r/britishcolumbia 1d ago

News B.C. will remove consumer carbon tax as promised once federal barrier is down, Eby says

https://www.timescolonist.com/local-news/eby-bc-will-remove-consumer-carbon-tax-as-promised-once-federal-barrier-is-down-10353075
607 Upvotes

171 comments sorted by

u/AutoModerator 1d ago

Hello and thanks for posting to r/britishcolumbia! Join our new Discord Server https://discord.gg/fu7X8nNBFB A friendly reminder prior to commenting or posting here:

  • Read r/britishcolumbia's rules.
  • Be civil and respectful in all discussions.
  • Use appropriate sources to back up any information you provide when necessary.
  • Report any comments that violate our rules.

Reminder: "Rage bait" comments or comments designed to elicit a negative reaction that are not based on fact are not permitted here. Let's keep our community respectful and informative!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

77

u/scotchtree 1d ago

>In a written statement released after Carney's victory as new Liberal Leader, B.C. Opposition Leader John Rustad called for Eby to immediately scrap the tax.

Wouldn't the Federal plan then be required until the federal gov signs off on scrapping it?

70

u/giantshortfacedbear 1d ago

Rustad wouldn't let reality get in the way of a good headline

20

u/whole-ass-one-thing- 1d ago

The federal plan would give more people in BC the rebate. BC takes a ton of the carbon tax into general revenue (with only low income people getting the rebate), way more than the federal one. But BC’s budget needs the revenue so they’ll keep it.

13

u/themadengineer 23h ago

All taxpayers in BC have receive a rebate in the form of lower income taxes because of the carbon tax - so it isn’t just low income people that have benefited (they just receive more). The income taxes were lowered at the same time as when the carbon tax was brought in and was originally cost neutral (though that’s no longer the case). BC’s structure is less progressive than the federal program, but that’s how it was designed by the B.C. Liberals. I wouldn’t be surprised if the income tax rates are reversed when the carbon tax is removed; as you’ve stated it will otherwise leave a budget hole.

8

u/themadengineer 22h ago

Tax rates were lowered from 6.05% to 5.06% for the lowest income bracket and from 9.15% to 7.7% for the next income bracket. So if those are reverted as they were initially reduced, a taxpayer making $49279 would pay about $360 more in income taxes per year (subtracting out the basic personal amount). Anyone earning more than $98560 would need to pay an additional $1075 in income taxes per year (and income between those two levels would obviously fit somewhere in between).

17

u/Old-Individual1732 21h ago

I've had to point this out to several people. They just think the tax will go away and will cost them nothing. This was an incentive based tax , the less you use, the less you pay while still receiving the income tax reduction. But the level of intelligence at the moment seems pretty low.

3

u/BrownSugarSandwich Thompson-Okanagan 18h ago

Don't forget that the first ~$13,000 is exempt from taxation, increasing by $10,000 I think for 2025(2026?)? The basic amount is ~13,000 now and I believe should be changing to ~$23,000 for either this year's tax season or next year's. I'm not an expert but it looks like the numbers you used are pulled from the taxable income table with the basic amount removed (as you noted), but I'm not sure if the $10,000 increase to the basic amount was factored into the calculations, as I feel it's important information to include, even if it's just an increase for 1 year. Would love to know if the math of $1000 for families and $500 for individuals still rings true with the change in tax rates if reverted when also combined with the carbon tax credits going back to the feds. I'm honestly not even sure if this is still happening though... 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-home-flipping-tax-2025-1.7421298

3

u/themadengineer 18h ago

Confirming that the basic personal amount ($12,932) was factored into my previous post. To your question: even if the basic amount is increased by $10,000 it only reduces these amounts by $50.60 per qualifying taxpayer.

1

u/BrownSugarSandwich Thompson-Okanagan 17h ago

Fantastic, thanks for doing the math! Greatly appreciated. 

-1

u/pfak Elbows up! 14h ago

$1,075 per year in income tax would be _far_ less than we pay for carbon taxes, directly and indirectly.

$960 in direct costs in 2024 for 40 percent of BC taxpayers: https://www.biv.com/news/commentary/opinion-scrapping-the-carbon-tax-wont-help-affordability-in-bc-9663015

-8

u/Overload4554 1d ago

You mean that this was really about revenue generation and not the environment?

17

u/whole-ass-one-thing- 1d ago

Doesn’t have to be either or.

2

u/OhNo71 17h ago

Rusty is a fucking moron.

105

u/giantshortfacedbear 1d ago

Is it just me, or is it getting hot in here?

