NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/sci/energy/7139

Internet Message Format | 1993-01-22 | 3.7 KB

Xref: sparky sci.energy:7139 talk.environment:5652
Newsgroups: sci.energy,talk.environment
Path: sparky!uunet!pmafire!mica.inel.gov![e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Don Palmrose)
Subject: Re: Energy Taxes (was Re: Gas Tax (was: Re: NEWS: True Costs ...))
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: INEL EG&G Idaho
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 15:13:15 GMT
Lines: 69

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (C Revie) writes:
>
>
>  what if you have a general energy tax on
> all forms of non-renewable energy carriers which replaces income and
> other business taxes. If the energy is taxed at source (or point of
> entry into the country), then the amount of administration would be
> minimal.
>
> The effect on rural areas would be softened, as they would gain through
> having  no income taxes or business taxes to pay. They would only pay
> tax everytime they bought fuel. Therefore any system which allows them
> to tap reduces their tax bill, until the the government puts up the
> energy tax to compensate, thus providing a further incentive towards
> greater energy efficiency and the consumption of renewables.
>
> Market forces would come into effect, as long as you pay for it you can
> use as much energy as you like.
>
> However, an energy tax is an indirect tax, and thus takes no regard of
> ability to pay! A way round this would be an energy allowance, of so
> many mega-joules per person per year which would be exempt from
> taxation.
>
> However this is only really viable for electricity or gas delivered
> straight to the home. Otherwise a coupon system would have to be used
> for petrol with all the bureaucracy etc that that would entail.
>
> Chris
>
>

This is not much different from what some other people have stated.  The big
problem with this is it assumes that if a gas tax is imposed the government
*will* do something to make sure it does not impact the poor or some other
group.

I do not think any of this is politically workable.  For one, the poor do
not pay much in taxes anyway so having a large gas tax will cause their overall
tax burden to go up and they cannot afford it.  Giving out an "energy
allowance" is just another food stamps program which while the intent is good
has major problems in keeping the operation clean.

IMO the best and easiest way to lower our dependence on gasoline is through
the setting of standards and establishing *tax credits*.  Rather than a
reduction by placing a large burden on those who cannot afford that burden,
award those who actually use less by reducing their tax bills.  I do have
extreme doubts that even a tax credit system would work (government revenue
may go down forcing them to raise taxes in other areas).  What ever the
"solution" is, that solution must be one that comes in gradually and not all
at once so that the economy has the time to adjust.

Don Palmrose




========== long legal disclaimer follows, press n to skip ===========

Neither the United States Government or the Idaho National Engineering
Laboratory or any of their employees, makes any warranty, whatsoever,
implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility regarding any
information, disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe
privately owned rights.  No specific reference constitutes or implies
endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States
Government or the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory.  The views and
opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of the
United States Government or the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory,
and shall not be used for advertising or product endorsement purposes.