France to Assess Annual Tax on Most-Polluting Vehicle Owners
by Matthew McDermott, Brooklyn, NY on 07. 1.08
photo by Adam Comerford
While pure free-marketeers will continue to argue that eco-taxes interfere with the pure functioning of markets, it is increasingly being acknowledged that some means of incorporating the environmental costs of a product must be included into the price which the consumer pays. If this is done—if environmental externalities and internalized into prices, in ecological economics speak—then the true lifecycle costs of a product are taken into account, and a more informed decision can be made on the part of the consumer.
In a practical example of this, France has expanded its so-called “bonus-malus” system of taxes and rewards on cars, from a one-time penalty or bonus at the time or purchase to an annual assessment. Ideally, this should probably be included in the price paid at the dealer and not be something assessed by the government, but it's a good start.
Polluting vehicles taxed, Less-polluting ones receive bonus
Currently car purchases have to pay between 200 and 2,600 euros at the time of purchase if their vehicle emits more that 250 grams of CO2 per kilometer, while they receive a “bonus” of 200-1000 euros if the car is deemed to be more environmentally friendly. While the penalty for the most polluting vehicles will be assessed annually, the bonus will continue to only apply at the time of purchase.
According the original article in Le Parisien, Austria is launching a similar system of taxes to encourage consumers to make more eco-friendly buying decisions.
via :: Reuters and :: Le Parisien
France, Climate Change, Cars
France Gets Eco-Labels for New Autos
Electric Car Sharing Service Announced in Paris
Brazil and India Top Greendex; USA, Canada and France Finish Last
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
- Czech President & Climate Denier Vaclav Klaus To Preside Over EU In 2009
- 3 Green Pre-Conditions for a Big Three Bailout
- GHG Photos: Climate Change Photography Shapes Debate
- Sustainability’s Success
HI
I just discovered your site and I really like it. My life is focused towards getting people to use less and enjoy more. I have a business where I do that specifically. I have a blog where people can learn how to let go. It's at http://brooks-palmer.blogspot.com
thanks again for your valuable forum
Brooks :)
Free-marketeers are asses. They put the value of a "pure market" over all else. They think this "invisible hand theory" is some divine concept. It's such a pile of BS. The concept of a pure market is such a fallacy. Markets have always operated within the law, therefore they are not truly pure. If it served the bottom line, some companies would (and do) commit all kinds atrocious acts like murder and dumping toxic waste. And they would do so without consequence and free-marketeers would all cheer.
The fact is that we as the people own the commons and we have the right to levee a cost or prohibit outright companies from trashing them. Left to their own bottom line, corporations will always behave sociopathically. We as the people have the obligation to direct corporations to act in a socially responsible way through legislation and/or free market incentives.
Though I would have liked to see an eco-tax as you put it, I guess this is the next best thing. Bravo to France for that.
Taxing a car at the point of purchase on expected consumption/pollution doesn't make any sense. They should be taxing each liter of petrol instead which reflects actual consumption and the amount of CO2 emitted. Why charge people more for an inefficient car if they rarely drive it?
@ snooo53: You're right about the car. I should've been more specific. I was referring to items in general incorporating externalized environmental factors into their pricing. In most cases this would be influenced in large part by the input costs for manufacturing, which would get passed on to the consumer.
good idea, you have to force peple to not buing inefficient cars, so the manufactures will not build them in the first place.
Thanks stradric. You're completely right.
As for the merits of this tax, there should be a finer grained distinction. Put a purchase-price adjustment for the pollution caused by the manufacturing (and eventual disposal) of the vehicle. Life-cycle pollution should be handled as a gas tax, however.
stradric - every free-marketeer believes in some level of government invovlement as laws need to be upheld. The government is a referree in free market theory, not a spectator. Additionally, since the government is there to keep things fair, there is nothing in free market theory that says you can't penalize or prevent emissions to some extent. Finally "the invisible hand," Adam Smith's invention is often misquoted as he was not a pure capitalist - he was more of an anti-mercantilist. Please get your facts straight before you post intentionally incindiary tripe.
TreeHugger - I'm dissapointed that you allow comments such as stradric's when you ask us to post civil responses.
re Chad - If we censor people who disagree with us, then we'll never understand eachother. BTW - When's the last time you read Adam Smith? He clearly and repeatedly advocates a free market in all things subject to the constraints of national & personal safety. The only thing he gets wrong is the treatment of money as a unique commodity when it is not.
re stradric - How do you explain the terrible damage done in the USSR, China or North Korea then? Or the working conditions in early industrial factories that were privately owned, not corporate? Problems with greed are manifest in all people in all times. What we really need to do is stop the abuse of the 14th amendment and pierce the veil of corporate shielding for the criminals who operate many of them. They should not be able to pay fines with other people's money, they should do forced labor for any crimes they commit.
As for the tax - I support consumption taxes whenever value is removed from the economy. Burning gasoline is clearly removing value from the system. Same with burning coal or uranium. However solar power is adding value and should not be taxed.