We're finally told what Trudeau's carbon tax will cost us. Are you sitting down?

[cc]

It took some poking and prodding and (finally) committee testimony, but now we know what the bill will be for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's carbon tax. In a report to the Senate Standing Committee on Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources, University of Calgary economics professor Jennifer Winter revealed the bottom line of the Trudeau Carbon Price.



Using energy-consumption data from Statistics Canada, and imputing prices from average household expenditure on transportation fuels and provincial gasoline prices, Winter calculated the impact of the carbon tax on a typical Canadian household across different provinces. Far from being painless as advertised, the costs to households will be significant.



Three provinces — Alberta, Saskatchewan and Nova Scotia — will be hit with more than $1,000 of carbon tax per year to comply with the $50-per-tonne carbon tax Ottawa has mandated for 2022. Nova Scotia ($1,120) and Alberta ($1,111) will have the highest bills, followed by Saskatchewan ($1,032), New Brunswick ($963), Newfoundland ($859) and Prince Edward Island ($788). The average household in Ontario will pay $707 a year to comply with the carbon tax once its fully implemented.



Who gets the lowest bill? British Columbia ($603 per year), Quebec ($662) and Manitoba ($683). Simply put, households in provinces with the lowest bills will pay just a bit more than half compared to households in the hardest-hit provinces.



But it gets worse, since most experts say carbon prices must continue to increase sharply to effectively lower emissions. At $100 a tonne, for example, households in Alberta will pony up $2,223, in Saskatchewan they'll pay $2,065 and in Nova Scotia, $2,240. In fact, at $100 a tonne, the average price for households in all provinces is well north of $1,000 per year.



Already across Canada, particularly in the Maritimes, a significant number of households fit the definition of "energy poverty" — that is, 10 per cent or more of household expenditures are spent simply procuring the energy needed to live (to power the home and transportation). In 2016, the Fraser Institute measured energy poverty in Canada and found that when you add up the costs to power the home and cars, 19.4 per cent of Canadian households devoted at least 10 per cent or more of their expenditures to energy.



http://business.financialpost.com/opinion/and-heres-your-very-small-carbon-bill-canada">http://business.financialpost.com/opini ... ill-canada">http://business.financialpost.com/opinion/and-heres-your-very-small-carbon-bill-canada



Phony Bologna  I say



 https://www.texasgrassfedbeef.com/sites/default/files/products/slp/bologna_stack_0.jpg">

[Anonymous]

Oh well, my family can afford this pointless tax..



Our prime minister thinks we have lots of money.

[Anonymous]

It took some poking and prodding and (finally) committee testimony, but now we know what the bill will be for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's carbon tax. In a report to the Senate Standing Committee on Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources, University of Calgary economics professor Jennifer Winter revealed the bottom line of the Trudeau Carbon Price.



Using energy-consumption data from Statistics Canada, and imputing prices from average household expenditure on transportation fuels and provincial gasoline prices, Winter calculated the impact of the carbon tax on a typical Canadian household across different provinces. Far from being painless as advertised, the costs to households will be significant.



Three provinces — Alberta, Saskatchewan and Nova Scotia — will be hit with more than $1,000 of carbon tax per year to comply with the $50-per-tonne carbon tax Ottawa has mandated for 2022. Nova Scotia ($1,120) and Alberta ($1,111) will have the highest bills, followed by Saskatchewan ($1,032), New Brunswick ($963), Newfoundland ($859) and Prince Edward Island ($788). The average household in Ontario will pay $707 a year to comply with the carbon tax once its fully implemented.



Who gets the lowest bill? British Columbia ($603 per year), Quebec ($662) and Manitoba ($683). Simply put, households in provinces with the lowest bills will pay just a bit more than half compared to households in the hardest-hit provinces.



But it gets worse, since most experts say carbon prices must continue to increase sharply to effectively lower emissions. At $100 a tonne, for example, households in Alberta will pony up $2,223, in Saskatchewan they'll pay $2,065 and in Nova Scotia, $2,240. In fact, at $100 a tonne, the average price for households in all provinces is well north of $1,000 per year.