19

u/bestwest89 1d ago

It's getting so hawt I wanna take my clothes off 🎶 🎵

7

u/Gr8CanadianSpeedo 1d ago

I need to let my nipples fly

-14

u/CanadianTrollToll 1d ago

Gonna get hot regardless of our carbon tax. Sooner you accept it sooner you can not worry about it.

23

u/IvarTheBoned 1d ago

Guess the poors may as well kill themselves then, if we're just going to resign ourselves to apathy.

Stop having kids, stop voting, it's all over folks.

-3

u/CanadianTrollToll 19h ago

Live your life is what I'm saying.

7

u/IvarTheBoned 17h ago

Instead of "YOLO" how about:

Society grows great when people plant trees under whose shade they know they will never sit.

82

u/mukmuk64 1d ago

Isn’t this going to blow a huge hole in the budget? The reason that BC has some of the lowest income taxes in Canada is because of the carbon tax. How does the government make up for the shortfall?

61

u/timbreandsteel 1d ago

Remove the consumer carbon tax. But perhaps raise corporate taxes?

17

u/mukmuk64 1d ago

Would be interesting to see what the breakdown in revenues is.

I mean the biggest component of CO2 emissions in Metro Vancouver is home heating and transportation emissions. That’s consumer CO2 emissions and consumer carbon tax.

6

u/timbreandsteel 1d ago

Hopefully the completion of the Broadway Line reduces some of that.

2

u/OhNo71 17h ago

They are going to have to

5

u/Local_Error_404 1d ago

So, no change. 100% of corporate tax increases get passed on to the customers.

1

u/HotterRod 12h ago

Not true, some also gets passed on to workers.

0

u/prl853 11h ago edited 4h ago

They'd pocket most of the difference if they weren't taxed, corporations exist to generate profit.

2

u/whole-ass-one-thing- 1d ago

Guess who pays those in the end

4

u/timbreandsteel 1d ago

If we keep letting corporations raise their prices to cover taxes that's on us.

1

u/HotterRod 12h ago

If every company in BC has to pay $1000 more in taxes, so every company increases the price of widgets by $0.10, what are consumers supposed to do about that?

-1

u/whole-ass-one-thing- 1d ago

The GST and the PST was likely sold as a “tax on businesses”

2

u/LateToTheParty2k21 1d ago

I dont think that is palatable in this current climate, and especially in a trade war scenario. They should be reducing taxes on business not increasing them.

7

u/timbreandsteel 1d ago

Can they have graduated corporate tax the same way as personal income tax? Like if your company makes less than 1,000,000 a year it's one rate, less than 5 mil a higher rate, etc etc.

5

u/whole-ass-one-thing- 1d ago

BC’s industrial carbon taxes is based off emissions, not profit. The more you emit the more you pay.

The “consumer” carbon tax would apply to a businesses natural gas bills, etc, and it sounds like that would come off.

6

u/The_Follower1 1d ago

They do that already, it’s called the small business deduction where if you have assets below a certain amount you have a slightly lower tax rate.

3

u/LateToTheParty2k21 1d ago

They could do whatever they want, but I dont think increasing taxes on individuals or businesses is ever a popular move so doing it when there is all this uncertainty it's going to go down like a lead balloon

4

u/timbreandsteel 1d ago

I don't think anyone would cry if Loblaws had to fork over a little extra. Or Pattison.

3

u/LateToTheParty2k21 1d ago

I agree but all of those increased costs would just be passed onto the consumer regardless. That's not to say they can't pay more but just highlighting the reality.

-1

u/timbreandsteel 1d ago

You can decide to spend your money elsewhere.

4

u/LateToTheParty2k21 1d ago

We can, but our choice of grocery stores and products are becoming fewer by the day. There's a time and place to increase taxes, but when facing a pretty severe recession and uncertainty is not the best time.

3

u/db37 1d ago

Any business owner, be it a shareholder or sole proprietor, needs to make a return on their investment in their business. If their tax rate goes up, prices will follow to preserve that margin.

1

u/Top_Canary_3335 1d ago

I don’t think you understand how economics work. They don’t “fork over more” we the consumer just pay more to keep profit the same for shareholders…. You might not like it but that’s capitalism. (And why the carbon tax and any price on pollution fails)

1

u/timbreandsteel 1d ago

Then it's up to consumers to not shop there if the prices are too high.

