Carbon tax

src: fee.org

A carbon tax is the tax imposed on the carbon content of the fuel. This is a form of carbon pricing. Income earned through taxes is not always used to compensate for tax-imposed carbon emissions (see implementation). Carbon is present in any hydrocarbon fuel (coal, petroleum, and natural gas) and converted to carbon dioxide ( CO
₂ ) and other products when burned. In contrast, non-combustion energy sources - wind, sunlight, geothermal, hydropower, and nuclear - do not convert hydrocarbons to CO
₂ . CO
₂ is hot -binding "greenhouse gas" that represents a negative externality to the climate system (see scientific opinion on global warming). Since GHG emissions caused by burning fossil fuels are closely related to the carbon content of individual fuels, the tax on these emissions can be levied by taxing the carbon content of fossil fuels at any point in the fuel product cycle.

The carbon tax offers social and economic benefits. This is a tax that increases revenues without significantly altering the economy while promoting climate change policy objectives. The objective of the carbon tax is to reduce the level of harmful and unfavorable emissions of carbon dioxide, thereby slowing climate change and its negative impact on the environment and human health.

The carbon tax offers a cost-effective way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. From an economic perspective, the carbon tax is a type of Pigovian tax. They help address emitters of greenhouse gases that do not face the full social cost of their actions. Carbon taxes can be a regressive tax, because they can directly or indirectly affect low-income groups disproportionately. The regressive impact of the carbon tax can be overcome by using tax revenues to support low-income groups.

A number of countries have implemented carbon taxes or energy taxes related to carbon content. Most environmental taxes with implications for greenhouse gas emissions in OECD countries are imposed on energy products and motor vehicles, not on CO
₂ directly.

Opposition to increasing environmental regulations such as carbon taxes often centers on concerns that companies may move and/or people may lose their jobs. It has been argued, however, that carbon taxes are more efficient than direct regulation and can even lead to higher jobs (see footnote). Many large users of carbon resources in power plants, such as the United States, Russia, and China, reject the carbon tax.

Video Carbon tax

​​Latar Belakang

CO ₂ dan pemanasan global

Carbon dioxide is one of the few greenhouse gases that trap heat (GHGs) emitted by humans (anthropogenic GHG). The scientific consensus is that human-caused greenhouse gas emissions are a major cause of global warming, and that carbon dioxide is the most important of anthropogenic GHG. Worldwide, 27 billion tons of carbon dioxide are generated by human activity each year. The physical effects of CO ₂ in the atmosphere can be measured as a change in the energy balance of the Earth's atmospheric system - coercion of CO ₂ . Carbon tax is one of the policies available for governments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

In the Kyoto Protocol (international treaty), CO ₂ emissions are set together with other GHGs. Different GHGs have different physical properties: the potential for global warming is an internationally accepted equivalence scale for other greenhouse gases in tons of carbon dioxide equivalents.

Economic theory

Carbon taxes are a form of pollution tax (although carbon dioxide occurs naturally). Pollution taxes are often grouped with two other economic policy instruments: tradeable pollution permits/credits and subsidies. These three environmental economic policy instruments are built on the basis of command and control rules. The difference is that classical penalty order rules establish, through performance or prescriptive standards, what every polluter should do to comply with the law. The rules of command and control are not considered as economic instruments because they are usually enforced by narrower means such as stop or control orders, although they may include administrative monetary penalties in location-specific regulations. The instrumental differences between tax and rule-and-control rules are determined by the established legislative names, and whether they contain "taxes" as the terms prescribed in the Act, for example the British Columbia Carbon Tax Act versus the Rules of a Certain Gender of Alberta, Alta Reg 139/2007

Carbon tax is also an indirect tax - tax on a transaction - compared to direct taxes, which impose income tax. The carbon tax is called the price instrument, as it sets the price for carbon dioxide emissions. In economic theory, pollution is perceived as a negative externality, a negative effect on parties not directly involved in transactions, which results in market failure. To confront the parties with this problem, economist Arthur Pigou proposes taxing goods (in this case hydrocarbon fuels), which are the source of negative externalities (carbon dioxide) so as to accurately reflect the cost of producing goods to society, thus internalization costs associated with the production of goods. Taxes on negative externalities are called Pigovian taxes, and should equal the cost of marginal damage.

Within the Pigou framework, the changes involved are marginal, and the size of the externality is assumed to be small enough not to distort the rest of the economy. According to scientific consensus, the impacts of climate change can lead to disastrous and non-marginal changes. "Non-marginal" means that the impact can significantly reduce the rate of income growth and welfare. The amount of resources to be devoted to avoiding the effects of climate change is controversial. Policies designed to reduce carbon emissions can also have a non-marginal impact.

The price of hydrocarbon fuels is expected to continue to increase as more countries are industrializing and increasing fuel supply demand. In addition to creating incentives for energy conservation, the carbon tax will put renewable energy sources such as wind, sun and geothermal on a more competitive footing, stimulating their growth. David Gordon Wilson first proposed a carbon tax in 1973.

Social cost of carbon

The social cost of carbon (SCC) is the marginal cost of the impact caused by emitting an extra ton of carbon (as carbon dioxide) at any point in time, including 'non-market' impacts on the environment and human health. The concept of carbon social costs was first debated by the Reagan administration in 1981. The initial goal of fixing the price for a ton of CO2 emissions was to help policymakers in evaluating whether policies designed to curb climate change are justified. An intuitive way to look at this is this: if the carbon price is $ 50 per ton by 2030, and we currently have a technology that can reduce emissions by 1 million metric tons by 2030, then the amount of investment below $ 50 million would make economic sense, while more than that will lead us to consider investing money elsewhere, and paying to reduce emissions by 2030.