Already across Canada, particularly in the Maritimes, a significant number of households fit the definition of "energy poverty" — that is, 10 per cent or more of household expenditures are spent simply procuring the energy needed to live (to power the home and transportation). In 2016, the Fraser Institute measured energy poverty in Canada and found that when you add up the costs to power the home and cars, 19.4 per cent of Canadian households devoted at least 10 per cent or more of their expenditures to energy.



http://business.financialpost.com/opinion/and-heres-your-very-small-carbon-bill-canada">http://business.financialpost.com/opini ... ill-canada">http://business.financialpost.com/opinion/and-heres-your-very-small-carbon-bill-canada



Phony Bologna  I say



 https://www.texasgrassfedbeef.com/sites/default/files/products/slp/bologna_stack_0.jpg">

The Seoul brother posted this in another thread. You can see why Justine doesn't want anyone to reveal the costs. It will also shave a half point off of our already contracting GDP. Not smart at all.

[Anonymous]

Already across Canada, particularly in the Maritimes, a significant number of households fit the definition of "energy poverty" — that is, 10 per cent or more of household expenditures are spent simply procuring the energy needed to live (to power the home and transportation). In 2016, the Fraser Institute measured energy poverty in Canada and found that when you add up the costs to power the home and cars, 19.4 per cent of Canadian households devoted at least 10 per cent or more of their expenditures to energy.

And what will a national carbon tax do to those numbers?



Push more people into energy poverty.

[Anonymous]

The Seoul brother posted this in another thread. You can see why Justine doesn't want anyone to reveal the costs. It will also shave a half point off of our already contracting GDP. Not smart at all.

It's an economic self inflicted wound. And when our biggest trading partner is lowering taxes and slashing job killing regulations, it makes no sense.

[Anonymous]

The Seoul brother posted this in another thread. You can see why Justine doesn't want anyone to reveal the costs. It will also shave a half point off of our already contracting GDP. Not smart at all.

It's an economic self inflicted wound. And when our biggest trading partner is lowering taxes and slashing job killing regulations, it makes no sense.

Neither our prime minister or our premier will back down..



Jason Kenny has said getting rid of Alberta's carbon tax will be his first priority after he becomes premier..



That would be terrific, but he is a politician and they break promises.

[Anonymous]

Regina — a study commissioned by the saskatchewan government says a federal carbon tax could potentially reduce the province's gross domestic product by almost $16 billion between 2019 and the end of 2030.



[size=150]The study says even the most conservative scenario shows a carbon tax of $50 per tonne would reduce provincial GDP by 2.43%, or $1.8 billion annually.



The study used information provided by the provincial government and statistics Canada data that was analyzed by a computer model developed by the university of Regina.



[size=150]Environment Minister Dustin Duncan said the study shows a federal carbon tax could hobble growth and have little effect on emissions.[/size]



"The federal government has significantly underestimated the economic impact of its carbon tax and overestimated the expected greenhouse gas reductions," Duncan said Wednesday in a release.



"This new and more thorough model indicates GDP reductions in the billions, which translates to less competitive industries in saskatchewan and fewer jobs across the province."



duncan said the findings show why saskatchewan has never supported the tax and is challenging it in court.



In April, Premier Scott Moe asked the Saskatchewan Court of appeal to rule on whether imposing a carbon tax on his province would be unconstitutional.



The province also cited research by the university of Calgary that shows a federal carbon tax would cost an average Saskatchewan household more than $1,000 per year.

[Anonymous]

This is from an Alberta MLA.



It was disappointing, but not unexpected, to read NDP Environment Minister Shannon Phillips's brazen defence of the NDP'S carbon tax in these pages this past Saturday ("On climate change, Albertans expect their leaders to lead", June 23, 2018).



The NDP'S carbon tax was always just a government cash grab — one that comes with considerable expense to Albertans.



While the NDP minister talks about "the interests of everyday Alberta families" in her column, the reality is that the "the interests of everyday Alberta families" are a lot more expensive with the carbon tax.