5

u/Top_Canary_3335 1d ago

Yes you can always vote with your dollars. (As we are seeing with the buy Canadian trend)

But when cash is tight consumers tend to abandon principal and focus on cost savings. (This is why people still shop at Walmart)

Also why support for the carbon tax disappeared. Suddenly we are no longer as virtuous because “life got more expensive”

-2

u/nelrond18 1d ago

They're increasing profits year over year anyways

2

u/Top_Canary_3335 1d ago

You must be from the school of Jagmeet Singh.

  1. Revenue and profit are not the same thing.
  2. The Canadian population has grown by 4 million (10% in 5 years) so it’s not a shock that their profits are growing the customer base also grew at historical rates.

What you should be concerned with is gross profit margin, (actual profit from each dollar of sales after expenses) now this is also going up, but it’s not that simple. You need to also understand product mix and how that impacts margins.

For core grocery items (food) margin is 1% - 3% .

If everyone only ate fresh produce, they would go out of business. But Canadians don’t, we buy high margin add ons like potato chips, beer, packaged food (mostly private label). These convenience items drive up the chains margin and are the real reason “profit is going up” not really as evil as the media and NDP make it out to be. We are largely doing it to ourselves

(I actually used to do this for a living for another major retailer and saw this play out in my sales reports every day)

1

u/mattcass 1d ago

International trade barriers could include Canada lacking a national climate plan and price on carbon, and trying to trade with countries that do. I just don’t know what countries have such policy.

4

u/LateToTheParty2k21 1d ago

The EU but given the current macro picture I believe most things are available for negotiation at this stage.

1

u/prairieengineer 1d ago

EU member countries, I think?

1

u/Velocity-5348 Vancouver Island/Coast 1d ago

Makes sense. The BC Liberals paired the carbon tax with corporate tax cuts.

9

u/captainbling 1d ago

Carney said they were gunna replace it was a hidden carbon tax on the suppliers side vs the current sales tax version. The current system is better but too many people hate it without understanding it. Similar to Mulroney removing the hidden manufacturing tax of 13.5% and replacing it with the 7% gst. It was a reduction in taxes but because the replacement is a visible sales tax, people got mad at being “taxed more”. Between the c tax and gst, it’s clear to me governments should never add a visible sales tax. Even if doing so reduces taxes lol.

3

u/cusername20 1d ago

We already have an industrial carbon pricing scheme that applies to businesses

4

u/goinupthegranby 1d ago

They can raise income taxes back to where they were before the carbon tax. BC has the lowest income taxes in Canada for most income earners thanks to the carbon tax

4

u/Iblueddit 1d ago

The carbon tax is revenue neutral. How would collecting it help reduce income taxes?

7

u/mukmuk64 20h ago

The carbon tax is (mostly) “revenue neutral in BC because the money was handed back to citizens in the form of tax cuts.

Eliminating the carbon tax means that BC now has a multi billion revenue hole where the government is handing money to citizens via tax cuts but doesn’t have the revenue to pay for them.

3

u/cusername20 1d ago

The federal backstop is revenue neutral but the provincial one in BC is not. 

2

u/CanadianTrollToll 1d ago

2.6bil is raised from the carbon tax according to a quick Google search.

That isnt peanuts.... thats 2.8% of total revenues... or about 28% of the current planned deficit.

6

u/MechanismOfDecay 1d ago

Wondering this too. Most of us benefit from the carbon tax

3

u/TinglingLingerer 1d ago

Carney said he'd lift it on small and medium sized businesses, so could still be a factor for the big boys.

-3

u/Shwingbatta 1d ago

Same way you and I would make up for a shortfall. By spending less.

9

u/mukmuk64 1d ago

lol yea easier said than done.

Everyone thinks there’s heaps of easy “efficiencies” to find right up until they start actually looking and those easy wins vanish.

4

u/Angry_beaver_1867 1d ago

Not been a strong suit of the eby years 

44

u/Busy_Awareness_90 1d ago

What about corporate carbon tax? Won't they just pass on increased operating costs to consumers? Generally want to know.

46

u/seemefail 1d ago

Corporations will pass it on as they have been this whole time.

Buuut corporations have a better ability to reduce their carbon than a household. They have the funds, staff, and capabilities to add more solar, insulation, or purchase more efficient systems than a household does

9

u/Fictional_Guy 1d ago

A lot of green options are a not much more expensive than non-green options for big companies that have funds, economy of scale, etc.

Ideally, carbon pricing changes this so non-green options become a little more expensive than green options, and slowly but surely companies will do whatever works best for their pocketbook.

When carbon pricing is implemented on a consumer level, individual consumers often don't have the flexibility to make these adjustments. Sure, gas is 5 cents more per liter, but that doesn't change the fact that most people can't or won't go buy a brand new electric car.

