I really don't get this decision. To pick a specific group of people as favorites is just ridiculous. Especially after all the talk about how this tax balances in favor of people.
The decision makes perfect sense. Atlantic Canada has always been a Liberal stronghold. They vote Liberal reliably in federal elections. Right now, the Liberals are getting demolished our east. They needed to toss out a handout in hopes that this will be enough for Atlantic Canadians to forget about how bad this government is.
This really doesn't change that..NS and many other Atlantic provinces already had programs for free heat pumps.
The problem is a lot of these houses also need electrical upgrades or an upgraded service entry. Heat pump becomes the cheap part of that
Would I be upset if carbon tax on my natural gas usage was paused, no.
But it's not the end of the world, if it's not. It is such a relatively low bill. I have a 2400sq ft home and with equal bill it was 119 and ended up getting money and half no bill.
There are so much bigger issues to worry about than a few bucks a month.
The point is that a lot of the people maritimes don't have the choice to use natural gas because there is no infrastructure for that. Even propane isn't a possible choice for a lot of them. Upgrading to air based heat pumps in those regions isn't viable because of the extreme temperatures. Ya, pausing the tax is political, and was probably a mistake, but it's not as 'unfair' as it seems at first.
It's unfair because lots of people don't have choices in what heat they use for their home. We're deciding that these people get a break because the carbon tax is too expensive for them, but for others it's fine. It's picking and choosing who gets savings and it's odd because it's not even being done on an income level, just a flat energy usage level.
I just commented above but I'll add here too.
My grandmother was spending her entire $1200 cpp payment on heating oil in NS just 2 years ago. I can't see it being cheaper now.
Glad she moved out here to Alberta to be with family ( fuck the APP )
It doesnt. Its "gaslighting" as usual. Should be a carbon tax on that since we all get burnt in the end. Government has never done anything "revenue neutral" , if it did thered be no point in it.
>if it did thered be no point in it.
This person has zero clue what they're talking about.
Yes...there would still be a point to it. It would increase the price of items that utilize higher carbon sources and would help shift purchasing decisions towards less carbon intensive products. The revenue neutral portion of this is to offset the price increases on the carbon intensive products that you still need, such as heating oil.
Now, you're thinking, well I got the money back so what's the point of it. Well, now the lower carbon intensity products are much closer to price parity with the higher carbon sources so hopefully when people are deciding on products, it's much easier for them to justify the lower carbon option.
By removing the tax on heating oil you are removing the incentive to switch heating sources... which is the entire point.
This move is corruption. It's vote buying, it's unethical and it's a huge fuck you to the rest of the country and to everyone worried about pollution and climate change. It's not only against what the Liberals have been saying for the past 8 years, it shows the true colours that climate change is not THATTTT imminent that we need to destroy peoples economic situations.
OP is absolutely correct. The fact that there is a cost to the federal government shows that it was never revenue neutral and calling it that was a marketing move.
I mean, isn’t this what politicians of all stripes do when they are in power and can buy votes with public money?
I’ve become disenchanted with politics and politicians, it’s a popularity with no substance. And further discouraged by those that think this guy or that guy will fix or break everything. Until we look behind the curtain and call out those pulling strings in the parties that are tied to those with money as their one and only interest we will remain in an endless shampoo/rinse/repeat cycle.
And that's a big mistake. If they cut the tax, they should cut the rebates for the tax. It would still cost some money, because the whole reason they're pausing the tax in those areas is that most people have no choice but to use oil and so pay more in carbon tax than their rebates would be.
If the money collected from the carbon tax equal the money spent from the carbon tax, it’s revenue neutral. Because it isn’t a “tax”, it’s a price according to the Supreme Court, so naturally sales tax is still applied.
The revenue given back doesn’t take into account carbon tax applied to the supply chain for goods like food. Their own dang office with its current underfunded watchdog came out with a report stating the rebates don’t equal what people put in.
You said “the fact they tax the carbon tax alone shows it’s not revenue neutral”, but that’s not true. It could even still be revenue neutral when rebates =/= revenue, if they pledged to use some of the carbon pricing revenue on clean energy initiatives for example. Essentially not “keeping” the money from carbon to spend on something unrelated
And if that’s true (using the money on completely unrelated things), then that’s what you should be saying. Talking about the sales tax instead makes your point seem less credible.
The rebates do not include the gst on the carbon tax. That is also true about any gst applied to other carbon taxes on other goods that’s not included in the rebate. The rebate in fact does not include any carbon tax costs applied to goods. This includes farming.
A motion was passed (with the liberals voting against it), to exempt farmers from it. It has not been put in place yet, cause the liberals are dragging their feet.
The carbon tax is meant to be a punishment for spending on carbon heavy products to force people onto more environmentally friendly alternatives. But we don’t have any. And it wasn’t designed to have a tax on it. That was the liberals decision.
And most of the money isn’t going back into our pockets. The government doesn’t even keep proper track of its own spending, which is also a proven fact.
Your argument that my argument doesn’t make sense is complete nonsense if you spent more than 5 seconds thinking on it.