From heightened costs for schools to keep the lights on, to Albertans facing an added cost at the pumps on top of an already high fuel cost just for the crime of getting to work or driving for groceries, the carbon tax affects everybody in Alberta.



Ms. Phillips claimed that the carbon tax is needed "to secure future growth and market access through new pipelines."



[size=150]Since the NDP sprung their surprise carbon tax on Albertans, not one pipeline opponent has moved from "No" to "Yes."[/size]



Here's what has happened: the federal Liberal government stopped the Northern Gateway pipeline.



They tampered with the regulatory process and stopped the Energy East pipeline.



The previous U.S. administration halted the Keystone XL pipeline.



And, of course, British Columbia's NDP government has been fighting tooth and nail to stop the Trans Mountain Expansion Project, a much-needed, job-creating project.



Meanwhile, extreme activist groups remain determined to illegally obstruct the Trans Mountain expansion project.



None of these groups or governments received the memo about the carbon tax and social licence, apparently.



These are the NDP'S fellow travellers obstructing the pipeline: including some of those organizing illegal protests, Tzeporah Berman and Karen Mahon, who Alberta's NDP government actually named to their oilsands advisory group; or Greenpeace ringleader Mike Hudema, with whom Minister Phillips collaborated on a how-to book on stopping resource projects.



In her column, the NDP minister did find room to attribute Calgary's Green Line LRT to the carbon tax.



She fails to mention that federal funding for the Green Line LRT came under the former federal Conservative government, announced by Jason Kenney in mid-2015, and there was no condition of a carbon tax.



The NDP'S carbon tax, from the start, has been a false bag of goods: they never campaigned on it, they just imposed it right after taking office.



In 2015, the premier claimed that revenue collected through the carbon tax would never go to pad the government's deficit-heavy budgets, but that's exactly where it's going.



As time passes, the only defence the NDP seems to have for their carbon tax cash grab is to try and guilt Albertans into supporting it.



I've said it before and I'll say it again: I know that Albertans are smarter than that, and I know they do not believe for a minute that the only way to address climate change is through a carbon tax.

[Rose]

https://2sp7lb27e15tm9sej1jutg1m-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/carbon-tax.gif">

[Lance Leftardashian]

With all this carbon going into the atmosphere we must drastically increase our carbon tax!

[Anonymous]

With all this carbon going into the atmosphere we must drastically increase our carbon tax!

[Anonymous]

[size=150]The Liberals have now admitted the carbon tax is a job-killer

[/size]

By Conservative Shadow Minister for Finance, Pierre Poilevre.



Environment Minister Catherine Mckenna admitted an inconvenient truth last week: The Liberal carbon tax would drive jobs out of Canada. The admission came in the form of a partial flip-flop on the issue.



The government quietly posted a document online indicating that 80%-90% of greenhouse gas emissions of large industrial corporations would be exempt from the tax. The reason? The government wants to avoid high costs that push industrial production out of Canada to places without carbon taxes.



But wait; Mckenna has told us all along that the carbon tax would actually help our economy. Now she accepts it could simply move business, jobs and emissions out of Canada to more polluting countries where the emissions would ironically be higher.



According to the great energy CEO Michael Binnion, making one tonne of aluminum generates 11 tonnes of carbon in the U.S., but thanks to abundant hydroelectricity, only two tonnes in B.C. This means, when heavy environmental taxes and regulations drive aluminum production out of B.C., they not only kill Canadian jobs, but increase global greenhouse gas emissions.



For several years, Canada has insisted on rigorous environmental standards for our industries, among the world's toughest. For example, much of the world's oil is beyond dirty, compared to Canadian crude.



So, if the Liberals really cared about the earth, they wouldn't impose a damaging carbon tax on the world's cleanest industries. Instead, they would admit the world needs more Canada, and keep industry and jobs here.



It is not clear if the Liberals have accepted this common-sense argument or if Mckenna climbed down to avoid having the carbon tax lead to mass layoffs in the middle of the coming election year.



