This is very misleading "reporting", and it's important that people understand why before they hand their credit card over to this person's paywall. #cdnpoli
First, the "Proceeds" line includes all carbon tax payments, not just households' costs.

This is important because the "Climate Action Incentive Payments" do not include other uses of carbon tax revenues which are returned to the provincial economy.
They are only the 80-90% of all payments that are supposed to be returned to households. This is why households end up receiving more than they pay: they get 80-90% of all payments, even though they do not incur that proportion of the costs.
The government's commitment to return 100% to the province will be adhered to and reviewed by independent audit. To do this analysis properly, you have to include the other programming that the carbon tax is funding.
Or, alternatively, carve out the amounts that all households, specifically, pay, which will be less than the total household incentive payments in each province. This work has been done, btw, by @trevortombe, who includes direct and indirect carbon tax costs for households.
To be a bit more clear: payers of carbon tax (the "proceeds" line) include Households plus Others (H+O). The fact that rebates to H ("incentive payments" line) is less than carbon tax costs of H+O DOES NOT mean that rebates to H are less than costs of H.
I.e. the table shows:
Rebates(H) < Costs(H) + Costs(O)

But this DOES NOT mean:
Rebates(H) < Costs(H)

But that's what this "clipped" table is being held up as showing. When in reality, we know that:
Rebates(H) > Costs(H)
You can follow @ThibaultBen.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled:

By continuing to use the site, you are consenting to the use of cookies as explained in our Cookie Policy to improve your experience.