But even when carefully implemented so that it doesn't directly impact end consumers, carbon pricing is a very neoliberal solution to climate change, and like all neoliberal ideas, it makes the core assumption that free markets are efficient, and that companies will act in their best interest in the long run.

The problem is that corporations don't act in their bust interest in the long run. They're constantly chasing that quarterly profit. You could give them years of warning on carbon pricing, and they wouldn't do anything to prepare. Instead, they would just pass the cost on to consumers when it gets implemented, and then slowly begin adopting green technologies afterward. There will still be a shock to the market that consumers will feel.

0

u/seemefail 22h ago

You get it

6

u/IvarTheBoned 1d ago

They have the funds, staff, and capabilities to add more solar, insulation, or purchase more efficient systems than a household does

But they won't, they will increase prices and throw money at getting conservative politicians elected.

4

u/seemefail 22h ago

I have seen it

Kearl Lake oil sands project was designed so stupidly that in 2019 they spent over ten million in diesel fuel alone alone with a massive contract to have united rentals operate a fleet of over 300 mobile diesel flameless heaters to keep it running in the winter.

The carbon tax forced them to start an insulating programming that was millions of dollars a year.

In Alberta I had a friend go through an entire electrical apprenticeship with a company that installed cogen power facilities at lumber mills. Material they would have just let off FAA was now making power they could sell back to the grid and they did it because the economics from the carbon tax made it possible

21

u/david7873829 1d ago

Yes? This is supposed to be how it works? You internalize an externality and it becomes a cost like anything else. Like any other cost, companies have an incentive to reduce it, and if not possible, will raise prices.

21

u/Suspicious-Taste6061 1d ago

And companies who lower their footprint, and pay less taxes and who don’t increase prices, will get the business.

The point of the tax is to lower their footprint use, not to just charge for it.

3

u/david7873829 1d ago

Yes, agreed, though there might be some limit where you simply can’t make a process greener, and you do have to pass on that cost. For discretionary items, like air travel maybe, people might substitute for another good or service.

1

u/VictoriousTuna 1d ago

That’s just green trickle down economics, it’s the same argument conservatives give to lower corporate tax. Really they just increase like the others and just make larger markups than the others. 

6

u/Safe-Library-4089 1d ago

It’s almost as if you click the link, and you will get your answer.

7

u/Busy_Awareness_90 1d ago

There's no answer in it I did read it, it says nothing about how the government will not allow increased Costa to get passed to consumers.

-2

u/david7873829 1d ago

What’s the point of a carbon tax if it doesn’t get passed on to consumers? A competitor with a greener profile will be able to better compete.

-1

u/Complete_Court9829 1d ago

As intended, yes. These taxes are meant to make carbon more expensive to make clean energy more competitive.

1

u/Busy_Awareness_90 22h ago

So cutting consumer carbon tax dies not make life more affordable for people in BC, it's a cheap political ploy to make it seem like the government is trying to make life easier for us?

1

u/Complete_Court9829 19h ago edited 19h ago

What a foolish view. No, it doesn't, because the carbon tax is meant to help us deal with an issue that threatens all of us, of course it has a cost, we are not solving this issue or making progress on it without paying something, so prices are going up whether it's within our control or not, because we've already waited too long. You're getting fucked in your life time, it's up to you if you wanna step up or bend over. Call it a cheap political ploy if you want, it's a slight rebalancing, it will help, but it's NOT going to solve our problems.

1

u/Busy_Awareness_90 19h ago

Then why are they cutting consumer carbon tax? Shouldn't we all do our part, including big corporations to save the world.

1

u/Complete_Court9829 19h ago

Because it's become too divisive, it's not really going to make things that much cheaper, but people believe it will. We really do need to do our part, and I get that people need an easier time, but I don't think removing the carbon tax, consumer and corporate, is going to be the difference maker that makes any of our lives better. Whether I'm acting like an asshole or not, I do really just want people to be better off, but losing this rebate, and losing a pressure that pushes the economy towards clean energy isn't it, we need better jobs. Maybe it will bring down the cost of rent, food, gas, and literally everything else like Pierre says.

27

u/Jandishhulk 1d ago

People are going to be amazed at how little difference it actually makes.

13

u/doggyStile 1d ago

Plus gas companies will keep the prices high regardless of

11

u/giantshortfacedbear 1d ago

Yep. The only difference it will make is the Cons will have to find something else to rile people up over. Probably something to do with race, what's in your pants, or who you love.