Whatever the reason, it's problematic that the Liberals are not making similar exemptions for consumers who will pay the tax on 100% of their heat, gas and other fuels. If the Liberals cared as much about hard-working Canadians as they do about large industrial players, Minister Mckenna would have offered them a break, too. After all, we have to heat our homes. But, unlike industry, we don't have the option of moving if we can't afford Justin Trudeau's carbon tax. So, industrial corporations get a break, but working families pay more. And the government won't even come clean about how much more. No wonder.



If private sector economists are correct, a $50/tonne carbon tax will cost average households more than $1,000 a year, and $1,100 in Nova Scotia where people can least afford it. That's electoral poison for the Liberals. They would rather keep the costs secret and let consumers think the higher prices are the result of greedy gas stations and grocery store owners.



The good news is that across our country, Canadians are catching on. They know they'll pay more for everything. And, they're backing politicians — like the premiers of Saskatchewan and Ontario — who call out the hypocrisy and unfairness upon which the Liberal carbon tax is built.



The pressure is beginning to work. Liberals love carbon taxes. But they love power even more. So they're not just running for election, but running from some of their own policies.

[Anonymous]

[size=150]Ontario targets carbon pricing — Alberta should follow suit[/size]



By Kenneth Green Resident Scholar and Chair in Energy and Environmental Studies and former Senior Director of the Centre for Natural Resource Studies at the Fraser Institute.



Ontarians should mark July 25 on their calendar as Carbon Tax Freedom Day, and Albertans should watch and learn.



On July 25, Ontario's Ford government introduced legislation that would do what was previously unthinkable — unwind the cap-and-trade system implemented under former premier Kathleen Wynne, saving Ontario households $260 per year by reducing the cost of gasoline, diesel and natural gas.



Motorists will enjoy a reduction in gasoline prices by 10 cents per litre.



Ontario's cap-and-trade system is different than Alberta's carbon tax regime, though cap-and-trade is really just a hidden carbon tax.



The government sets a declining limit on greenhouse gas emissions and gives out (or sells) ration credits to emitters who must buy them from other companies (or countries) if they can't reduce emissions enough on their own. Those companies in turn pass on the cost to consumers in the price of goods and services (such as electricity), often in ways consumers can't relate to the cap-and-trade emission rationing.



How is this relevant for Albertans? In several ways. First, it sets a precedent in Canada that carbon pricing, whether it's done through a direct tax (as in British Columbia and Alberta) or as a cap-and-trade system (as in Ontario and Quebec), is just as susceptible to modification or cancellation as any other tax. People who labour under the belief that Canada's joining of the Paris climate accord means that carbon taxes are pretty much the only tax that can't be cut (or terminated) should think again.



Ford's dismantling of Ontario's cap-and-trade shows that not only can governments terminate carbon pricing, but it's not all that expensive to do so. The Government of Ontario estimates it will have to refund up to $5 million in unused allowances (emission credits) purchased by participants in the capand-trade program. Hardly bank-breaking.



Premier Rachel Notley could learn a lesson from Premier Ford and Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe, and look for common sense "made in Alberta" approaches to air quality and environmental protection, rather than embracing Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's plan to demand a centrally-planned energy economy out of Ottawa. There's a good reason Canada has traditionally given provinces the lead on environmental protection. Canada's provinces are highly diverse in their energy resources, economic activities, climatic challenges, ecosystems, proximity to emission sources in the United States, and, subsequently, the control of greenhouse gas emissions.



And Canadians believe climate protection should be a provincial matter, like air and water protection. A new Angus Reid poll shows that two out of three Canadians believe provinces should determine greenhouse gas emission reductions, not the federal government. The numbers are highest in the Prairies where 82% of Saskatchewan respondents and 71% of respondents in Alberta said the provinces should have the final say on carbon pricing. Incidentally, 69% of respondents in Atlantic Canada agreed, as did a majority of British Columbians.



Premier Notley should take a hard look at the poll numbers and put her Alberta Climate Leadership Act playbook into reverse, to let market forces and people's choices drive Alberta's economy rather than heavyhanded regulation and punishing carbon taxes.



Clearly, Albertans deserve their own Carbon Tax Freedom Day.

[Anonymous]

I can't wait until our carbon tax freedom day.