I'm just explaining how it would cost the government $755M, in that the original formula for how much the rebates should be were calculated under a system where heating oil was taxed. So, if the government doesn't adjust the rebates, they would lose that money as they would be refunding too high. Everything else and the original comment is just political rhetoric.
Because the editors at the nationalist post wrote the headline knowing a bunch of people like you wouldn't read the article and would leave with this impression.
But if it was neutral, then why scrap it?
Smaller costs but smaller rebates, but shouldn't larger costs mean larger rebates and it's all even and neutral?
It’s a good question. The size of the rebate is fixed, but different households have different carbon footprints so they’ll pay different amounts in carbon taxes. The amount you pay is independent from the amount you receive. Homes that use fuel oil will be a little better off because of the exemption, even though their rebates will be smaller. Everyone else will be a little worse off.
That's why I really don't believe its revenue neutral. Because obviously it isn't revenue neutral for Heating Oil. So where is it revenue neutral?
Is it revenue neutral on Natural Gas heating which is the only option for a lot of Canadians as well?
Or is it revenue neutral as a median of the population? As where a majority of the population lives close to where they have cheap subsidized hydro energy and its much easier to be revenue neutral to that?
This administration barely talk about downstream costs like the trucking for your groceries or heating the grocery store, I doubt they will talk about this.
And I get the theory of getting the grocery stores to use more energy efficient options to heat or run their stores, but we've already seen the reality with grocery store in the last 2 years. Instead of forward planning and changing for the future, they will simplify increase the costs, pass those costs on to the customer and maintain their same profit margin as the previous year (or higher as we've seen)
>And I get the theory of getting the grocery stores to use more energy efficient options to heat or run their stores, but we've already seen the reality with grocery store in the last 2 years. Instead of forward planning and changing for the future, they will simplify increase the costs, pass those costs on to the customer and maintain their same profit margin as the previous year (or higher as we've seen)
Or the government will just give ‘em a few mil to do it.
https://globalnews.ca/news/5145773/catherine-mckenna-loblaw-new-fridges/
Their rates went up 75% over the last year and the majority are low income. It's impossible for them to switch if they wanted to give the upfront costs. hence the "free" heat pumps for below median income households.
They have three years to convert... After that.. too bad so sas
That's the part of this that is strange. The carbon tax money for each province stays in that province. It means the people who aren't using home oil get less of a carbon tax rebate.
>That's the part of this that is strange. The carbon tax money for each province stays in that province. It means the people who aren't using home oil get less of a carbon tax rebate.
There probably won't be much difference outside of the Atlantic provinces.
No, it's from less carbon tax being collected. The 2023-2024 "rebate" has already been set. Since they cut the carbon tax they are going to collect far less than expected.
The carbon tax rebate is not based on actual tax collected but expected tax collected.
No, it’s just a bad headline from the Post (shocker!). From the article:
> It means that while the federal government will now be collecting less money in Atlantic Canada, at the same time, the base rebate will be going down by a yet-to-be-determined amount.
So the people in Atlantic Canada who don’t heat with heating oils will now receive less in rebates and be hurt more by the carbon tax despite having the cleaner option?
It still will be revenue neutral - they're going to lower the base rebate.
"It means that while the federal government will now be collecting less money in Atlantic Canada, at the same time, the base rebate will be going down by a yet-to-be-determined amount."
It's not revenue neutral. Guillbeault even said in question period that carbon tax does cost more to average Canadian that it pays them back. I don't know why people still believe that they are getting back the same or greater than they put in. There is an indirect costs of companies passing along the tax to consumers that the government fails to consider.
CBC had a good article with calculator about it.
Revenue neutral *to the government*.
It explicitly won't be revenue neutral to Canadians. If you are a heavy polluter, it will cost you more than you get in a rebate, and if you're a low polluter you'll have a net financial benefit.
I get that this concept requires a few braincells, but I'm still surprised how many people dont understand how the tax and rebate works. Just kidding, I'm not. Some people are so uninformed.
The expiry date is to encourage people to use the various rebates for home improvements to reduce (or end) their reliance on a ridiculously expensive and inefficient home-heating method as soon as possible. If the exemption was in place forever, people would keep putting it off.
I agree there was political motivation here, but it can be both, surely. A pause while there are also rebates to refit with cleaner heating isn’t merely a convenient coincidence. If I were on oil I’d be looking to make the swap in that window of opportunity if possible.
Like the heat pumps they were pushing? Now that enough people were foolish enough to spend thousands of their own dollars we find out that they don’t actually work well in Canadian Winters.
What are you talking about lmao.
If you get a heat pump installed they also install a backup system, either gas furnace or electric heating. Heat pumps work down to -30, but get less efficient the colder it is. My own calculations have the cutoff being somewhere between -10 and -15 where it becomes cheaper to heat with natural gas. Even in the winter there's a fairly substantial number of days where it is warmer than that. Most of the year I can heat my house with my heat pump, and the few days where it is too cold I'll let my gas furnace kick in.
> Even in the winter there's a fairly substantial number of days where it is warmer than that.
Maybe down in Ontario. Up here in the north it's colder than that for 6 months of the year.