Calculating SCC requires an estimate of atmospheric carbon dioxide residence time, along with estimating the impacts of climate change. The impact of extra tonnes of atmospheric carbon dioxide must then be converted into an equivalent impact on human climate and health, as measured by the amount of damage done and the cost of repairing it. In economics, comparing impacts over time requires a discount rate. This level determines the weights placed on impacts that occur at different times.

The best estimates of SCC come from Integrated Assessment Models (IAM) that predict the impact of climate change under various scenarios and allow to calculate monetized damage. One of the most widely used IAM is the Dynamic Climate and Economic Integrated model (DICE).

The DICE model, developed by William Nordhaus, makes provision for the calculation of carbon social costs. The DICE model defines SCC to "equal the economic impact of emission units in terms of t-period consumption as numÃÆ'Â © raire."

The number of SCC calculated in 2015 is $ 31.2 per ton CO2 for emissions, this amount will rise 3% in real terms, to account for inflation up to 2050. Estimated cost of carbon dioxide pollution is given per tonne, well carbon, $ X/tC , or carbon dioxide, $ X/tCO ₂ . One tC is roughly equivalent to 3.7 tCO ₂ .

According to economic theory, if the SCC estimates are complete and markets are perfect, the carbon tax should be set equal to the SCC. Emissions permits will also have the same value as SCC. But in reality, the market is not perfect, SCC estimates are incomplete, and externalities in the market are difficult to quantify accurately, resulting in inaccurate carbon taxes (Yohe et al. ., 2007: 823).

SCC estimates are very uncertain. Yohe et al. (2007: 813) summarizes the literature on SCC estimates: peer-reviewed SCC estimates for 2005 have an average value of $ 43/tC ($ 12/tCO ₂ ) with a standard deviation of $ 83/tC. The broad range of estimates is largely explained by the underlying uncertainties in the science of climate change (eg, climate sensitivity, which is a measure of the amount of global warming expected to double atmospheric concentrations CO
₂ ), various discount rate options, different economic and non-economic impact assessments, equality treatment, and how potential disaster impacts are expected. One particular problem arises when it comes to consensus about the discount rate used. Some, like Nordhaus, advocate a discount rate that is pegged to the current market rate, as we must treat efforts to reduce carbon dioxide emissions just as we treat other economic activities. Others, such as Stern, propose a much smaller discount rate because the "normal" discount rate is skewed when applied to the time scale at which climate change acts. As a result, other estimates of the SCC stretched at least threefold, from less than $ 1/tC to over $ 1,500/tC. The actual SCC is expected to increase over time. The rate of increase will be very likely 2 to 4% per year. A recent meta-analysis of the literature on carbon social cost estimates, however, finds evidence of publication bias in favor of larger estimates.

Carbon leak

Carbon leakage is the effect of emissions regulations in one country/sector on emissions in other countries/sectors that are not subject to the same regulation. Leakage effects can be negative (ie, increase overall effectiveness of reducing emissions) and positive (reducing the effectiveness of reducing overall emissions). Negative leaks, as desired, are commonly referred to as "spill-over".

According to Goldemberg et al. . (1996, p.Ã, 28), short-term leakage effects should be assessed against long-term leakage effects. Policies that, for example, see a carbon tax set only in developed countries could lead to emission leaks to developing countries. However, the desired negative leak may occur due to a decrease in demand for coal, oil and gas from developed countries and thus world prices. This will allow developing countries to afford more types of hydrocarbon fuels, thus being able to replace more oil or gas for coal, which essentially lowers their national emissions. However, in the long run, if technology transfer is less pollution delayed, this substitution by income effect may not have long-term benefits.

Carbon leakage is at the core of discussions on climate policy, given the meeting of issues currently under debate, including 2030 Energy and Climate Frameworks and a review of the EU carbon leak list by 2014.

Adjustment of limits, rates and restrictions

A number of policies have been suggested to address concerns over competitive losses because one country introduces a carbon tax while other countries do not. A similar policy has also been suggested in an effort to encourage countries to introduce a carbon tax. Suggested policies include border tax adjustments, trade tariffs, trade restrictions and deaths.

Border tax adjustments will take into account emissions that can be attributed to imports from countries with no carbon price. Another alternative is a trade ban or tariff applied to countries that do not pay taxes. It has been argued that such an approach could harm the targeted country as a trade measure (Gupta et al. ., 2007). To date, World Trade Organization law matters have not yet rendered specific decisions on climate-related taxes. Administrative aspects of border tax adjustments have also been discussed.

Other tax types

Two other taxes related to the carbon tax are the emissions tax and the energy tax. The emission tax for greenhouse gas emissions requires that every issuer pays fees, fees or taxes for every ton of greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere while energy taxes are charged directly to energy commodities.

In terms of climate change mitigation, the carbon tax, which is levied on the carbon content of fuels, is not a perfect substitute for taxes on CO ₂ emissions. For example, carbon taxes encourage a reduction in the use of hydrocarbon fuels, but do not provide incentives to reduce or improve mitigation technologies, eg. carbon capture and storage.

Energy taxes increase energy prices uniformly, regardless of the emissions produced by energy sources (Fisher et al. ., 1996, p.Ã, 416). The ad valorem energy tax is imposed on the energy content of fuel or the value of energy products, which may or may not be consistent with the amount of greenhouse gases emitted and their respective global warming. potency. Studies show that to reduce emissions by a certain amount, the energy tax will be more expensive than the carbon tax. However, even though CO ₂ emissions are externalities, using energy services may result in other negative externalities, for example, air pollution. If this other externality is taken into account, the energy tax may be more efficient than the carbon tax alone.

Another type of tax is fees and dividends, in which money collected from the taxes is returned fairly to all households, effectively imposing a carbon emissions tax and cutting those who burn less carbon.

Petroleum (motor gasoline, diesel fuel, jet fuel)

Many OECD countries have been taxing direct fuel for years for several applications; for example, the UK imposed direct duties on vehicle hydrocarbon oils, including gasoline and diesel. The tasks are adjusted to ensure that the carbon content of various fuels is handled with equality.

