TheCase for a Vermont Carbon Tax在佛蒙特州的碳税的情况下.pptVIP

The Case for a VT Carbon Tax Rationale Simplification Replace existing energy taxes with a single tax on carbon content of fuels. Behavioral Change Encourage reduced consumption of fossil fuels and reduced CO2 emissions. Revenue Leveraging Make use of revenues to purchase energy saving efficiencies and stimulate growth. Current Energy Taxes Carbon Tax: Pro/Con PRO Broad influence- consumers, transport. Low transaction costs Ease of administration Produces recyclable revenue CON Emissions reductions not predictable Vulnerable pricing due to inflation/ price shocks Not targeted to reduce all GHG’s. Regressive Carbon Tax Proposal $100 per ton tax on carbon content of fuels. Applied at point where fuels enter Vermont economy. Revenues recycled back to taxpayers (individual and commercial). Comparable tax on nuclear and large hydro (market competitiveness). Revenue Estimates Price Effects on Fuels Energy Savings and CO2 Reductions 2004 Energy Tax Revenues (Existing) 2004 Total energy revenue: ?$259,269,147 Energy Tax Revenues (Including Carbon Tax) 2004 Revised Energy Revenue: $521,540,000 Energy Tax Revenues (Including Carbon Tax) Trading Carbon Offsets Emerging markets for emissions/ sequestration trading: Kyoto Signatory nations EU cap and trade system (2005) Chicago Climate Exchange Northeastern States cap and trade system (2005) Allows for trading CO2 emissions with carbon sequestering “sinks.” “the biggest commodities market in the world.” -R. Sandor (Northwestern Univ. / CCX) Carbon Trading Potential for VT Agricultural/Forest Land States (NE,AK) have begun quantifying sequestration potential of land. VT forests hold a carbon stock of 492.6 MMTC (1997). Carbon tax revenues can be used to quantify capacity/pool land holdings/define compliance mechanisms for trading. US farmers can sequester 200 MMTC annually / add $4-6 billion gross income (10% increase in average net farm income). * 116.1 TOTAL 5.5 .5% on retail sales Fuel Gross Receipts 5.7 .3-.5% of gro