Speakers at a rally in Kindersley, Sask., included the Reform Party’s Preston Manning, the Liberals’ Lloyd Axworthy and the Saskatchewan NDP’s Roy Romanow.
The SPSD/M (as it’s known for short) is specialized software created and maintained by Statistics Canada that is used by economists, researchers, politicians and anyone interested in analyzing tax and transfer policies in the country.
Tombe extracted data from the latest version of the model and shared it with CBC News to illustrate how a hypothetical axing of the federal carbon tax would affect different households.
For these purposes, the model is only applicable to four provinces: Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, which accounts for the vast majority of Canadians paying the federal carbon tax and receiving the rebates.
A separate analysis released by the Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO) in March found households in Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland and Labrador, on average, will also receive more in rebates this year than they pay in direct and indirect carbon-tax costs combined.
(It’s also important to note the analysis was conducted before the Liberal government’s decision to exempt home heating oil from the carbon tax, a move that disproportionately benefits people in Atlantic Canada.)
The original article contains 1,459 words, the summary contains 193 words. Saved 87%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Cutting/deferring carbon taxes is such a bad idea. It sends the wrong message. There should be no exemptions. This is the cost per tonne of carbon. Period.
If there is a segment of the population who suffer disproportionately due to the tax, you compensate them by providing a larger share of the rebates. This already happens with rural residents who have higher costs and fewer options in terms of transportation.
Now let’s say you lived down east and took out a loan to replace your oil furnace with a heat pump. You figured an increase in the rebate that would come with the promised carbon tax hike would help you pay it down. But then they decide to defer the tax (and therefore the rebate) instead. It’s a betrayal.
Cutting/deferring carbon taxes is such a bad idea. It sends the wrong message. There should be no exemptions. This is the cost per tonne of carbon. Period.
What Trudeau did is fundamentally against why the Carbon tax is considered to be one best means to reduce carbon emissions. And to top it off he did it for one of the worst heating fuels.
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:
Speakers at a rally in Kindersley, Sask., included the Reform Party’s Preston Manning, the Liberals’ Lloyd Axworthy and the Saskatchewan NDP’s Roy Romanow.
The SPSD/M (as it’s known for short) is specialized software created and maintained by Statistics Canada that is used by economists, researchers, politicians and anyone interested in analyzing tax and transfer policies in the country.
Tombe extracted data from the latest version of the model and shared it with CBC News to illustrate how a hypothetical axing of the federal carbon tax would affect different households.
For these purposes, the model is only applicable to four provinces: Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, which accounts for the vast majority of Canadians paying the federal carbon tax and receiving the rebates.
A separate analysis released by the Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO) in March found households in Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland and Labrador, on average, will also receive more in rebates this year than they pay in direct and indirect carbon-tax costs combined.
(It’s also important to note the analysis was conducted before the Liberal government’s decision to exempt home heating oil from the carbon tax, a move that disproportionately benefits people in Atlantic Canada.)
The original article contains 1,459 words, the summary contains 193 words. Saved 87%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
As is tradition.
Which is why Conservatives are pushing for it so hard
I’d be good if PP would stay the fuck out of my business.
Cutting/deferring carbon taxes is such a bad idea. It sends the wrong message. There should be no exemptions. This is the cost per tonne of carbon. Period.
If there is a segment of the population who suffer disproportionately due to the tax, you compensate them by providing a larger share of the rebates. This already happens with rural residents who have higher costs and fewer options in terms of transportation.
Now let’s say you lived down east and took out a loan to replace your oil furnace with a heat pump. You figured an increase in the rebate that would come with the promised carbon tax hike would help you pay it down. But then they decide to defer the tax (and therefore the rebate) instead. It’s a betrayal.
What Trudeau did is fundamentally against why the Carbon tax is considered to be one best means to reduce carbon emissions. And to top it off he did it for one of the worst heating fuels.
This tax has been praised as “a far better way to control pollution than the present method of specific regulation.”[66] It has also been lauded for its market based simplicity. This includes a description as “the most efficient way to guide the decisions of producers and consumers”