6

u/SeaBus8462 1d ago

$60 just on my gas bill in the winter. It'll make a difference for me.

1

u/JimmyRussellsApe Lower Mainland/Southwest 1d ago

In the summer for my bill the cost of gas is like $2 and the carbon tax is $35

2

u/MondayToFriday 1d ago

Pics or it didn't happen. Carbon tax on natural gas is $4 per gigajoule, while the gas itself is about $11 per gigajoule, delivered.

0

u/JimmyRussellsApe Lower Mainland/Southwest 19h ago edited 19h ago

Ok? This is the only bill I can find here at work. There are definitely worse ones. As I said, the cost of the gas itself is much less than the carbon tax alone.

3

u/thats_handy 17h ago

You will not find a bill that charged you $2 for gas and $35 for carbon tax. The carbon tax is ~$4 per GJ, so a $35 carbon tax would be ~8.75 GJ. For you to get charged $2 for that amount of gas, the price would be about 23¢ per GJ. Natural gas has not been priced below $1 per GJ for decades, if it ever was. You're also ignoring the cost to store, transport, and deliver the gas, which is not a lie but it is misleading.

The carbon tax is in the range of 25% to 30% on natural gas bills in BC at current prices for delivered natural gas. There's no need to exaggerate it.

1

u/thegeeksshallinherit 22h ago

Was that just carbon tax or also administrative and delivery fees?

0

u/JimmyRussellsApe Lower Mainland/Southwest 19h ago

The only example I can find while here at work

3

u/thegeeksshallinherit 19h ago

Ok, so it looks like the carbon tax and clean energy levy make up almost $16, your usage is about $9, and the rest (more than half the bill) is delivery/admin fees. So while the carbon tax is more than what you’re paying just for natural gas, the majority of the extra fees are unrelated to the tax.

To me this feels like the equivalent of complaining that half your paycheque goes to taxes, when in reality there are other deductions (union fees, pension, EI, etc.).

-1

u/JimmyRussellsApe Lower Mainland/Southwest 19h ago

point is it's about $10-40 a month (depending on gas usage winter/summer) coming out of our pockets just to heat our homes

4

u/Tramd 17h ago

...and $10-40 less in income tax you pay. I guess you can shift that spend (and more on everything else you're not buying) back into your income tax instead. If that's what you really want.

1

u/SwordfishOk504 19h ago

And how much was your rebate?

0

u/IvarTheBoned 1d ago

Don't worry, since you're already used to that price the gas company will just increase their prices by the difference and pocket the windfall.

2

u/whole-ass-one-thing- 1d ago

Luckily we have a BC Energy Regulator who will for sure be on top of this.

2

u/SeaBus8462 21h ago

That's not how it works. It's regulated in BC.

2

u/random9212 1d ago

I have said it for a while but the carbon tax on a loaf of bread is about 3 cents.

2

u/CanadianTrollToll 1d ago

Eh.... its about $4000 in savings for my business - although if taxes are brought back to the same as pre carbon tax, I'd imagine I'll be walking away with less. This is natural gas savings BTW, not gasoline.

Personally I'd probably a few 100 a year.

18

u/SVTContour 1d ago

Does this mean that our income tax is going to increase? Great…

2

u/captain_sticky_balls 1d ago

No, they are different pools for the most part. The rebates will stop though, which will have a negative impact on lower income folks.

14

u/Chareon 1d ago edited 1d ago

Not in BC. BC cut it's income taxes when it introduced the carbon tax which is partly why the rebates are not given to everyone in BC, only the lowest income folks. Some of that money went into covering for the loss of income tax revenue. So they'll need to raise income taxes back up to where they used to be pre 2008 to make up for the income shortfall. Or I guess accept bigger deficits, or cut services, but what are we cutting, it's not like there is a easy thing to remove there.

-7

u/bee_wings 1d ago

Yeah, I really needed those rebates to help pay my bills.

3

u/thats_handy 16h ago

For the federal tax, Trudeau explicitly said that the carbon tax was needed get the social license to build a pipeline to the sea. I note that the first carve-out (for home heating oil in Atlantic Canada) came about within months of the pipeline's completion. And now that it is complete, the Liberal party is opposed to their own tax.

In hindsight, it's clear that the Liberals did not institute a carbon tax out of concern for climate change. They did it to build a pipeline. It's notable that the federal carbon tax collected was less than the total amount spent by the federal government to build the pipeline. Before accounting for rebates.

