Photo

Reuters Photojournalism

Our day's top images, in-depth photo essays and offbeat slices of life. See the best of Reuters photography.  See more | Photo caption 

Photo

Devastated by tornado

A huge tornado tears through the Oklahoma City suburb of Moore, killing dozens.  Slideshow 

Photo

Nuclear tsunami wall

Safety upgrades designed to prevent a repeat of the Fukushima disaster.  Slideshow 

Sponsored Links

U.S. carbon tax could halve deficit in 10 years: report

Related Topics

WAHSINGTON, Sept 26 | Wed Sep 26, 2012 4:24am EDT

WAHSINGTON, Sept 26 (Reuters Point Carbon) - Imposing a $20 per metric ton carbon tax in the U.S. could reduce the country's budget deficit by 50 percent over the next 10 years, a report by the Congressional Research Service said on Tuesday.

Such a tax would generate approximately $88 billion in 2012, rising to $144 billion by 2020, the report said, slashing U.S. debt by between 12 and 50 percent within a decade, depending on how high the deficit climbs

The U.S. budget deficit has exceeded $1 trillion annually in each fiscal year since 2009, and could rise to between $2.3 trillion and $10 trillion by 2020, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

Since deficits can lead to reduced savings, higher interest rates and higher levels of inflation, reducing them is a high-priority issue in Washington.

The concept of using a carbon tax to combat the problem has been floated in Congress this year, but it comes with many potential downsides, the report added.

For example, households would face higher energy bills because utilities forced to pay the tax would likely pass the costs onto consumers.

"Lower-income households, in particular, would face a disproportionate impact if revenues were not recycled back to them in some fashion," the report said.

Returning money to consumers would mean fewer funds available for cutting the deficit.

And unlike a cap-and-trade system, where the government would set a hard limit on the amount of CO2 that could be released into the atmosphere, a carbon tax could not ensure a specific environmental outcome, the study said.

The likelihood of Congress passing such a measure would be limited, given the opposition of many Republican lawmakers to any type of tax increase.

Despite the odds, some politicians in Washington continue to promote the idea.

Former Republican Congressmen Sherwood Boehlert and Wayne Gilchrest joined Democrats Henry Waxman and Ed Markey to support a carbon tax in February.

In July, former Republican Congressman Bob Inglis launched a think tank to promote a plan to raise taxes on fossil fuels while cutting income tax, a concept previously supported by former Democratic Vice President Al Gore.

Democratic Congressman Jim McDermott last month introduced a Managed Carbon Price (MCP) bill to cut and put a price on carbon emissions, while returning some money to consumers and using the rest to reduce the deficit.

(Reporting by Valerie Volcovici; additional reporting by Rory Carroll)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (6)
AZWarrior wrote:
Tripling the personal and corporate income tax could do even better – - – a surplus! But like the fricking stupid carbon tax scam, it would kill the economy which is sort of killing the golden goose you liberal clowns. Crawl back to the hole you came from and don’t come back out until we call you.

Sep 26, 2012 6:00am EDT  --  Report as abuse
MEWeaver wrote:
The article implies Congress would be good stewards of the additional resources to reduce the deficit. Click your heals three times Dorthy.

Sep 26, 2012 10:09am EDT  --  Report as abuse
pcamp wrote:
To lower the deficit? In ten years? That’s rich. Since when has any politician – or interest group – cared about the financial health of a nation for more than five minutes? You can bet that as soon as that tax is passed, there’ll be another tax and then another tax – all for a so-called good cause. In the meantime, the economy goes to the utopian version of H*LL. (by the way, utopia means “no place”).
The carbon tax proposal, and almost any tax proposed from here on out, is designed to put us peons in our place – somewhere between abject poverty and merely poor.

ps. Someone wrote recently that Americans are “undertaxed”, implying there are more taxes on the way. Someone tell me: for what? What has not been taxed? Why haven’t the taxes we already pay done the job?

Sep 26, 2012 10:09am EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.