Carbon emissions are soon to become the latest portal the state uses to reach the wallets of Massachusetts taxpayers. A bill is gaining momentum on Beacon Hill that would place a fee on carbon emissions produced by fossil fuels.
The carbon tax would start at $20 per ton and increase every year by $5, allegedly until the fee reaches $40 per ton. Thirty percent of the collected revenue — estimated to be between $400M and $600M per year — would be siphoned off for state and local government to embark on renewable energy projects.
Among other goals, advocates of the bill hope to incentivize people to move off of fossil fuel consumption and on to more green options, which would be comparable in price due to the carbon tax.
Something we know such a tax would do is punish the people and businesses in the commonwealth.
As the Herald’s Mary Markos reported, a Beacon Hill Institute study found that the average Massachusetts household would see its tax bill increase by $755 in the first year. By the fifth year, that annual tax load would increase to $1,263. In addition, Massachusetts would see a loss of 11,090 private sector jobs in its first year, increasing to 18,240 by its fifth, according to the study.
The analysis laid out in the study is stark: “The tax would also, in the first year, reduce business investment by $925 million, disposable income by $1,950 million, and private employment by 11,090 jobs. As time passed and the tax rate rose, the carbon tax would produce more substantial economic effects. By 2026, investment would fall by $1,585 million, disposable income by $3,266 million, and private employment by 18,240 jobs.”
Those are staggering numbers and all for what?
To what degree will reducing the carbon emissions in a small state with a population of under 7 million affect a globe full of 7.53 billion people?
The answer is, likely not at all. The people of Massachusetts will be fleeced once again with nothing to show for it, while progressives in upscale neighborhoods pat themselves on the back for our sacrifices. Failed green energy businesses and initiatives will litter the land until the next green think tank presents our lawmakers with another feel-good project on which to spend our hard-earned money.
The bill at hand, An Act to Promote Green Infrastructure and Reduce Carbon Emissions, filed by Rep. Jennifer Benson (D-Lunenburg), is cut from the same cloth as the Green New Deal. It is aspirational, maybe even inspirational, but also wholly impractical.
Proponents cannot be bothered by the facts, though. Executive Director Michael Green of Climate XChange, a non-profit with a mission to fight climate change, countered that the study doesn’t include the cost of “climate inaction.”
In other words, doing a dumb thing is still better than doing nothing and those are absolutely our only two choices. You either want a carbon tax, straw ban, water bottle ban and styrofoam ban or you are a climate denier. Furthermore, since climate change is purportedly the new World War II, if you are not all in you are allied with the Axis forces.
Straight out of the AOC playbook.
No to the carbon tax. It’s just another tax under a trendy name.