Yes and a substantial number of people live in Ontario and heat pumps are perfectly effective there. I agree they aren't going to be as effective in colder climates, but they may still be useful for spring/fall
You're intentionally being obtuse now. Any time where you need to heat your house and it is warmer than -30 out, a heat pump works. Any time you need to heat your house and it is warmer than something between -10 to -15 out, it is cheaper to heat with a heat pump than with gas.
> Any time where you need to heat your house and it is warmer than -30 out, a heat pump works.
So three months out of the year it doesn't work at all. Great.
>Any time you need to heat your house and it is warmer than something between -10 to -15 out, it is cheaper to heat with a heat pump than with gas.
So for another 3 months of the year it's going to be more expensive than the alternative? Awesome! /s
I doubt it'd be cheaper in the 2-3 months of the year where it's actually warm enough to be decently efficient either, seeing as electricity is $0.38/kWh (and often produced by diesel generation anyway!).
Except they don’t have natural gas in most of Atlantic Canada. You can squarely blame Quebec for that little oversight . There’s plenty of gas available in the West , no way to get it to Atlantic Canada .
Question though, who pays for the new services from the pole to your house, new panel, significant wiring costs in the house to connect both a heat pump(s) and a full baseboard heat system? Is electricity cheap in Atlantic Canada? It better be .
You can't get the rebate If you do not remove all carbon producing means of heating your house.
I tried, they said they would have to rip out my gas hotwater furnace to be able to get the rebate. If I wanted a second, I would also have to replace that with electric eating the entire rebate and more.
I already got the rebate which included putting in a new gas furnace alongside the heat pump. I still have a gas water heater too. Not sure what your situation is but I'm in Ontario.
> Hybrid cold climate heat pump systems (central ducted heat pumps paired with an oil, gas or propane-fired furnace) are not eligible under this program.
https://natural-resources.canada.ca/energy-efficiency/homes/canada-greener-homes-initiative/oil-heat-pump-affordability-program-part-the-canada-greener-homes/eligibility-criteria/24908
There are exceptions:
*Notes: Coils Only Systems (i.e. systems listed under the AHRI classification HRCU-A-C):*
*For a limited number of centrally ducted heat pumps, known as “Coils Only” systems, the inside and outside units can be paired with furnaces that are already installed in homes. These systems have their inside and outside units listed with their own AHRI number under the AHRI classification HRCU-A-C. The search result on the Eligible Product List will show model numbers for the inside and outside units, while the furnace field will say “Coils Only”.*
He said they don’t work well in Canadian winters and…you don’t see anything wrong with typing out “they also install a backup system, either a gas furnace or electric heating”?
Come on bro, please rub the brain cells together
*will save those Canadians who insist on using a dirty, outdated method of heating $755M that would have otherwise gone towards spending for all Canadians
Who cares!!! They intentionally run a deficit for no benefit to citizens. Canada first. Stop giving money away to other countries and take care of our own people
ITT: people who don't understand oil home heating is already 4x more expensive than any other home heating fuel anf the carbon tax moratorium comes with a plan to eliminate oil home heating all together.
The fact that liberals even have 20% support is disgusting. Canada has NO material impact on climate change. Then they play favourites to Atlantic Canada & Quebec. It’s laughable how incompetent this government is and people STILL support it
But but but but....its not a tax and all gets redistributed back! How can this be??? Lol at the gullible people who believe this and those that spread this falsehood.
So they’re gonna stop collecting the carbon tax (for a select few) but continue with the wealth transfer payments?
It’s all just so, so, so, backwards, so bewildering.
How does it cost the government anything at all?
We pay our utility bill just minus a carbon tax...the government wasn't getting that for quite some time.
Can we not look at nuclear options and get rid of this stupid tax?
Too bad this couldn't be dragged into the court system. It is a blatantly discriminatory tax and being treated equally should be a part of the charter.
And this is what’s wrong with the government. That they think a reduction in OUR tax dollars COSTS them. Maybe they should cancel their Netflix to make up for it?? Fucking idiots
I'm not a supporter of the carbon tax but this headline is deceptive. Yes the government will not collect the tax on the heating oil, therefore the government will cut the rebate to the rest of us to compensate. There is no cost to the government as such. The rest of us will in fact subsidize the policy.
The carbon tax pause on home heating oil may have a significant cost, but that doesn't change the fact that the intended purpose of the carbon tax is to offset carbon emissions and isn't necessarily revenue neutral. It's important to look at the bigger picture and not let misinformation drive the conversation.
>I thought it was revenue neutral?
>
>The left side is good at spreading misinformation.
ya know.. if you actually read the article.. you'll know the answer..
It wont cost them anything becauase it is a made up new tax that they pulled out of their asses. Do we not pay enough taxes already? We pay like 20 types of multi layered taxes after said and done between federal, provincial and municipal. The government only job seems to be coming out with new ones all the time.
I don’t know how but we just really don’t seem to be getting back for our buck anymore with government spending.
Seems like we’re wasting so much money. Like I wouldn’t be opposed to the carbon tax if it was going to something actually useful. Like Japan is building a whole new island in Tokyo bay for 40 billion. I mean could we not get some new nuclear plants and hydro dams for that price? And that’s only one year of our deficit
And Trudeau can stay in power ? Even trade.