While direct taxes must send a clear signal to consumers, its use as an efficient mechanism for influencing the use of consumer fuel has been challenged in several areas:

• There may be a delay of a decade or more due to inefficient vehicles being replaced by newer models and old models filtering through the 'fleet'.
• There may be political reasons that prevent policy makers from imposing new cost ranges on voters.
• There is some evidence that consumer decisions about fuel economy are not fully aligned with the price of fuel. In turn, this may prevent manufacturers from producing vehicles that they value as having lower sales potential. Other attempts, such as imposing efficiency standards on producers, or changing income tax rules for taxable benefits, are at least as important.
• In many countries, fuel is already taxed to influence transportation behavior and to increase other public income. Historically, they have used this fuel tax as a common source of income, because their experience is that the price elasticity of fuel is low, thus increasing the fuel tax has little impact on their economies. However, under these circumstances the policies behind the carbon tax may not be clear.

Some also note that an appropriate price tax on vehicle fuel can also offset the "rebound effect" that has been observed when vehicle fuel consumption has increased through the imposition of efficiency standards. Instead of reducing overall fuel consumption, consumers have been seen traveling extra or buying heavier and stronger vehicles.

Calculation

Carbon taxes that compensate for SCC vary by fuel source. The production of carbon dioxide from a fuel source per unit mass or volume is multiplied by the SCC for taxes. Based on the assessed value of colleagues ($ 43/tC or $ 12/tCO ₂ , see carbon social costs , above), the table below estimates tax:

Note that the tax per kWh of electricity depends on the thermal efficiency of generated power generation, which varies from power plant to power plant. The following table estimates the American Physical Society (APS) of 10.3 BTU/Wh (33%). The APS notes that "It is expected that future crops, especially those based on gas turbine systems, will often have higher efficiencies, in some cases exceeding 50%." The highest efficiency achieved is 62% by the new EDF power plant at Bouchain [1] The theoretical conversion rate of 100% is 3,412 BTU/Wh. A more practical threshold for thermal power plants is Carnot's theorem.

Maps Carbon tax

Implementation

Both energy and carbon taxes have been implemented in response to commitments under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. In many cases where energy or carbon taxes are applied, taxes are applied in combination with various forms of exclusion.

Africa

Zimbabwe

Carbon taxes are paid in foreign currency at a rate of US $ 0.03 (3 cents) per liter of oil and diesel products or 5% of cost, insurance and shipping value (as defined in the Customs and Excise Act [Chapter 23: ) , which one is bigger.

South Africa

Tax on emissions has been filed for South Africa. Announced by Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan, the tax will be implemented starting September 1, 2015 on new motor vehicles. This tax will apply at the time of sale, and will be related to the amount of CO ₂ transmitted by the vehicle. 75 South African Rand will be added to the price for every gram of CO ₂ per kilometer of vehicles emitting over 120 g/km. Taxes will apply to passenger cars first and ultimately commercial vehicles. Bakkies (pickup trucks) will be taxed as they are often used as passenger vehicles: this has caused an uproar for fear of affecting the industry.

David Powels of the National Association of Automobile Manufacturers of South Africa (NAAMSA), opposes this taxation on light commercial vehicles. Taxes may increase the cost of new vehicles by 2.5% and lead to a decrease in total car sales: in addition, Powels questioned the ability to accurately predict CO ₂ emissions based on engine capacity. NAAMSA recognizes the ability of the carbon tax to change consumer behavior for environmental improvement, but argues that this tax is not transparent enough for consumers because taxation occurs at the time of car production. Powels said the tax was discriminatory for targeting new vehicles, and that the government should focus on introducing "green fuel" to South Africa.

The purpose of the carbon tax is to place South Africa on a "sustainable path". South Africa has produced a Long Term Mitigation Scenario (LTMS) to address climate policy issues that take into account variables such as technology, investment, and policy (including carbon tax) and to clarify South Africa's position for potential UNFCC negotiations.

Asia

China

The Chinese Government Ministry of Finance has proposed to introduce a carbon tax from 2012 or 2013, based on carbon dioxide output from hydrocarbon fuel sources such as oil and coal. The introduction of a carbon tax in China may affect the internal market, as well as many laws and regulations of other countries, but given the size of China's economy also contributes significantly to climate change mitigation.

India

On July 1, 2010, India introduced a national carbon tax of 50 rupees per ton ($ 1.07/t) of coal produced and imported to India. In a budget speech in 2014, the Finance Minister raised the price to 100 rupees per ton ($ 1.60/t at $ 60.5 conversion) In India, coal is used to power more than half of the country's power plants.

India's total coal production is estimated at 571.87 million tons in the year ending March 2010 and is expected to import around 100 million tonnes. The carbon tax expects to raise 25 billion rupees ($ 535 million) for the 2010-2011 financial year. According to Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee, a clean energy tax will help finance the National Clean Energy Fund (NCEF). Industrial agencies have not yet liked the levy and fear that higher coal prices can trigger inflation.

While many are still concerned, the carbon tax is a step to help India meet their voluntary targets to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide released per unit of gross domestic product by 25% from 2005 levels by 2020. Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh told reporters in June 2010 that domestic taxes must come before global carbon taxes, and India has implemented them while others debate the issue. With the new government in India under PM Narendra Modi, the carbon tax has been increased further from 100Rs per tonne to 200Rs per tonne in the 2015-16 Budget. Current carbon taxes reach 400rb per tonne.

Japanese

In October 2012 Japan introduced the Carbon tax with a view to taking action to reduce harmful climate change. The government plans to use revenues generated from this tax to finance clean energy projects and energy savings.

