Want to Do Something About Greenhouse Gas? Try a Carbon Tax

By :: May 6th, 2014

This morning, the White House released a massive report on the effects of climate change. In sum: The problem is already bad, it is going to get worse, and we need to address it quickly. The science of greenhouse gas emissions and climate change may be clear (though, of course, always evolving). But the policy response is far murkier.

Yet there is a relatively simple solution, based on the old economic maximum: If you want people to do less of something, raise the price. In this case, if you want people to use less carbon-emitting fuel, tax it—a lot. Sadly, the report barely mentioned carbon taxes anywhere in its 829 pages.

For years, the U.S. has fumbled with an alternative response: an incomprehensible maze of regulation and subsidies. This toxic mix of positive and negative incentives is confusing, easily gamed, inefficient, and largely ineffective.

Consider: We subsidize production of fossil fuels but then attempt to limit their use through fuel efficiency standards and emissions limits. Then we provide tax breaks for producers and consumers of alternative fuels so they can compete with subsidized carbon-based energy. You can’t make this stuff up.

A carbon tax could cut through the mess. The government could drain much of the current swamp of environmental and energy regulation, get rid of all those targeted subsidies and, instead, tax carbon fuels. By itself, this would cut demand for oil and coal and increase demand for alternative fuels such as solar, nuclear, and wind. Beyond the carbon-based/ non-carbon-based choice, it would sharply reduce government’s role in picking winners and losers and at least limit the potential for the next ethanol and Solyndra fiascos.

A carbon tax has broad support among economists across the ideological spectrum, but remains politically unpalatable. There are some serious policy reasons for this. For instance, a carbon tax (or its policy cousin, a cap-and-trade system) can be deeply regressive—a problem that could addressed with other tax changes.

But the political problems are far more challenging. Here are just a few:

If-Obama-is-for-it-we-are-against-it:  Once, cap-and-trade was supported by influential Republicans such as President George H.W. Bush and 2008 presidential candidate John McCain. Then, President Obama embraced it. Now, it is an idea with many enemies and few friends.

Bureaucratic resistance: Inside the executive branch, officials love complex solutions to problem such as carbon emissions. No fewer than 16 federal agencies and a half-dozen separate White House offices had a hand in the Administration report released today. Everyone from Homeland Security to the Smithsonian got in the act. From a bureaucratic point of view, everyone wants a piece of climate change. But the role of most agencies would be limited or even eliminated if policy is based on a carbon tax.

Congressional  resistance: It is the same problem with Congress. Today, just about every committee has some piece of the climate change action. Every lawmaker gets to hold a fundraiser (the deniers as well as the accepters). But with a tax-based system, only a relatively handful on the tax-writing committees could cash in.

The lobbyists: Entire industries have been built around all those regulations and subsidies. For instance, while solar prices are falling, the industry is still addicted to generous tax breaks. Could it make it in a carbon tax environment? It very well might. But business—even green business—does not like uncertainty.

Don’t mess with my car: Right now, Congress can’t work up the courage to raise the gas tax by a few pennies to support desperately-needed highway and bridge construction and repair. Imagine the firestorm if gasoline taxes were raised by, say, 25 cents. Tea party anyone?

Yet, there are enormous potential benefits to such a levy. A modest carbon tax could reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 10-15 percent, according to several recent studies. Last year, my Tax Policy Center colleagues Donald Marron and Eric Toder found that a tax of $20 per ton would raise enough revenue to significantly buy down corporate tax rates. Corporate tax reform would even be possible if some revenue from the carbon tax were used to finance a rebate to help offset the inevitable tax increases for low-income consumers.

The political system may not be ready for a carbon tax, but it is hard to read this new climate change paper without thinking about how valuable such a levy could be.



  1. Michael Bindner  ::  2:21 am on May 7th, 2014:

    I would rather use an employer based consumption tax to buy out the personal income tax for all but the moderately wealthy and above (taxing only the rich violates the Willie Sutton rule). Carbon taxes get in the way of being able to do that. I favor the seize as a danger of public health method for fixing carbon polution – then retrofiting if possible (demolishing if not) and stick the owners with the bill. Of course, aside from a few bad coal plants, the real problems are in Asia – and these are beyond both our taxing and retrofitting power. Is war justified to preserve beach houses and keep people from having to migrate? Doubtful. If food really is at risk from warming (which is counter-intuitive if you manage water resources well), then closed system growing solutions will solve that too. Indeed, warming may be the catalyst for us to finally grow scientifically rather than raping the land and flushing it into the sea.

  2. peter joseph  ::  4:03 pm on May 9th, 2014:

    You are so right! Please take a look at my entry into the MIT Climate CoLab contest for a U.S. Carbon Price and tell me what you think in the comments section. Thanks. http://climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/1300404/planId/2802

  3. headphones beats ebay  ::  9:49 pm on July 9th, 2014:

    The most effective strategy for the babyliss you may understand more about straight away.
    headphones beats ebay http://www.hekmarket.com/beats-by-dr-dre-studio-c-5.html

  4. Tammie  ::  1:32 pm on July 22nd, 2014:

    Similarly, the budget limitations through cost effective garage flooring
    is making an effort to reach all types of commercial and residential
    customers. Look down at cabinets, doors and wood moldings to see if there are teeth marks,
    or small mounds of wood shavings. Ideally, gutters should drain water away from the garage door and into water spouts
    that direct the water away from the house.

  5. Grass Mats From LogoMats  ::  2:30 pm on September 15th, 2014:

    You’ve ρrobably seen tires as bumƿers аround boat docks.
    To remove your wireless unit, network card and
    modem, locate thee remaining covers on tɦe baϲk of
    your HƤ laptop. In spite of the windy and rainy weather, golfers whο ventured to Cog Hill Country Club (Cog Hill is at 12294 Archer Avenue in Lemont,

    My homepage :: Grass Mats From LogoMats

  6. coaching aarhus  ::  11:42 am on September 26th, 2014:

    Your productiveness will suffer if you dont decouple your burning feeling of injustice from your unwanted behavior. Being yelding in your approach to people will actually give opportunity for putting more motivation behind your act.