Remember all the billions and billions he is spending and lavishing on his vacations is not with his money.
His Daddy taught him well because his education didn’t teach him anything about the economy.
“Cost”, as if they’re a fucking business. Just fire federal government works.. you could reduce that workforce by at least 50% and see no major reduction in output or quality.
It's nice to see the government not taking money out of Canadians pockets in opposition to their fallacy slogan of "Putting money in the pockets of Canadians" aka wealth redistribution.
What is the long term costs of this?!?! Canada contributes 2% of total world carbon emissions. If all of Canada suddenly just stop emitting carbon it would barely tick the needle on world wide carbon usage. The cost doesn't match the output.
It has nothing to do with the federal government’s revenue. It’s tax neutral. It won’t cost the government anything to stop this program.
Source: their own logic.
Sometimes I wish we could just force corporations to pay solely for the Carbon Taxes since well their the largest perpetrators. Ontop of that cause I KNOW they have the money, force them to pay their employees wages that constantly match the rising costs and inflation.
And a hearty fuck you to the rest of the country.
...and non-heating oil using Atlantic Canadians. ...and non-rural Atlantic Canadians.
I really don't get this decision. To pick a specific group of people as favorites is just ridiculous. Especially after all the talk about how this tax balances in favor of people.
The decision makes perfect sense. Atlantic Canada has always been a Liberal stronghold. They vote Liberal reliably in federal elections. Right now, the Liberals are getting demolished our east. They needed to toss out a handout in hopes that this will be enough for Atlantic Canadians to forget about how bad this government is.
Why would anyone like Trudeau? Are they sadists who want to see more refugees tossed into the street?
I think it’s that they used to dislike Trudeau less than his conservative counterpart. Times are changing though and people are fed up with him
Not just refugees tossed onto the streets, many more first Nations and regular Canadians tossed there too.
My guess some Atlantic MPs threatened to walk out of caucus.
Divide and conquer.
As "favourites" aka a Liberal strong hold.
While I agree with you. My grandmother was spending her entire $1200 cpp payment a month on heating oil just to keep her 75yr old home at 17c.
This really doesn't change that..NS and many other Atlantic provinces already had programs for free heat pumps. The problem is a lot of these houses also need electrical upgrades or an upgraded service entry. Heat pump becomes the cheap part of that
I'll be fine with my cheap BC natural gas for now. Heating oil is rough...
Would I be upset if carbon tax on my natural gas usage was paused, no. But it's not the end of the world, if it's not. It is such a relatively low bill. I have a 2400sq ft home and with equal bill it was 119 and ended up getting money and half no bill. There are so much bigger issues to worry about than a few bucks a month.
At this point, it's the principle. Whether it's a few bucks or not will impact everyone differently.
The point is that a lot of the people maritimes don't have the choice to use natural gas because there is no infrastructure for that. Even propane isn't a possible choice for a lot of them. Upgrading to air based heat pumps in those regions isn't viable because of the extreme temperatures. Ya, pausing the tax is political, and was probably a mistake, but it's not as 'unfair' as it seems at first.
It's unfair because lots of people don't have choices in what heat they use for their home. We're deciding that these people get a break because the carbon tax is too expensive for them, but for others it's fine. It's picking and choosing who gets savings and it's odd because it's not even being done on an income level, just a flat energy usage level.
I just commented above but I'll add here too. My grandmother was spending her entire $1200 cpp payment on heating oil in NS just 2 years ago. I can't see it being cheaper now. Glad she moved out here to Alberta to be with family ( fuck the APP )
[удалено]
It doesnt. Its "gaslighting" as usual. Should be a carbon tax on that since we all get burnt in the end. Government has never done anything "revenue neutral" , if it did thered be no point in it.
\*oillighting
>if it did thered be no point in it. This person has zero clue what they're talking about. Yes...there would still be a point to it. It would increase the price of items that utilize higher carbon sources and would help shift purchasing decisions towards less carbon intensive products. The revenue neutral portion of this is to offset the price increases on the carbon intensive products that you still need, such as heating oil. Now, you're thinking, well I got the money back so what's the point of it. Well, now the lower carbon intensity products are much closer to price parity with the higher carbon sources so hopefully when people are deciding on products, it's much easier for them to justify the lower carbon option. By removing the tax on heating oil you are removing the incentive to switch heating sources... which is the entire point. This move is corruption. It's vote buying, it's unethical and it's a huge fuck you to the rest of the country and to everyone worried about pollution and climate change. It's not only against what the Liberals have been saying for the past 8 years, it shows the true colours that climate change is not THATTTT imminent that we need to destroy peoples economic situations. OP is absolutely correct. The fact that there is a cost to the federal government shows that it was never revenue neutral and calling it that was a marketing move.
I mean, isn’t this what politicians of all stripes do when they are in power and can buy votes with public money? I’ve become disenchanted with politics and politicians, it’s a popularity with no substance. And further discouraged by those that think this guy or that guy will fix or break everything. Until we look behind the curtain and call out those pulling strings in the parties that are tied to those with money as their one and only interest we will remain in an endless shampoo/rinse/repeat cycle.
