If you read beyond the squeals of indignation from the latest TaxPayers Alliance “research” you find an interesting conclusion. The taxes we pay on measures aimed principally at reducing carbon dioxide emissions are much lower than the cost of those emissions to the economy. So we should be putting more tax on carbon dioxide, and perhaps less on good stuff like work!
The TPA, better known for their corporate tax avoidance and personal tax evasion than robust research, have really gone to town on environmental taxation. So here are two fatal flaws and an interesting conclusion for those worried by the headlines.
First, they pit these taxes against the cost of carbon dioxide emissions. But by their own, buried and obfuscated admission, these taxes do a lot more than just reduce carbon dioxide emissions. Fuel and vehicle excise duty, which make up the bulk of the taxes, also address congestion, air pollution, service maintenance and help to suppress the level of driving generally. Landfill tax targets the waste of good land being used up for rubbish, and forces councils to get a move on with decent recycling facilities for residents.
The real cost of the taxes that specifically target carbon dioxide emissions is much smaller than they suggest.
Second, they chose a completely misleading figure to estimate the cost of the carbon dioxide emissions. They use an estimate which takes the cost to society of the emissions, then deducts the immediate benefits. They pretend this low figure is representing the gross costs. If you look at the costs based on the Government’s shadow price for carbon, the costs come out – shocker – three and a half times higher.
This real cost of the emissions is actually higher than the real cost of the taxes that directly address those emissions. Nice one, TPA.
The other interesting nugget is in their analysis of who these taxes affect. If you’re lucky enough to live somewhere with plenty of public investment in public transport, energy efficiency programmes and good recycling facilities, the cost of these taxes is far lower for you. So the best thing is to, er, live in a green area! Nice one, TPA.
We have solution for all your hosting needs. We are offering cheap web hosting packages to all our customers. We have dedicated servers in our company and you can also get virtual private servers package also.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by GreenFeed, Tom Chance. Tom Chance said: Hmm, the TaxPayers Alliance have accidentally shown that we need more eco-taxes! http://bit.ly/75qcMf [...]
Very good article Tom; but you’ll get in trouble saying things like: “So we should be putting more tax on carbon dioxide, and perhaps less on good stuff like work!” A ‘green tax switch’ is the policy of the Liberal Democrats and the Canadian Green Party , in both cases to take the lowest paid out of taxation – Jenny Jones doesn’t like it at all – she said “In their ‘green tax switch’ announced last September, they promised to “cut income tax and switch to green taxes on pollution instead”. No serious Greens would contemplate this.”
I shall beware her wrath at work!
I wouldn’t like to see a general cut on income tax and used to vote Lib Dem based on the penny in the pound policy. But it strikes me that re-introducing a 10p tax band and reducing NI contributions could be part of a progressive shift to ease the burden on the poorest people who suffer very high marginal rates and to shift the burden from work to consumption.
Very good article. I wouldn’t like to see a general cut on income tax and used to vote Lib Dem based on the penny in the pound policy.