When people talk about the federal “carbon tax,” they are typically referring to the surcharge most Canadians pay when filling up their vehicles and the extra fee on their natural gas bills, which are accompanied by rebates that are direct-deposited into their bank accounts every three months.
Oilsands facilities and power plants and other large-scale industrial emitters are subject to this parallel system of carbon pricing and, instead of rebates, they receive “output-based” credits.
Both the PBO and the other group of economists agree the majority of Canadian households receive more in rebates than they pay in these direct and indirect fiscal costs, combined.
Economists, meanwhile, often argue that carbon-pricing, which leaves emissions reduction largely up to the free market, is the least costly kind of policy, especially when compared to more heavy-handed government regulation.
Giroux added that the PBO’s choice of counterfactual scenario — a world with no carbon tax and nothing to replace it — is logical from an analytic perspective but isn’t meant to be prescriptive.
Given the complexity of the modelling, Tombe said “the details really matter,” but he believes the PBO’s reports are often short on the kinds of methodological specifics that one would typically find in economic analyses published by other groups.
The original article contains 1,610 words, the summary contains 203 words. Saved 87%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !canada@lemmy.ca
This is the best summary I could come up with:
When people talk about the federal “carbon tax,” they are typically referring to the surcharge most Canadians pay when filling up their vehicles and the extra fee on their natural gas bills, which are accompanied by rebates that are direct-deposited into their bank accounts every three months.
Oilsands facilities and power plants and other large-scale industrial emitters are subject to this parallel system of carbon pricing and, instead of rebates, they receive “output-based” credits.
Both the PBO and the other group of economists agree the majority of Canadian households receive more in rebates than they pay in these direct and indirect fiscal costs, combined.
Economists, meanwhile, often argue that carbon-pricing, which leaves emissions reduction largely up to the free market, is the least costly kind of policy, especially when compared to more heavy-handed government regulation.
Giroux added that the PBO’s choice of counterfactual scenario — a world with no carbon tax and nothing to replace it — is logical from an analytic perspective but isn’t meant to be prescriptive.
Given the complexity of the modelling, Tombe said “the details really matter,” but he believes the PBO’s reports are often short on the kinds of methodological specifics that one would typically find in economic analyses published by other groups.
The original article contains 1,610 words, the summary contains 203 words. Saved 87%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!