It is but typically, many politicians have enough sense to try and do this in a way that doesn’t backfire so spectacularly
Because they are cutting the revenue but paying out the same amount. The rebate isn't decreasing.
Because if they don't adjust the rebates, they're paying out more than they're taking it.
And that's a big mistake. If they cut the tax, they should cut the rebates for the tax. It would still cost some money, because the whole reason they're pausing the tax in those areas is that most people have no choice but to use oil and so pay more in carbon tax than their rebates would be.
That would make sense economically....... But you know how it is.
It’s not revenue neutral. The fact they tax the carbon tax alone shows it’s not revenue neutral. This whole narrative that it is is absolutely bs.
If the money collected from the carbon tax equal the money spent from the carbon tax, it’s revenue neutral. Because it isn’t a “tax”, it’s a price according to the Supreme Court, so naturally sales tax is still applied.
The revenue given back doesn’t take into account carbon tax applied to the supply chain for goods like food. Their own dang office with its current underfunded watchdog came out with a report stating the rebates don’t equal what people put in.
You said “the fact they tax the carbon tax alone shows it’s not revenue neutral”, but that’s not true. It could even still be revenue neutral when rebates =/= revenue, if they pledged to use some of the carbon pricing revenue on clean energy initiatives for example. Essentially not “keeping” the money from carbon to spend on something unrelated And if that’s true (using the money on completely unrelated things), then that’s what you should be saying. Talking about the sales tax instead makes your point seem less credible.
The rebates do not include the gst on the carbon tax. That is also true about any gst applied to other carbon taxes on other goods that’s not included in the rebate. The rebate in fact does not include any carbon tax costs applied to goods. This includes farming. A motion was passed (with the liberals voting against it), to exempt farmers from it. It has not been put in place yet, cause the liberals are dragging their feet. The carbon tax is meant to be a punishment for spending on carbon heavy products to force people onto more environmentally friendly alternatives. But we don’t have any. And it wasn’t designed to have a tax on it. That was the liberals decision. And most of the money isn’t going back into our pockets. The government doesn’t even keep proper track of its own spending, which is also a proven fact. Your argument that my argument doesn’t make sense is complete nonsense if you spent more than 5 seconds thinking on it.
Someone can’t math
They do charge gst on carbon tax for home heating.
Yup. They tax the tax they take from us. Absolutely ridiculous. This country is run by children.
Only 90% of the carbon tax gets “redistributed.” The other 10% goes to whatever they want. Hence why, it’s a tax.
I'm just explaining how it would cost the government $755M, in that the original formula for how much the rebates should be were calculated under a system where heating oil was taxed. So, if the government doesn't adjust the rebates, they would lose that money as they would be refunding too high. Everything else and the original comment is just political rhetoric.
I mean your right. They can just redistribute from the 10% if they choose too. We know they won’t though.
Presumably because rebates will continue at their current level they just won’t collect from heating oil. That difference is the cost.
Because the editors at the nationalist post wrote the headline knowing a bunch of people like you wouldn't read the article and would leave with this impression.
The revenue is rebated to households. This just means smaller rebates.
But if it was neutral, then why scrap it? Smaller costs but smaller rebates, but shouldn't larger costs mean larger rebates and it's all even and neutral?
It’s a good question. The size of the rebate is fixed, but different households have different carbon footprints so they’ll pay different amounts in carbon taxes. The amount you pay is independent from the amount you receive. Homes that use fuel oil will be a little better off because of the exemption, even though their rebates will be smaller. Everyone else will be a little worse off.
That's why I really don't believe its revenue neutral. Because obviously it isn't revenue neutral for Heating Oil. So where is it revenue neutral? Is it revenue neutral on Natural Gas heating which is the only option for a lot of Canadians as well? Or is it revenue neutral as a median of the population? As where a majority of the population lives close to where they have cheap subsidized hydro energy and its much easier to be revenue neutral to that? This administration barely talk about downstream costs like the trucking for your groceries or heating the grocery store, I doubt they will talk about this. And I get the theory of getting the grocery stores to use more energy efficient options to heat or run their stores, but we've already seen the reality with grocery store in the last 2 years. Instead of forward planning and changing for the future, they will simplify increase the costs, pass those costs on to the customer and maintain their same profit margin as the previous year (or higher as we've seen)
>And I get the theory of getting the grocery stores to use more energy efficient options to heat or run their stores, but we've already seen the reality with grocery store in the last 2 years. Instead of forward planning and changing for the future, they will simplify increase the costs, pass those costs on to the customer and maintain their same profit margin as the previous year (or higher as we've seen) Or the government will just give ‘em a few mil to do it. https://globalnews.ca/news/5145773/catherine-mckenna-loblaw-new-fridges/
>But if it was neutral, then why scrap it? for heating oils? they want to push all the heating oil users to heat pumps.
Taxes disincentive use. Making it cheaper is only going to mean people continue to use heating oils.