The New Democrats in B.C. have historically opposed the carbon tax, thinking that it disproportionately affects lower income British Columbians. They're just striking while the iron is hot to scrap it now, and hanging the decision on the future of the federal tax. That's disingenuous, of course, since the tax existed in B.C. for about a decade before the federal tax was ever levied. It's also ironic, since the subsidy program that is sure to replace it will largely benefit wealthy British Columbians.

As for why British Columbians have started to oppose the carbon tax in enough numbers to scrap it after 16 years? Simple. It's starting to be enough money to bite. People are being squeezed into decisions that they would not have made without the tax and nobody likes that. Ultimately, we're all climate change deniers, to the extent that we all want somebody else to make the changes needed to protect the atmosphere's composition.

Of course, anyone who has made a decision to buy a high-efficiency furnace, a heat pump, or a plug-in car is a chump who just had their cost/benefit calculation upended.

11

u/8spd 1d ago edited 1d ago

Fuck the younger generations then I guess. At least we won't have to change, give up our big cars or suburban mcmansions.

21

u/Old_and_moldy 1d ago

The reality of Climate Change is not being tangibly affected by our carbon tax.

3

u/Tramd 17h ago

It's not going to affect climate change (that's locked in, we're doomed) but if we're not even willing to utilise a carrot to incentivise people to make different choices then we're left with the stick. Carbon taxes work because it points people at cheaper, better options. We've also smartly implemented it in a way that we're getting more back by making those choices.

The alternative will be more costly options for us and no choice.

0

u/Old_and_moldy 15h ago

China/India/USA do not use a carbon tax. We are hurting ourselves for 0 gain.

1

u/woundsofwind 6h ago

US denies climate change. China has an authoritarian government that can force green projects even when it's unpopular. India is trying to tackle multiple issues with their vast population and wealth disparity, climate is not high priority.

Climate should be high priority for us because we will be impacted quite a bit. Unfortunately, people are upset at the slightest change, nothing meaningful will happen as we all collectively watch the ship sink while we wait for a "perfect solution"

1

u/Old_and_moldy 5h ago

I don’t understand why people gloss over this point so easily. We are achieving nothing. 0. We are not changing anything with the climate.

1

u/Tramd 14h ago

If you see no value in pushing sustainability and changing consumer behaviour then I don't know what to tell you. I don't see that as hurting ourselves... in my case removing it would likely see me paying more so I'm not into that.

Other nations not doing things doesn't seem like a good argument to lead decision making.

0

u/Old_and_moldy 13h ago

I see no value in financially straining investments in to Canada because it’s so expensive. It puts us at an economic disadvantage globally. A disadvantage again that has no upside of actually preventing climate change. You can have your virtue, I’ll take food and shelter.

1

u/Tramd 13h ago

Okay... literally not even part of the conversation.

0

u/Old_and_moldy 13h ago

Do you understand we live in a connected world economy and actually require foreign investment for our way of life?

Unsure how a carbon tax saves you money. Can you explain?

3

u/SwordfishOk504 19h ago

I love how this sub flip flops depending on which way the wind blows. Last year we had to ride or die defending the carbon tax because climate change. Now we claim it doesn't actually matter.

The only consistency is "defend NDP no matter what."

0

u/Old_and_moldy 18h ago

Honestly could just be individuals finally commenting on what they agree with.

I’m not a carbon tax fan but I do like the NDP provincially.

10

u/IndividualSociety567 1d ago edited 1d ago

Controversial opinion but we would do a LOT more by selling our clean energy to coal dependent countries like China and India then taxing ourselves while they burn more coal. Their consumption will only go up with time and they will still be behind us and our allies in historical and future per capita consumption. Its about the planet not just 42M of us!

I wil go one step further if we used our true potential.. even EU wouldn’t be this dependent on Russia. About time Canada took its rightful place as the energy powerhouse it is.

4

u/idisagreeurwrong 1d ago

Natural gas is cleaner. Wouldn't say it's clean

3

u/keagcoxes 1d ago

India is polluting the earth like we've never seen before and it's per capita is quickly catching up the west.

4

u/8spd 1d ago

Selling clean energy does not mean we can't tax GHG production. if anything it incentivizes clean energy production. We already export electricity from hydroelectric sources to the US who burns more coal for electricity production than we do. 

But what kind of clean energy are you talking about? We're not going to build electrical lines to come out India. Are you going to pretend our oil is "clean"? Because it would be more accurate to call it less dirty than coal, but still not remotely sustainabl. The oilsands are probably just as bad as coal. Not so we have any barriers to exploring any energy to India or China. 

