集會，多數市議員有提案周一表決減商業稅，看來不少議員也經意識到民眾的不滿，當然南希除外。

这批议员就是墙头草，商户不闹就跟着市长一同拼命加税;商户一闹，转脸就咋呼着要给减税。

你妈，如此决策，丢不丢人!

[bigdog69]

抗稅是一種崇高偉大的行為，也是因為有抗稅運動才建立了曾經偉大的美國。
為了偉大，抗稅吧！

[瞎逛逛]

你们两个dog很好玩，一起抗税。

[bigdog69]

So what has city council done? Jacked up taxes for employment-creating business owners. The mathematics that has led to this crisis is pretty simple.

Total revenues including property taxes have increased 7.4 per cent from 2014 to 2018.

However, non-tax revenues (user fees, Ennmax earnings, investment income and transfers from other governments) have only increased a paltry 2.5 per cent during this period, reflecting poor growth.

City spending increased by 12.2 per cent over the same period

[Hotdogy]

作者: bigdog69

下周一，市府前有抗稅集會，多數市議員有提案周一表決減商業稅，看來不少議員也經意識到民眾的不滿，當然南希除外。

提议减税，方向没错:至少商业税减税10%，居民税减少30%,utility 减30%。
议员们要是真想表现得有点公平正义的形象，就要在为居民减税减费上敢于较真碰硬。