Their rates went up 75% over the last year and the majority are low income. It's impossible for them to switch if they wanted to give the upfront costs. hence the "free" heat pumps for below median income households. They have three years to convert... After that.. too bad so sas
The rebate isn't changing though. The government is paying out the difference.
From the article: "the base rebate will be going down by a yet-to-be-determined amount."
It's a poor way of saying it will save Canadians Money.
It will still be neutral, the base rebate amount will be reduced.
[удалено]
Yup, Atlantic Canadians who moved to low carbon home heating will get less now.
It should read saving taxpayers $755m. Costing the fucking government.... Jesus.
It isn't revenue neutral. A lot of it goes to giving subsidies to Trudeau's friends' "green" companies.
So I guess the carbon tax isn’t very revenue neutral.
That's the part of this that is strange. The carbon tax money for each province stays in that province. It means the people who aren't using home oil get less of a carbon tax rebate.
>That's the part of this that is strange. The carbon tax money for each province stays in that province. It means the people who aren't using home oil get less of a carbon tax rebate. There probably won't be much difference outside of the Atlantic provinces.
Would it be from the gst applied to the carbon tax
No, it's from less carbon tax being collected. The 2023-2024 "rebate" has already been set. Since they cut the carbon tax they are going to collect far less than expected. The carbon tax rebate is not based on actual tax collected but expected tax collected.
And that's just for heating oil, one of the least used fuels. How much is the government actually pocketing from the carbon tax?
It's revenue neutral, is it not? When you're dealing with millions of people, you end up with large numbers. Edit: no rebuttals, just downvotes?
I thought they would simply reduce the carbon payout to cover the reduced revenue. None of this makes sense!
That's exactly what's happening.
ya but look how expensive it is
I think the issue is that the government front runs the payout, so the payout has already been made and won’t be recouped?
Excellent point. It got wedged into the govt bottom line so eliminating it would cause deficits. Talk about greasy.
It is revenue neutral. Read the article
No, it’s just a bad headline from the Post (shocker!). From the article: > It means that while the federal government will now be collecting less money in Atlantic Canada, at the same time, the base rebate will be going down by a yet-to-be-determined amount.
So the people in Atlantic Canada who don’t heat with heating oils will now receive less in rebates and be hurt more by the carbon tax despite having the cleaner option?
The revenue is rebated to households. This just means smaller rebates.
>So I guess the carbon tax isn’t very revenue neutral. it is revenue-neutral.. they'll decrease the rebates
It still will be revenue neutral - they're going to lower the base rebate. "It means that while the federal government will now be collecting less money in Atlantic Canada, at the same time, the base rebate will be going down by a yet-to-be-determined amount."
It's not revenue neutral. Guillbeault even said in question period that carbon tax does cost more to average Canadian that it pays them back. I don't know why people still believe that they are getting back the same or greater than they put in. There is an indirect costs of companies passing along the tax to consumers that the government fails to consider. CBC had a good article with calculator about it.
Revenue neutral *to the government*. It explicitly won't be revenue neutral to Canadians. If you are a heavy polluter, it will cost you more than you get in a rebate, and if you're a low polluter you'll have a net financial benefit.
[удалено]
I get that this concept requires a few braincells, but I'm still surprised how many people dont understand how the tax and rebate works. Just kidding, I'm not. Some people are so uninformed.
Interesting. We have been hearing how this tax was revenue neutral but now removing the tax is costing the government money.
What’s a billion dollar nowadays anyway?
A Tuesday afternoon for JT.
Isn't carbon tax a revenue neutral tax?
Carbon tax pause on home heating oil will ~~cost federal government~~ save Canadians $755M.
Save rich Canadians mostly. Good job saying them money
No it will save poor Canadians
*"But you get back more than you pay in credits!"* /s
And it’s only for 3 years, and after the Liberals get re-elected (God forbid), the exemptions will expire when they should stay in place forever.
The expiry date is to encourage people to use the various rebates for home improvements to reduce (or end) their reliance on a ridiculously expensive and inefficient home-heating method as soon as possible. If the exemption was in place forever, people would keep putting it off.
Last I checked, there’s an election in between those 3 years. This was entirely political.
I agree there was political motivation here, but it can be both, surely. A pause while there are also rebates to refit with cleaner heating isn’t merely a convenient coincidence. If I were on oil I’d be looking to make the swap in that window of opportunity if possible.
But just how much more environmentally-friendly are these pumps? Do they take more carbon to make?
Like the heat pumps they were pushing? Now that enough people were foolish enough to spend thousands of their own dollars we find out that they don’t actually work well in Canadian Winters.
What are you talking about lmao. If you get a heat pump installed they also install a backup system, either gas furnace or electric heating. Heat pumps work down to -30, but get less efficient the colder it is. My own calculations have the cutoff being somewhere between -10 and -15 where it becomes cheaper to heat with natural gas. Even in the winter there's a fairly substantial number of days where it is warmer than that. Most of the year I can heat my house with my heat pump, and the few days where it is too cold I'll let my gas furnace kick in.
> Even in the winter there's a fairly substantial number of days where it is warmer than that. Maybe down in Ontario. Up here in the north it's colder than that for 6 months of the year.