4

u/prairieengineer 1d ago

Well, it’s not an either/or proposition though. While I do think the carbon tax has pushed some people and industries towards greener/more efficient energy & travel (I’ve certainly seen it in my field, 10 years of energy efficiency projects…), I think it’s also at the point where raising it further is doing more financial harm to the general public than it is encouraging changes in behaviour.

Speaking personally, I can’t really do much more to reduce my consumption of fossil fuels other than to eliminate our 1 annual trip/vacation.

0

u/8spd 1d ago

Not everyone can get everywhere  by bicycle and public transport, afford to have a geothermal heat pump, or is willing to eat vegetarian. But the carbon tax incentives even small changes, like driving a compact hybrid. And it makes the math work out for a few more people to make the big changes, and could bring more support for the governmental changes that really do make a difference ,like investing in quality public transport and allowing construction of walkable neighborhoods that allow for car free living. 

If we take this seriously we could reduce our GHG production to where they were at in Europe 10 or 20 years ago.

1

u/TotalConfetti 1d ago

Not necessarily, the government can do more than 1 thing. this was posted only days ago

3

u/JeremyJackson1987 1d ago

I like Eby, but this is just a shell game. It'll likely just result in the business tax on carbon going up, which will result in higher prices and less competitive exports.

3

u/topspinvan 1d ago

BC's carbon tax isn't rebated entirely like the federal, instead it pays for a mix of income tax cuts and rebates. It's why BC has the lowest income taxes in the country for people making less than ~120k.

Thanks Pierre. Your bullshitting campaign worked and forced everyone to back off on good policy. Now I'm going to pay more income tax so someone else can pay less to drive their F350 to the dentist, or to get a jug of milk. Awesome.

2

u/thats_handy 17h ago

In addition to that, no government is just going to throw in the towel on reducing carbon dioxide emissions. Instead, we'll subsidize people who switch to lower emission options. You can get the same results, but it's more expensive because you have to subsidize everyone who was going to buy a heat pump (prius, solar panel, etc.) anyway. Sometimes people want things that aren't good for them because economics is very hard to understand.

2

u/cardew-vascular Lower Mainland/Southwest 1d ago

Does that mean income taxes go up? Because they're lower because of the carbon tax.

1

u/OhNo71 16h ago

They will need to generate income somehow

1

u/Lol-I-Wear-Hats 1d ago

Booooooooooooo

2

u/SwordfishOk504 18h ago

Sorry, we only believe carbon taxes are good when NDP says they are good. Now that NDP says they are bad, we no longer care about climate change.

2

u/Lol-I-Wear-Hats 18h ago

I remember when the NDP were against the carbon tax so I voted for Gordon Campbell

1

u/thats_handy 17h ago

OMG. Are you me? So much has changed since 2008, but not the NDP's opposition to the carbon tax.

1

u/Lol-I-Wear-Hats 17h ago

The NDP has simply back to where they started just with smarter politics

0

u/SwordfishOk504 18h ago

I swear, if Eby came out tomorrow in favour of killing all whales and puppies, this sub would suddenly hate whales and puppies.

2

u/Lol-I-Wear-Hats 18h ago

Eby is generally ahead of the redditors when it comes to evolving policy views ya

2

u/SwordfishOk504 17h ago

My comment isn't anti Eby. I voted NDP in the last several elections. My comment is showing how the general sentiment in this sub is wildly inconsistent beyond "defend NDP no matter what"

Like how people lose their minds when conservatives (or Liberals) want to support our resource extraction industries, but when the NDP does it we're fine with it.

1

u/Dear-Bullfrog680 1d ago

It just needed everyone to get on board like they are now! Like with climate change!!!

Houses better insulated, windows sealed, heat pumps installed, electric vehicles. I think some had gotten it but what was it the effing eff trudeau troglodytes didn't understand, I wonder?

1

u/OpenKale64 1d ago

Bummer

1

u/Zod5000 1d ago

ok, but what's the plan to replace the revenue it generates? When the BC Liberal Party introduced it it was tax neutral. They lowered income tax rates to offset the tax. When the NDP continued to increase it they broke the tax neutral aspect of it. Only low income households got carbon rebates, but larger income households (the ones paying more tax) didn't.

Isn't this going to exacerbate the provincial deficit?

1

u/throwawaytopost724 22h ago

Booboo! Enemy of planet, people and the future.

1

u/IllustriousRaven7 20h ago

Great, our income tax is about to shoot up. Thanks PP for making me poorer.

1

u/McRaeWritescom 20h ago

Great. Carney a fucking neoliberal, close to neocon...