In December 2009, nine industry groups opposed the carbon tax on the opening day of the Copenhagen COP-15 climate conference stating, "Japan should not consider the carbon tax as it would undermine the most energy-efficient economy in the world." Grouping industries representing oil, cement, paper, chemicals, gas, electric power, automobile and electronics manufacturing, and the information technology sector. The sectors stated that "the government has never studied or explained quite clearly why such a carbon tax is needed, how effective and fair it is and how it should be used."

In 2005, environmental taxes proposed by the Japanese authorities were also delayed due to the great opposition of the Japan Petroleum Association (PAJ), industry and other consumers. The delay is "to avoid putting too much economic burden on end users because they already pay heavy taxes on hydrocarbon fuels amid high oil prices." The tax to be executed will be 2,400 yen ($ 20.85 in 2005 dollars) per ton of carbon dioxide emitted from fuel. The tax on coal is about 1.58 yen per kilogram and on petrol 1.52 yen per liter (4.3 cents per gallon in 2005 dollars). Officials estimate that the tax will generate 37 billion yen a year income for the government and generate 2,100 yen payments per year for the average household.

South Korea

On August 22, 2008 Chong Wa Dae, also known as the Blue House - the executive office and the official residence of the head of state of South Korea, confirmed the list of 40 new administrative strategy agendas, which include the replacement of the carbon tax with the current transportation tax. Most tax revenues of $ 11 trillion annually ($ 10.4 billion) will be financed for the "Low Carbon, Green Growth" movement, announced in a speech by President Lee Myung-bak that marked the 63-nation Liberation Day a week before the announcement. Carbon taxes are imposed on greenhouse gas emissions including carbon dioxide. The system of direct taxation is now applied to several European countries, such as Sweden, the Netherlands and Norway, as well as several states in North America. The temporary transportation tax, one of the country's main destination taxes, is scheduled to end in 2009. About 80 percent of the proceeds are used in transport-related jobs such as road construction. Additional taxation amendments may be followed by a "tax on emissions" baseline, in the possibility of applying the tax discrimination according to vehicle size and carbon tax at the current tax-free thermal power plant. Taxation on emissions can not be avoided in the low carbon policy that takes a big budget, the government said.

In February 2010, a deputy finance minister Yoon Young-sun confirmed that South Korea is considering a carbon tax to help reduce emissions by 4% from 2005 levels by 2020. This will be related to the cap-and-trade program that will be implemented later. This year. With a tax rate of 31,828 won (25 Euro) per ton CO ₂ , the South Korean government will collect 9.1 trillion won ($ 7.9 billion) in tax revenue under 2007 emissions. will be used to reduce corporate tax and income tax. On July 22, 2010, Chairman Sohn Kyung-shik of the Korean Chamber of Commerce and Industry asked the South Korean government to postpone the implementation of the carbon tax: "If the government implements stricter guidelines on carbon emissions, then the company may be burdened."

On July 13, 2010, the South Korean government announced plans to double its financing for the green research and development project to 3.5 trillion won ($ 2.9/Ã, £ 1.9bn) in 2013. The finance ministry decided that new investments would be incorporated into a new special green fund operated by state-run Korean Financial Corporation, for distribution to private sector projects. The government says the fund is part of a huge low-carbon investment drive that will see it invest a total of 107.4 trillion won, or two percent of the country's annual gross domestic product, on green projects between 2009 and 2013.

However, the government indicated that in addition to setting aside state funds, it would ask private companies to contribute 2.4 trillion won to the fund. He added that spending from the fund will be directed primarily to businesses involved in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and promoting energy efficiency. In addition, the government intends to expand its tax relief system to include new technologies in solar, wind and heat, low-emission vehicles, rechargeable batteries and next-generation nuclear reactors.

The government also set a voluntary target last year (2007) to reduce emissions by 2020 to four percent by 2005 levels by 2020, and is expected to announce plans for a carbon trading scheme to begin in 2012.

Taiwan

In October 2009 the deputy finance minister Chang Sheng-ho announced that Taiwan plans to adopt a carbon tax in 2011. However, Prime Minister Wu Den-yih and legislators stated that the carbon tax would increase the public suffering from recession and that the government should not levy taxes until Taiwan's economy recovers. He opposed the carbon tax. Many Taiwanese are opposed to tax increases as well. However, the Chung-Hua Institution for Economic Research (CIER), a think-tank assigned by the government to advise on its plans to reform state taxes, has recommended retributions of NT $ 2,000 (US $ 61.8, Ã, Â £ 37, 6) at each tonne of CO ₂ emissions. CIER estimates that Taiwan can raise NT $ 164.7bn (US $ 5.1bn, Ã, Â £ 3.1bn) from energy taxes and then NT $ 239bn (US $ 7.3bn, Ã, Â £ 4.4bn) of annual carbon levy on year 2021. If Taiwan passes its carbon tax policy, Taiwan will become the first Asian country with a tax on carbon emissions. Due to the relatively high amount of revenues from the carbon tax, the government plans to subsidize low-income families and public transport using revenue from carbon taxes.

Oceania

Australia

On July 1, 2012 the Federal Government of Australia introduced a carbon price of AUD $ 23 per ton of CO emitted ₂ -e on selected fossil fuels consumed by major industrial issuers and government agencies such as councils. To offset the impact of tax on some sectors of society, the government reduces income taxes (by raising tax-free thresholds) and increasing pensions and welfare payments slightly to cover expected price increases, and introducing compensation for some affected industries. On July 17, 2014, a report by the Australian National University estimated that the Australian scheme had cut carbon emissions by 17 million tonnes, the largest annual reductions in greenhouse gas emissions in 24 years of record in 2013 as carbon taxes helped drive a large drop in pollution from the power sector.

On July 17, 2014, the Abbott Government passed the revocation law through the Senate, and Australia became the first country to abolish the carbon tax. Instead, the government set up an Emissions Reduction Fund, paid by taxpayers of combined income, which, according to RepuTex, a market consultation, estimates that the government's main climate policy can only meet a third of emission reduction challenges if Australia will cut 2,000 to 5% by 2020.

