Solve 4 Biggies
  ~  by reducing income taxes & increasing energy taxes

                          
   
New entries Wednesday &
Sunday evenings
  (& sometimes in between)

- Contribute to this online
  public conversation -





   1 - Global warming

   2 - Dependence on
        foreign energy

   3 - Trade deficit

   4 - Pollution from non-
        renewable fuels

How much of a tax shift?

Print the article

This entry was posted on 5/5/2007 10:42 PM and is filed under uncategorized.


A gallon of gas would increase $.10/year for 10 years - a total of $1.00 after 10 years.  This additional energy tax would be "tax-neutral" for individuals and families because federal income taxes would be reduced by an equivalent amount.

Where did this number come from? -- the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), an international scientific panel.   As reported in the Washington Post today, the IPCC estimated the that "to avoid the worst effects of global warming" we may need to raise "the cost of gasoline by up to one dollar a gallon over the next several decades."  This is an incredibly LOW price to pay to solve our global warming crisis!

Now, they are saying "decades" and I'm saying "decade."  Why?  The IPCC is focusing on the incremental cost of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.  I'm suggesting raising taxes on non-renewable energy for energy conservation and to stimulate renewable energy industries.  It will likely take a somewhat larger investment to achieve the emission reductions indirectly (via energy price increases) as compared to direct action to reduce emissions.

But.... if we only target greenhouse gas emissions, we'll have much less of an effect on reducing U.S. dependence on foreign energy, the U.S. trade deficit, and pollution while also missing the opportunity to develop the U.S. alternative energy industry.

The average price of a gallon of gasoline in the U.S. on April 30, 2007 was $2.97.  Adding a $.10 tax today would be a 3.4% increase.  Each subsequent annual increase of $.10/gallon would likely be a smaller percentage since gasoline prices will likely increase over time.  But, from the Chicago Tribune, "A report by AAA finds that it costs drivers 53 to 84 cents for every mile traveled."  (Note: I increased these numbers based on the current national average of $2.97 for a gallon of gasoline.)

In additon to gas costs, these figures include items such as tires, maintenance, insurance, financing and depreciation.  From a cost per mile perspective, a $.10/gallon tax increase translates into less than a 1% increase per mile driven.

Note that with the btu tax proposed in this blog, taxes on all non-renewable energy would increase based on each fuel's energy content.    A typical gallon of gasoline has 114,000 btu.

 del.icio.us  Stumbleupon  Technorati  Digg 

 

What did you think of this article?




Trackbacks
Trackback specific URL for this entry
  • No trackbacks exist for this entry.
Comments

    • 5/27/2007 8:48 AM Mark Jeantheau wrote:
      Ten cents per gallon per year for 10 years has a nice feel of balance to it, but I suspect it's not enough of an increase to induce the level of change necessary. Many climate change experts are saying that we need to reduce CO2 emissions by 80% by 2030 to avoid catastrophic effects. That's a very tall order, and very aggressive efforts will be needed to make it happen. Combine that with a recent USA Today poll showing that in the US we're still more than a dollar a gallon away from the point where people would make serious changes in their transportation habits. Thus, an addition dollar per gallon in taxes might not even make a difference if it were implemented fully in year 1, let alone year 10.

      Going immediately to too high a tax increase might be too much of a shock to the system---after all, per-gallon price increases due to additional taxes will be piled on top of price increases related to supply constriction. So, rather than increasing the per-year fuel-tax number to a much higher (and more effective) number right away, we could start the fuel-tax increase at 10 cents per gallon the first year, but every year after that the tax would be raised an additional 5 cents per year on top of the previous year's tax. So, in year two, the tax would be 15 cents per gallon; in year three, 20 cents per gallon; and so on; until in year 10, the fuel tax would be raised by an additional 55 cents per gallon---making a total fuel-tax shift in year 10 of $3.25 per gallon.

      So, that would be $3.25 per gallon more in 2017 than we pay today (not taking into account price swings up or down caused by other factors). So, in 2017 we would likely be paying $6-$7 per gallon or more in today's dollars. Now, before readers cry "No way, you insane eco-maniac!" ... Remember, this is as much about changing unhealthy economic trends as it is about fixing environmental problems. And more importantly, remember that in a properly executed tax-shifting scheme, all that extra money you have to shell out at the pump will be magically appearing in your paycheck every week because the federal government will have offset its increased gas-tax revenue with reductions in payroll taxes. So, you actually get a choice: (a) continue spending your money on fuel, with no net impact to your ability to buy other things; or (b) change your gas-guzzling ways, pocket the difference, and spend the windfall on something more enjoyable than sitting in traffic.
      Reply to this
    Leave a comment

    Submitted comments will be subject to moderation before being displayed.

     Enter the above security code (required)

     Name

     Email (will not be published)

     Website

    Your comment is 0 characters limited to 3000 characters.