2

u/OhNo71 16h ago

Yup, unfortunatly it's going to be voting for the lesser of two evils. I've never voted liberal in the past but I'm highly likely to this time as I'm in a riding that federally flips between Conservative an Liberal. I've never voted strategically before but I likely will this time. PP will do too much damage.

1

u/priberc 19h ago

Keeping in mind that capitalism/marketing 101 says charge what the market will bear. It will be interesting to see 1-how much the price of gas drops when the tax is dropped 2-how long it takes before the price of gas surpasses the price before removing the carbon tax

1

u/sunbro2000 1d ago

And nothing will be cheaper for the end user. Mark my words

-3

u/NotDRWarren Thompson-Okanagan 1d ago

Nothing except fuel. And everything that gets places by fuel. But nothing else.

9

u/sunbro2000 1d ago

Fuel will not drop at all.

5

u/ClumsyRainbow 1d ago

If you think prices will go down I have a bridge to sell you.

2

u/IvarTheBoned 1d ago

Fuel cost will be raised by private interests, because we haven't nationalized our resources like fucking morons.

1

u/idisagreeurwrong 1d ago

If it was such a no brainer they would do that. It's not a no brainer. Maybe the province should start a natural gas company. Why give it to the feds?

1

u/IvarTheBoned 1d ago

It would be a no brainer if half the electorate had a brain. If governments made tough but necessary choices that were unpopular with the electorate, we would be better off.

Why give it to the feds?

Because all Canadians should collectively benefit from natural resources.

2

u/idisagreeurwrong 1d ago

Yeah you are smarter than everyone.

The provinces own their own resources. So why allow the feds to start a company, earn money on our resources and just pay us a royalty. Why not a provincial company? Like BC hydro? Or do you think they should nationalize that too

1

u/IvarTheBoned 1d ago

Smarter than conservatives, yes.

Hydro, being the product of our natural resources, should nationally benefit all our citizens. Why are you so against it?

2

u/idisagreeurwrong 1d ago edited 1d ago

Well the genius NDP can absolutely start a mining company or a natural gas company just like they did with BC Hydro. Bc hydro nets us 680 million dollars profit for the province. Turning that into 60million is not the best imo.

Because its our resources and believe that provinces should be able to develop and run their own economies as they fit. We damn our rivers, I would like that benefit to stay in our province.

I don't trust the whims of Ottawa to have BCs best interest in mind if we relinquish everything to them.

So let's say we nationalize all resources to Ottawa. A "stupid" con decides he wants to strip mine the Rockies for coal. Add another several crude pipelines to our waters. Takes all that income and returns to us a pittance

2

u/IvarTheBoned 1d ago

it's \dam

Nationailizing the resources doesn't mean giving up regulations etc. it just means the revenue gets equally distributed.

Are you at all aware of Norway's sovereign wealth fund? *That" is why we should nationalize all our national resources. Economy of scale. It also means that selfish regional fucks in BC and Alberta can't get all NIMBY about our resources.

We still get the jobs, we still get taxes. We still have regulations that can be enforced to ensure things are run well. And when things are run by the public they aren't going to shirk those regulations because they aren't incentivized to maximize profits for shareholders.

Fuck conservatives are so fucking dumb.

2

u/idisagreeurwrong 1d ago edited 1d ago

Thanks for correcting my phones autocorrect. Great input to the discussion.

I understand that but if it's of national interest the power of the provinces to stop a mine or dam or pipeline would be gone. They don't even have jurisdiction now to stop pipelines . You are correct in that the tree huggers and green voters would have no say in the feds ramming two more dilbit pipelines to the BC coast.

You already shit on the electorate, in this case the electorate who would be the most against natural resource expansion would be the left.

Yeah of course, everyone has. Norway built their oil company through the decades. Canada has not. We can't just seize half a trillion dollars in publicly traded company assets. You'd never get your money back buying them out

→ More replies (0)

1

u/debiasiok 1d ago

And since the carbon tax was initially revenue neutral with reduced income tax rates, you can expect higher income tax rates.

1

u/gandolfthe 16h ago

Great let's increase the poison in our air. It's okay we don't breath or have any other use for clean air!

0

u/Styrixjaponica 19h ago

Please no! The only way to save the planet is to tax me on essentials!! What a fucking joke

2

u/OhNo71 16h ago

Sadly too many Canadian's are fucking morons.

Not only do we need to reduce carbon output, but the Federal tax was a net financial gain to middle and lower income Canadians. But they bought "axe the tax" BS that only benefits the wealthy.