New Zealand

In 2005, the Fifth Labor Government proposed a carbon tax to meet its obligations under the Kyoto Protocol. The proposal will set an emission price of NZ $ 15 per ton CO ₂ -equivalent. The planned taxes are scheduled to come into effect since April 2007, and are applied in most economic sectors, albeit with the exception of methane emissions from agriculture and provisions for the special exemption of carbon-intensive businesses if they adopt the world's best practice standards on emissions.

After the 2005 election, several small parties supporting the Fifth Government (NZ First and United Future) opposed the proposed tax, and it was abandoned in December 2005. In 2008, the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme was enforced through the Emissions Trading Amendment Act 2008.

Europe

In Europe, some countries have enacted energy taxes or energy taxes that are based in part on carbon content. These include Denmark, Finland, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Slovenia, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom. None of these countries have been able to introduce a uniform carbon tax for fuel in all sectors. For a review of the European experience with carbon taxation, see Andersen (2010).

European Union

During the 1990s, carbon/energy taxes were proposed at the EU level but failed due to industrial lobbying. In 2010, the European Commission considered applying a pan-European minimum tax on pollution licenses purchased under the EU ETS EU Greenhouse Gas Emission Trading Scheme where proposed new taxes would be calculated in terms of carbon content rather than volume, so that the materials burns with high energy concentrations, even though their carbon content is high, will no longer carry the same traditional low prices. According to the European Commission, the new plan will cost the company a minimum tax per ton of carbon dioxide emissions at the recommended level of EUR4 to EUR30 per ton CO ₂ .

Denmark

Until 2002, the standard carbon tax rate since 1996 amounted to 100 DKK per ton CO ₂ , equivalent to about 13 Euro or 18 US dollars. The net carbon emissions tax from fuel combustion may vary depending on the level of pollution emitted by each source, the tax rate varies between 402 DKK per ton of oil to 5.6 DKK per ton of natural gas and 0 for non-combustible renewable energy. The electricity tariff is 1164 DKK per ton or 10 ÃÆ'¸re per kWh, equivalent to 0.013 Euro or 0.017 US dollars per kWh. CO ₂ taxes apply to all energy users, including the industrial sector. But industrial companies can be taxed differently under two principles: the energy process is used for, and whether the company has signed voluntary agreements to implement energy efficiency measures. Such Danish policies provide incentives for companies to adopt more sustainable practices such as carbon dioxide restrictions and trading programs.

In 1992, Denmark issued a tax on carbon dioxide, which is about $ 14 for business and $ 7 for households, per ton CO ₂ . However, Denmark offers tax returns for energy efficient changes. One of the main purposes of taxes is to change their habits, as most of the money raised will be put into research for alternative energy sources.

Finnish

Finland was the first country in the 1990s to introduce a CO ₂ tax, initially with some exceptions to certain fuels or sectors. Since then, however, energy taxation has changed many times and substantially. This change is related to the opening of the Nordic electric market. Other Nordic countries exclude energy-intensive industries, and the Finnish industry feels harmed by this. Finland does place a border tax on imported electricity, but this is found to be inconsistent with the single EU market law. Changes were then made to the carbon tax to partially exclude intensive energy companies. This has the effect of increasing the cost of reducing CO ₂ emissions (page 16).

Vourc'h and Jimenez (2000, p.Ã, 17) state that arguments based on competitive losses need to be viewed with caution. For example, they suggest that carbon tax revenues can be used to reduce labor taxes, which will support the competitiveness of non-energy intensive industries.

French

On September 10, 2009, France specified a new carbon tax with new levies on oil, gas and coal consumption by households and businesses that should come into effect on January 1, 2010. The new carbon tax would be 17 euros (25 US Dollars) per tonne of carbon dioxide (CO ₂ ) for households and businesses, which will raise the cost of a liter of unleaded fuel by about four cents (25 cents US dollars per gallon). The estimated total revenue from the carbon tax is between 3 to 4.5 billion euros annually, with 55 percent of the profits coming from households and 45 percent coming from business. The tax will not apply to electricity because it is mostly manufactured by the French nuclear reactor network.

On December 30, the bill was blocked by the French Constitutional Council. It was considered the bill included too many exceptions and said they were unconstitutional. It condemns exceptions for industry as unequal and inefficient, showing that less than half of all emissions will be taxed and say it's unfair to apply only taxes to fuel and heating, which accounts for a limited share of carbon emissions. Discounts and exclusions will apply to many aspects of industry and agriculture, including fisheries, trucks, and agriculture. French President Nicolas Sarkozy, despite his oath to "lead the struggle to save mankind from global warming", does not support the bill, saying that France needs support from all EU before it will try and continue with carbon tax.

In 2013, the Carbon tax is again announced for France. Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault launches a new Climate Energy Contribution (CEC) on September 21, 2013. The tax will apply at the rate of EUR7/ton CO ₂ in 2014, EUR14.50 in 2015 and up to EUR22 in 2016.

German

The German ecological tax reform was adopted in 1999. Subsequently, the country's ecological laws were changed twice in 2000 and in 2003. Firstly, the law provided tax growth from fossil fuels and fuels and laid the foundations for energy taxes. Only in 2003, after the gradual implementation of the law, the amount of emissions decreased by 2.4%, ie 20 million tons of CO2. Thus, environmental taxes are one of the most powerful instruments for climate protection in Germany. The number of workplaces increased by 250,000 jobs.

Republic of Ireland

In 2004, following a policy review, the Irish Government refused the introduction of the carbon tax as a policy option. However, in 2007 the Fianna FÃÆ'¡¡il-Green coalition government was formed, and promised to reconsider the issue. In the 2010 budget the country's first carbon tax was introduced. The new tax is levied at EUR15 per ton emission CO ₂ (about US $ 20 per ton).