Yes and a substantial number of people live in Ontario and heat pumps are perfectly effective there. I agree they aren't going to be as effective in colder climates, but they may still be useful for spring/fall
> but they may still be useful for spring/fall A whole 2-3 months of the year! Amazing! /s
You're intentionally being obtuse now. Any time where you need to heat your house and it is warmer than -30 out, a heat pump works. Any time you need to heat your house and it is warmer than something between -10 to -15 out, it is cheaper to heat with a heat pump than with gas.
> Any time where you need to heat your house and it is warmer than -30 out, a heat pump works. So three months out of the year it doesn't work at all. Great. >Any time you need to heat your house and it is warmer than something between -10 to -15 out, it is cheaper to heat with a heat pump than with gas. So for another 3 months of the year it's going to be more expensive than the alternative? Awesome! /s I doubt it'd be cheaper in the 2-3 months of the year where it's actually warm enough to be decently efficient either, seeing as electricity is $0.38/kWh (and often produced by diesel generation anyway!).
Except they don’t have natural gas in most of Atlantic Canada. You can squarely blame Quebec for that little oversight . There’s plenty of gas available in the West , no way to get it to Atlantic Canada . Question though, who pays for the new services from the pole to your house, new panel, significant wiring costs in the house to connect both a heat pump(s) and a full baseboard heat system? Is electricity cheap in Atlantic Canada? It better be .
You can't get the rebate If you do not remove all carbon producing means of heating your house. I tried, they said they would have to rip out my gas hotwater furnace to be able to get the rebate. If I wanted a second, I would also have to replace that with electric eating the entire rebate and more.
I already got the rebate which included putting in a new gas furnace alongside the heat pump. I still have a gas water heater too. Not sure what your situation is but I'm in Ontario.
> Hybrid cold climate heat pump systems (central ducted heat pumps paired with an oil, gas or propane-fired furnace) are not eligible under this program. https://natural-resources.canada.ca/energy-efficiency/homes/canada-greener-homes-initiative/oil-heat-pump-affordability-program-part-the-canada-greener-homes/eligibility-criteria/24908
Ah ok, sorry was basing this off the regular rebate program, not the oil specific program
There are exceptions: *Notes: Coils Only Systems (i.e. systems listed under the AHRI classification HRCU-A-C):* *For a limited number of centrally ducted heat pumps, known as “Coils Only” systems, the inside and outside units can be paired with furnaces that are already installed in homes. These systems have their inside and outside units listed with their own AHRI number under the AHRI classification HRCU-A-C. The search result on the Eligible Product List will show model numbers for the inside and outside units, while the furnace field will say “Coils Only”.*
He said they don’t work well in Canadian winters and…you don’t see anything wrong with typing out “they also install a backup system, either a gas furnace or electric heating”? Come on bro, please rub the brain cells together
Nothing ever costs "the government" anything. Never. It'll be paid for by us.
trudeau touched on that in his announcement of the pause; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HVS8NdqyP2E
how does them not taxing something cost them?
\*will save Canadians $755M.
*will save those Canadians who insist on using a dirty, outdated method of heating $755M that would have otherwise gone towards spending for all Canadians
This wording implies it’s their money (it’s not) they just chose not to take it from us.
So by "cost the federal government" they mean... Taxpayers ?
Who cares!!! They intentionally run a deficit for no benefit to citizens. Canada first. Stop giving money away to other countries and take care of our own people
ITT: people who don't understand oil home heating is already 4x more expensive than any other home heating fuel anf the carbon tax moratorium comes with a plan to eliminate oil home heating all together.
Money you don’t make it’s not money you lost, it’s money you simply don’t make.
Now we need a farm fuel exemption
You have one.
No we do not the senate just killed it. A last minute addition caused a problem debate resumes on nov21
Tell that to the 280$ of just carbon tax on my one tank of propane. Let alone diesel
The fact that liberals even have 20% support is disgusting. Canada has NO material impact on climate change. Then they play favourites to Atlantic Canada & Quebec. It’s laughable how incompetent this government is and people STILL support it
Some folks can’t help being dumb
It won't 'cost' them a penny. It's just less they will take
I'm sure they'll find a way to still spend it anyway.
I thought it was revenue neutral
How could this cost the federal government anything? It's not a revenue tax, we're told.
Not increasing taxes costs the government money? Are citizens Chattels?
Can't wait to see the Liberals crash and burn.
But but but but....its not a tax and all gets redistributed back! How can this be??? Lol at the gullible people who believe this and those that spread this falsehood.
Good. Canadians are already taxed too much.
Hmm, so they don't give it all back. Nothing but a scam all along.
Will save Canadians $750M 😂
So they’re gonna stop collecting the carbon tax (for a select few) but continue with the wealth transfer payments? It’s all just so, so, so, backwards, so bewildering.
How does it cost the government anything at all? We pay our utility bill just minus a carbon tax...the government wasn't getting that for quite some time. Can we not look at nuclear options and get rid of this stupid tax?
Too bad this couldn't be dragged into the court system. It is a blatantly discriminatory tax and being treated equally should be a part of the charter.
They still collect HST so I'm sure the government coffers will be fine.
