Please find below the
Overall, excellent job of thinking both about the design of a carbon tax policy as well as the politics of implementing this policy. Welcome attention to how policy design can manage the different needs of economic constituencies.
1. This has the potential to get some conservatives thinking about what they could "get" out of climate action, even if they aren't convinced (or can't say they're convinced) by the science of climate change. As such, it's a very helpful proposal. To make it more palatable to conservatives, I'd suggest a toning down of the need for international dialogue. Better to talk about how the border adjustment would make it in our trading partners' interests to follow with "commitments of analogous stringency"--even in the absence of an international agreement. I have some qualms about the proposal not being revenue-neutral, but deficit reduction might give conservatives some cover, especially since they'd be getting corporate tax reduction. The subsidy to the poor (not sure how that's done, please expand) would be attractive to the left and would provide some protection to conservatives who would otherwise be attacked for cutting corporate income taxes and making up the revenue by taxing the poor through a carbon tax. This proposal smartly fits our desperate need for corporate tax reform and can capitalize on the concern over corporate inversion transactions.
2. This proposal does not break new ground in overall concept, but represents a thoughtful and fairly complete carbon tax reform package design. What the proposal does not make explicit is how this particular tax can be made politically feasible - some of the design elements seem to have political viability in mind, more details would be welcome. For instance, provide an A-to-B roadmap/strategy of how to actually implement the proposal. Specific details will help you in the final judging round.
No comments have been posted.