Carbon taxes apply to kerosene, marked oil gases, liquefied petroleum gas, fuel oil, and natural gas. Natural Gas Carbon Tax does not apply to electricity because electricity costs are included in the price under the Single Electricity Market (SEM). Similarly, natural gas users are exempt from taxes if they can prove that they use gas to "generate electricity, for chemical reduction, or for electrolytic or metallurgical processes". "A partial relief from taxes is granted for natural gas delivered for use in installations covered by greenhouse gas emission permits issued by the Environmental Protection Agency.The corresponding natural gas will be taxed at the minimum rate specified in EU Energy Tax Instructions, ie EUR0.54 per megawatt hour with gross calorie value. "Pure biofuel is also excluded. The Institute for Economic and Social Research estimates the tax will cost between about EUR2 and EUR3 per week per household, or about EUR156 per year: a survey from the Central Statistical Office reported that Ireland's average disposable income was nearly EUR48,000 in 2007.

There is a concern that the carbon tax can disproportionately affect elderly and low-income households. One group, Ireland Active Retirement, proposes that "an additional allowance of EUR4 per week is given to people who receive State pensions for 30 weeks currently covered by fuel allowances," they suggest that "home heating oils are added to the category covered in Household Benefit Packages, which are available to parents in State pension receipts ".

Taxes are paid by the company to the Collector General. Fraudulent violations may be punishable under section 1078 of the 1997 Taxes Consolidation Act, which allows up to 5 years in jail or a fine of no more than EUR126,970. Failure to comply with tax breaches Article 73 of the Financial Law of 2010. Payments for the first accounting period are due in July 2010.

The Irish Rural Link NGO has noted that according to the Irish Institute of Economic and Social Research (ESRI) "the carbon tax will weigh heavily on rural households." Irish Rural Link claims that experience from other countries has shown that the carbon tax will only succeed if it is part of a comprehensive package of actions, which includes reducing some other taxes that do not seem to approach the Government.

Carbon tax was introduced in Ireland in 2010 budget by the Green Party/Fianna FÃÆ'¡nil coalition government at a rate of EUR15/ton CO ₂ applied to gasoline and diesel and for home heating oil. (diesel). Electricity is exempted as a power plant from a fossil fuel power plant covered by EU ETS. Solid fuels including coal and grass are also excluded.

In 2011 the new government coalition Fine Gael and Labor raised the carbon tax by 33% to EUR20/ton. Farmers are given tax breaks to compensate for this increase.

Dutch

The Netherlands began a carbon tax in 1990. However, in 1992 it was replaced with a 50/50 carbon/energy tax called Environmental Tax on Fuel, a tax valued partly based on carbon content and partly on energy content. The charge was changed to tax and became part of general tax revenue. Thus, it falls under the administration of the Ministry of Finance. General fuel taxes are collected on all hydrocarbon fuels. The fuel used as raw material is not taxable. Tax rates are based 50/50 on energy and fuel carbon content. In 1996, the Energy Regulatory Tax, 50/50 carbon/other energy taxes, was also applied. Environmental tax and regulatory taxes are 5.16 Dutch guilders, or NLG, (~ $ 3.13) or per ton CO ₂ and 27.00 NLG (~ 16.40) per ton CO ₂ respectively. Under general fuel taxes, electricity is not taxed, though the fuel used to generate electricity may be taxed. Energy-intensive industries were used to benefit from preferential rates under this tax but the benefits were canceled in January 1997. Also, since 1997 nuclear power has been taxed under general fuel tax at the NLG level of 31.95 per gram of uranium-235.38 The European Environmental Agency issued an Executive Summary stating "Although the EU's 5th Environmental Action Program in 1992 recommended the use of larger economic instruments such as environmental taxes, there has been little progress in its use since then at the EU level." However, "at the level of Member States, there has been a continuous increase in the use of environmental taxes over the past decade, which has accelerated in the last 5-6 years... Countries including the Netherlands and the United Kingdom."

More recently, in 2007, the Netherlands introduced a Waste Fund funded by carbon-based packaging tax. This tax is used to finance the national Treasury and to finance activities to help achieve the recycling goal of 65% of the packaging used in 2012. The Nedvang Organization (Nederland van afval naar grondstof or the Netherlands from waste to value), established in 2005, is organizations that support manufacturers and packaged goods importers achieve individual company goals under the Dutch packaging decision. This decree was signed in 2005 and stated that manufacturers and importers of packaged goods are responsible for the collection and recycling of such waste, and that at least 65% of the waste must be recycled. Producers and importers may choose to achieve their goals individually or by joining organizations such as Nedvang.

The Packaged-Based Carbon Tax was analyzed on behalf of the Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment and proved ineffective. Therefore, the packaging tax is removed. The producer's responsibility activities for packaging are now financed under a private contract, which has been declared legally binding.

Swedish

In January 1991, Sweden imposed a CO ₂ tax of 0.25 SEK/kg ($ 40 per tonne at that time, or EUR 27 at the current rate) on the use of oil, coal, natural gas , liquefied petroleum gas, gasoline, and aviation fuel used in domestic travel. Industrial users pay half the tariff (between 1993 and 1997, 25% of the tariff), and certain high-energy industries such as commercial horticulture, mining, manufacturing and the pulp and paper industry are entirely exempt from these new taxes.

In 1997, tariffs were raised to 0.365 SEK/kg ($ 60 per tonne) CO ₂ . In 2007, the tax was SEK $ 930 (EUR 101) per tonne CO ₂ .

Taxes are credited with spurring significant displacement of hydrocarbon fuels into biomass. As the Swedish climate change expert for Nature Conservation Emma Lindberg said, "That is one of the main reasons that lead people to climate-friendly solutions, making pollution more costly and focused on people finding energy-efficient solutions."

"It increases the use of bioenergy", says University Professor Thomas Thomas Johansson, former director of energy and climate at the UN Development Program. "It has a huge impact, especially on warming, with every city in Sweden using district heating, previously coal or oil used for district heating, now biomass is used, usually waste from forests and the forest industry.

