News 
 National Rural News 
 Agribusiness and General 
 Finance 
 Fuel tax cut a bad move, say greens 

Fuel tax cut a bad move, say greens

22 Apr, 2009 06:28 AM
MOTORISTS will get a windfall of at least $150 million a year at the petrol pump under the "cent-for-cent" reduction of fuel taxes in the Government's emissions trading scheme.

But the annual petrol subsidy has angered green groups and industry, which say it will encourage motorists to drive more and increase emissions until at least 2025.

In economic work done by the Australian Conservation Foundation, the environmental group found that by using price increases in diesel, which emits more carbon, as the baseline for cutting taxes on petrol, the Government will reduce the price of petrol more than it would normally cost without emissions trading.

The ACF's modelling shows that the subsidy to motorists using petrol will be $150 million a year based on a $20-a-tonne carbon price. That subsidy will increase as the price of carbon rises under a trading scheme.

ACF economic adviser Simon O'Connor said yesterday the measure removed the price incentive for motorists to use their cars less and reduce emissions.

A spokesman for Assistant Treasurer Chris Bowen said the additional funding would be paid for with cash raised from the sale carbon permits in the emissions trading scheme and would not add to the budget deficit.

The Government has also committed to making cuts to fuel taxes permanent, meaning if the cost of carbon later falls — making fuel cheaper to refine — it will not increase the tax to original levels.

The ACF found an ally for its complaints yesterday in petrol company Caltex, which called for the fuel tax cut to be scrapped.

Caltex also wants the transport sector to be removed from emissions trading altogether and replaced with voluntary "complementary measures".

Caltex's government relations manager, Frank Topham, told a Senate committee hearing on climate change in Sydney that, by Caltex's calculation, the fuel tax reduction measures meant emissions from cars would rise in the first 15 years of a trading scheme, rather than fall.

"The price of petrol goes down so emissions will go up for the next few years," the manager of government affairs for Caltex, Frank Topham, told a Senate committee investigating the scheme.

Mr Topham called for private motorists and small vehicle users to be permanently excluded from the scheme.

Caltex estimates emissions will continue to rise until 2025.

But Caltex wants a delay to the scheme, scheduled to begin in July 2010, until the end of the global economic crisis and 100 per cent free permits until an international agreement of carbon is reached.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size


comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
Does everyone realise that, regardless of the fact that if a farmer makes his own biofuel from a crop he has grown, and it's not for sale but for his personal use only in his tractor, truck etc, he will still be liable for excise?

If the Gubmen man is really serious about reducing green house gasses, surely he would allow biofuels to be excise free provided they're not for sale to another party.

There is a precedent for this at law.

Posted by Trugger, 22/04/2009 8:22:58 PM
Because there is no public transport and we are so dependant on motor vehicles in the bush for travelling large distances, fuel taxes are simply an exercise in bush bashing.

They seriously lower country peoples standard of living. So I can understand why the ACF wants to keep them in place - that organisation is a chronic rural people hater, that’s what they do.

If the ACF was serious about greenhouse gas reduction, they would be going flat out encouraging urban people to use electric vehicles and lobbying Governments to go nuclear.

The introduction of an ETS will also disproportionately bash rural people through penalties on farm production.

Posted by Susan, 23/04/2009 10:56:25 AM

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Related Coverage
ARTICLES
MULTIMEDIA
20 April, 2009
17 April, 2009
POLL
Q: Do you think tree changers generally have realistic expectations of rural life when they move to the bush?

Yes
(9.8%)

No
(89%)

Other
(1.2%)

Total Votes: 764
Poll Date: 19 April, 2009

Most popular articles

Advertisement



Stock & Land







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...