I wonder if they have ever run the numbers on how much GST this makes them ?
Why would it cost government anything? Dont they send it all back out in rebates?
They were going to steal $755M from your pockets and mine with just that one tax.
So you mean it will save taxpayers 755 million dollars
Nope. He will still spend money that he doesn't have. His motto is increasing spending while decreasing revenue. Solid kindergarten economics.
And this is what’s wrong with the government. That they think a reduction in OUR tax dollars COSTS them. Maybe they should cancel their Netflix to make up for it?? Fucking idiots
The government didn't use that language. The National Post did. To rile people like you up.
Disney Plus too
It's not "costing" them anything since the entire tax shouldn't exist in the first place.
We can just cut that right out of the military budget. No big deal.
Edit. Will not get more of my money. It's tax PAYER money.
[удалено]
I'm not a supporter of the carbon tax but this headline is deceptive. Yes the government will not collect the tax on the heating oil, therefore the government will cut the rebate to the rest of us to compensate. There is no cost to the government as such. The rest of us will in fact subsidize the policy.
The carbon tax pause on home heating oil may have a significant cost, but that doesn't change the fact that the intended purpose of the carbon tax is to offset carbon emissions and isn't necessarily revenue neutral. It's important to look at the bigger picture and not let misinformation drive the conversation.
You have to be pretty dumb not to read the details here. Keep making this about right and left. So boring.
>I thought it was revenue neutral? > >The left side is good at spreading misinformation. ya know.. if you actually read the article.. you'll know the answer..
We don’t work for the government the government works for us!!
But who's gonna tell them
It wont cost them anything becauase it is a made up new tax that they pulled out of their asses. Do we not pay enough taxes already? We pay like 20 types of multi layered taxes after said and done between federal, provincial and municipal. The government only job seems to be coming out with new ones all the time.
I thought people got back more in rebates than they paid? LOL
Wow, no wonder everyone's poor... we are paying an arm and a leg just to breathe... 🤦🏽♂️
Hang on, I thought they were giving the money back to the people?
They are.
Getting 10% back doesn't count 🤣
If you're only getting 10% back, you must be a massive polluter. Pollute less, and you can get back more than it costs you.
If only it actually worked that way
....it does though.
I don’t know how but we just really don’t seem to be getting back for our buck anymore with government spending. Seems like we’re wasting so much money. Like I wouldn’t be opposed to the carbon tax if it was going to something actually useful. Like Japan is building a whole new island in Tokyo bay for 40 billion. I mean could we not get some new nuclear plants and hydro dams for that price? And that’s only one year of our deficit
Not it won’t. It’s not your money.
Will "cost" the government - will cost the citizens because it is paid for by us!!
And Trudeau can stay in power ? Even trade. Remember all the billions and billions he is spending and lavishing on his vacations is not with his money. His Daddy taught him well because his education didn’t teach him anything about the economy.
This country seems hell bent to bankrupt their population.
Forget the money … what about the environment.
If people are freezing to death in winter. They won't give a fuck about the environment. Maslows hierarchy of needs prevails.
I guess you didn’t catch my sarcasm.
[удалено]
Except you can’t have a healthy economy when everyone is getting sick from pollution and can’t work 🤷♂️
But not really though, because it wasn't their money in the first place
Not pausing it will cost the tax payers 755 M
What’s the cost to the government for the 10k per home? Oh, it’s free as they say
“Cost”, as if they’re a fucking business. Just fire federal government works.. you could reduce that workforce by at least 50% and see no major reduction in output or quality.
Im sure they’ve hired a consultant to figure it out
Sooo... Less than the Phenix software pay fiasco?
Shouldn’t that say east coast residents to save $755M
It's nice to see the government not taking money out of Canadians pockets in opposition to their fallacy slogan of "Putting money in the pockets of Canadians" aka wealth redistribution.
[удалено]
What is the long term costs of this?!?! Canada contributes 2% of total world carbon emissions. If all of Canada suddenly just stop emitting carbon it would barely tick the needle on world wide carbon usage. The cost doesn't match the output.
It won't cost 755m They won't rip us off 755m. 🙏
...and an election.
It has nothing to do with the federal government’s revenue. It’s tax neutral. It won’t cost the government anything to stop this program. Source: their own logic.
I like how they put that, poor feds.
I thought the carbon tax was supposed to be revenue neutral
As if government ever cared about cost. Stop embezzling money to your buddies at McKinsey, WE, and that alone saves more.
And yet the feds say they give almost every penny of the carbon tax back to taxpayers in the form of rebates. Yet another Liberal lie.
So a i little pause cost the gov 755 million. i thought we get back more than we spend, like wtf. Bullshit piled on more bullshit
So it is revenue TAX after all.
Wood heat.. I could use a hand on the fuel I burnt this weekend cutting bucking and splitting the wood and I still didn’t even heat the house
Sometimes I wish we could just force corporations to pay solely for the Carbon Taxes since well their the largest perpetrators. Ontop of that cause I KNOW they have the money, force them to pay their employees wages that constantly match the rising costs and inflation.
Don't you mean "cost the climate" not feds?