Economic growth does not seem to be affected. Between 1990 and 2006, the Swedish economy grew 44-46 percent (about 2.8% per year), depending on the source.

United Kingdom

In 1993, the British government introduced a fuel duty escalator (FDE), environmental tax on retail oil products. The tax is explicitly designed to reduce carbon dioxide emissions in the transport sector. Because carbon has a fixed ratio to fuel quantity, FDE roughly estimates carbon taxes. The transport lobby in the UK is very critical of FDE. The FDE, which is the only "real" carbon tax in Britain, failed because of provoked political criticism, and an increase in FDE was automatically canceled in 1999. The fuel tax increase has since been discretionary.

Politically damaging fuel protests in 2000 contributed to the government's decision to reduce the real rate of fuel taxes. At that time, taxes and duties represented more than 75% of the total pump price. In terms of money, past FDE increases remain valid, but in real terms, the increase has been reduced by the rate of inflation. In 2006, the tax represents about 2/3 of the pump price.

In addition, the UK Change Climate Change was introduced in 2001.

Norwegian

Norway introduced the CO ₂ tax on hydrocarbon fuels in 1991. Taxes started at a high rate of US $ 51 per ton CO ₂ on gasoline, with an average tax of US $ 21 per tonne. The tax is also applied to diesel, mineral oil, oil and gas used in North Sea extraction activities. The International Energy Agency (IEA) 2001 Norway review of the IEA Energy Policy states that "since 1991 the tax on carbon dioxide has been applied in addition to the fuel excise tax." This is one of the highest carbon taxes in the OECD. Carbon taxation is also applied to offshore oil and gas production. The IEA forecast for revenues generated by the CO ₂ tax in 2004 was 7808 million NOK (approximately US $ 1.3 billion in dollars in 2010).

According to Norway's IEA 2005 Assessment, Norway's CO ₂ tax is the most important climate policy instrument, and covers about 64% of Norwegian CO ₂ emissions and 52% of total GHG emissions. Several industrial sectors have been granted tax exemptions to maintain their competitive position. Various studies in the 1990s, and an economic analysis by Statistics Norway, have estimated the effect of CO ₂ tax to a reduction of 2.5-11% of Norway's emissions under a business-as-usual approach (ie, emissions that will happen without tax). However, even with a carbon tax, Norway's per capita emissions increased 15% between 1991 (when carbon tax was introduced) and 2008.

In an effort to reduce CO2 emissions by a larger amount, Norway implemented the first phase of the Emissions Trading Scheme in 2005 and joined the EU EU Trade Scheme (EU ETS) in 2008. By 2013, about 55% of CO2 emissions in Norway taxes and emissions not covered by the carbon tax are included in the EU ETS. Certain CO2 taxes applied to emissions resulting from petroleum activities on the continental shelf. This tax is charged per liter of oil and liquefied natural gas produced, as well as per standard cubic meter of gas being burned or directly emitted into the air. However, this carbon tax is considered a deductible operating expense for oil production which can therefore be eliminated to reduce the ordinary tax paid by oil companies. In 2013, the carbon tax rate doubled in Norway to 0.96 NOK per liter/standard cubic meter of mineral oil and natural gas. By 2016, the tax rate has been increased to 1.02 NOK per liter or standard cubic meters of oil and natural gas. Despite this increase, there is an intention to reduce taxes in the future if there is an ETS ETS price increase from the rate when an increase in carbon tax rates is implemented. According to the Norwegian Ministry of Environment, the CO2 tax has become the most important tool for reducing emissions produced by petroleum activities and there is a low level of CO2 emissions per oil equivalent produced.

Swiss

In January 2008, Switzerland imposed a CO ₂ incentive tax on all hydrocarbon fuels, such as coal, oil and natural gas, unless they were used for energy. Fuel gasoline and diesel are not affected by CO ₂ taxes. This tax is collected by the Swiss Customs Administration. This is an incentive tax as it is designed to promote the economic use of hydrocarbon fuels. The tax amounts to CHF 12 per ton CO ₂ (US $ 11.41 per ton CO ₂ ), which is equivalent to CHF 0.03 per liter of heating oil (US $ 0.108 per gallon) and CHF 0.025 per m ³ of natural gas (US $ 0.024 per m ³ ). This tax is derived from the Swiss Federal Act of 1999 on Legal Reduction CO ₂ (CO ₂ ). Although Switzerland prefers to rely on voluntary action and measures to achieve emission reductions, the CO ₂ Act mandates the introduction of CO ₂ taxes if voluntary action proves insufficient. In 2005 the federal government ruled that additional measures are needed to achieve emissions reductions and fulfill the Kyoto Protocol commitment of 8% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions below 1990 levels between 2008 and 2012. In 2007, CO ₂ tax approved by the Swiss Federal Council, came into force in 2008. In 2010, the highest tax rate was CHF 36 per ton CO ₂ (US $ 34.20 per ton CO ₂ ).

Companies are allowed to exempt themselves from taxes by participating in Swiss emissions-trading schemes where they voluntarily commit to legally binding targets to reduce their CO ₂ emissions. Under this scheme, the emission allowance is provided to the company for free, and each year the same emission allowance as the amount of CO ₂ emitted must be submitted by the company. Companies are allowed to sell or trade excess permits. However, if a company fails to deliver the correct benefit amount, they must pay retroactive CO ₂ taxes for each ton of CO ₂ emitted since the exemption is granted. About 400 companies are taking part in the CO 2 emissions credit trading under the program. In 2009, for the second year in a row, the company returned sufficient credit to the Swiss government to cover CO ₂ emissions for this year. The 2009 report shows that the company only spent about 2.6 million tons of CO ₂ , falling well below the total allowed total of 3.1 million tons. The Swiss carbon market remains fairly small, with some tradable emissions licenses. Swiss domestic law tends to support the use of CO ₂ taxes to achieve emission reductions and preferences for this tax combined with an immature carbon market could explain why Switzerland has not yet joined the EU EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS).

Tax is a neutral income, and its revenue is distributed proportionally to the company and to the Swiss population. For example, if the population bears 60% of the tax burden, they will receive 60% of the redistribution. For corporations, revenues will be distributed to all companies, except those who choose to exempt from tax through cap-and-trade programs. Revenue is given to the company in proportion to the total salaries of their employees and is distributed through AHV (Federal Old Age and Survivors' Insurance) compensation funds that pay the relevant amount of revenue to the company. Income from taxes paid by Swiss residents is redistributed equally to all Swiss citizens through health insurance companies and their insurance premium deductions. In June 2009, the Swiss Parliament decided to allocate about a third of its revenue from the carbon tax to a 10-year development program for the renovation of climate-friendly buildings. The program promotes the renovation of buildings, the use of renewable energy, the utilization of waste heat, and building techniques.

As part of the initial redistribution program decided by the Swiss Federal Council in 2009, tax revenues from 2008, 2009 and 2010 were distributed in 2010. In 2008 alone, the CHF tax of 12 per ton CO ₂ collected about CHF 220 million (US $ 209 million) in revenue. On June 16, 2010, a total of around CHF 360 million (US $ 342 million) was available for distribution to the Swiss population and economy. Estimated in 2010, at the highest tax rate of CHF 36 per ton CO ₂ , tax revenues will be around CHF 630 million (US $ 598 million). Of the projected CHF 630 million, CHF 200 million (US $ 190 million) will be allocated to development programs and the remaining CHF 430 million (US $ 409 million) will be redistributed in 2010 to the population and economy. The International Energy Agency (IEA) praised the Swiss CO ₂ tax for its excellent design and noted that the recycling of tax revenues for all citizens and companies was "healthy fiscal practice".

Since 2005, transportation fuels in Switzerland have been charged an additional Climate Cent Initiative - a CHF 0.015 per liter surcharge for gasoline and diesel (US $ 0.0038 per gallon) that will remain in effect by the end of 2012. However, this additional cost can be increased with CO ₂ tax on transport fuel if emissions reductions are not satisfactory. In their 2007 review, the IEA recommends that Switzerland apply CO ₂ tax on transportation fuels or increase the Climate Cent cost to better balance the high costs of meeting cross cutting emissions targets.

Switzerland is currently on track to meet the Kyoto Protocol's commitment of an 8% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions below 1990 levels between 2008 and 2012. The combination of CO ₂ tax and other voluntary measures by individual businesses and private individuals allowing Switzerland to achieve this reduction goal.

Central America

Costa Rica

In 1997 Costa Rica imposed a 3.5 percent carbon tax on hydrocarbon fuels. Part of the funds generated by the tax goes to the "Payments for Environmental Services" (PSA) program that provides incentives for property owners to practice sustainable development and forest conservation. About 11% of Costa Rica's national territory is protected by the plan. The program now pays about $ 15 million a year to about 8,000 property owners.

North America

Canada

At the Canadian federal election in 2008, the carbon tax proposed by the Liberal Party leader StÃÆ'Â © phane Dion, known as Green Shift, became a central issue in the campaign. That would be neutral to income, with an increase in carbon taxes offset by tax cuts for citizens. However, it proved unpopular and contributed to the Liberal Party's defeat with its worst part of the popular vote since the Confederacy. Instead, the Conservative Party, which won the election, has pledged to "develop and implement North American cap-and-trade systems for greenhouse gases and air pollution, with implementation taking place between 2012 and 2015."

Although there is no federal carbon tax, some Canadian provinces have a carbon tax:

• Quebec:

Canada's Canadian province became the first in Canada to introduce a carbon tax. The tax should be imposed on energy producers from October 1, 2007, with collected revenues being used for energy efficiency programs including public transport. The tax rate for gasoline is $ CDN0,008 per liter, or about $ 3.50 per ton from CO
₂ equivalent.

• British Columbia:

On February 19, 2008, the province of British Columbia announced its intention to apply a carbon tax of $ 10 per ton of carbon dioxide emissions (CO ₂ e) (2.41 cents per liter on gasoline) starting July 1, 2008, making BC the first North American jurisdiction to apply such taxes. The tax will increase every year after until 2012, reaching the final price of $ 30 per ton (7.2 cents per liter at the pump). Unlike previous proposals, legislation will keep carbon tax revenues pending by reducing corporate tax and income taxes at an equivalent rate. Also, the government will also reduce taxes above and beyond the carbon tax which was offset by $ 481 million over three years. In January 2010, the carbon tax was applied to biodiesel. Before the tax actually took effect, the British Columbia government sent a "rebate rebate" of the expected earnings to all residents of British Columbia on December 31, 2007. In January 2013, the carbon tax collected about $ 1 billion annually used to lower other taxes in the UK Columbia. Terry Lake, environment minister of British Columbia, said "It makes sense, it's simple, well received."

The neutral carbon income tax of British Columbia is based on the following principles:

• All carbon tax revenues are recycled through tax reductions - The government has a legal requirement to present an annual plan to the legislature demonstrating how all carbon tax revenues will be returned to taxpayers through tax deductions. The money will not be used to finance government programs.
• Low starting tax rate and gradually increase - Starting from a low level gives individuals and business time to make adjustments and honor decisions made before tax announcements.
• Low-income and family-protected individuals - Refundable Low Income Tax Credit Refunds are designed to help offset the carbon taxes paid by low-income individuals and families.
• Tax has the widest possible base - Almost all emissions from fuel combustion in B.C. taken in Canada's National Environmental Inventory Report are taxed, without exception except as necessary for integration with other future climate action policies and for efficient administration.
• The tax will be integrated with the action

  Source of the article : Wikipedia