IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/clh/briefi/v14y2021i34.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A primer On Carbon Tax Relief For Farmers

Author

Listed:
  • YmeÌ€ne Fouli

    (University of Calgary)

Abstract

Canada's federal carbon tax currently applies in Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Ontario. Farmers in these provinces lack consistency on the tax, which is differentially applied to agricultural fuels. They must navigate between distinct sets of rules depending on the type of fuels they’re using and what those fuels are used for. Some fuels are eligible to be fully exempt from the carbon tax; others may be allowed a partial exemption, and still others may force farmers to face the full amount of the carbon tax. The most significant agricultural fuel sources facing the full amount of the carbon tax are natural gas and propane used for grain and oilseed drying and for the heating of barns and other farm buildings. The burden of these tax payments on farmers is unclear. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada reports carbon tax cost estimates for grain and oilseed drying that range from an average of $210 per farm in Alberta to $774 per farm in Saskatchewan. Individual farmers, in contrast, have reported carbon tax costs of up to $10,000. Agriculture’s sector-level emissions and trade flows are comparable to those of many industries in Canada that meet the criteria for being labelled an emissions- intensive and trade-exposed (EITE) industry. EITE industries are typically eligible to receive carbon pricing support on all priced emissions as part of either the federal government’s output-based pricing system (OBPS) or similar provincial government programs. Agriculture is typically excluded from these programs because of the thousands of small producers in the sector, most of whom remain below the minimum emissions thresholds required for participation. As a result of this exclusion, agricultural subsectors have generally not been evaluated to see whether they meet EITE criteria. With all federal parties in favour of additional carbon pricing support for farmers, it is likely that support will soon be expanded to additional fuel uses. Future support to the agriculture industry is best offered via a mechanism that maintains the full incentive of the carbon tax. Two options that satisfy this objective are either a lump sum rebate to farmers or an output-based rebate system specific to agriculture. With both options it is important that any rebate amount is divorced from emissions and fuel use, A third option, which does not maintain the incentive of the carbon tax, is to expand farm-fuel exemptions. All of these options come with advantages and disadvantages, which would need to be carefully weighed. It would also be informative to complete an EITE assessment for agriculture that is based on all of the sector’s combustion emissions being subject to the carbon tax. This would help to inform the potential impact of the carbon tax on agricultural production costs, farm profitability and the global competitiveness of Canada’s farmers. Such an assessment would provide important insights on how to best support Canada’s agricultural competitiveness without undermining its overall emissions reduction plan.

Suggested Citation

  • YmeÌ€ne Fouli, 2021. "A primer On Carbon Tax Relief For Farmers," SPP Briefing Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 14(34), November.
  • Handle: RePEc:clh:briefi:v:14:y:2021:i:34
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.policyschool.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/JSC13_Carbon-Tax-Relief_Dobson-2.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sarah Dobson & Jennifer Winter, 2018. "Assessing Policy Support for Emissions-Intensive and Trade-Exposed Industries," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 11(28), October.
    2. Meredith Fowlie & Mar Reguant & Stephen P. Ryan, 2016. "Market-Based Emissions Regulation and Industry Dynamics," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 124(1), pages 249-302.
    3. Philippe Quirion & Damien Demailly, 2008. "Changing the Allocation Rules in the EU ETS: Impact on Competitiveness and Economic Efficiency," Working Papers 2008.89, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    4. Sarah Dobson & Jennifer Winter & Brendan Boyd, 2019. "The Greenhouse Gas Emissions Coverage of Carbon Pricing Instruments for Canadian Provinces," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 12(6), February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jean-Philippe Nicolaï & Jorge Zamorano, 2018. "Windfall Profits Under Pollution Permits and Output-Based Allocation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 69(4), pages 661-691, April.
    2. Ambec, Stefan & Esposito, Federico & Pacelli, Antonia, 2024. "The economics of carbon leakage mitigation policies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    3. Jonathan Colmer & Ralf Martin & Mirabelle Muûls & Ulrich J. Wagner, 2020. "Does pricing carbon mitigate climate change? Firm-level evidence from the European Union emissions trading scheme," CEP Discussion Papers dp1728, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    4. C. Lanier Benkard & Przemyslaw Jeziorski & Gabriel Y. Weintraub, 2013. "Oblivious Equilibrium for Concentrated Industries," NBER Working Papers 19307, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Meunier, Guy & Ponssard, Jean-Pierre & Quirion, Philippe, 2014. "Carbon leakage and capacity-based allocations: Is the EU right?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 68(2), pages 262-279.
    6. Jonathan T. Hawkins-Pierot & Katherine R. H. Wagner, 2022. "Technology Lock-In and Optimal Carbon Pricing," CESifo Working Paper Series 9762, CESifo.
    7. Martinsson, Gustav & Sajtos, László & Strömberg, Per & Thomann, Christian, 2022. "Carbon Pricing and Firm-Level CO2 Abatement: Evidence from a Quarter of a Century-Long Panel," Misum Working Paper Series 2022-10, Stockholm School of Economics, Mistra Center for Sustainable Markets (Misum).
    8. O'Connell, Martin & Smith, Kate, 2020. "Corrective Tax Design and Market Power," CEPR Discussion Papers 14582, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    9. Joseph S. Shapiro & Reed Walker, 2018. "Why Is Pollution from US Manufacturing Declining? The Roles of Environmental Regulation, Productivity, and Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(12), pages 3814-3854, December.
    10. Mathias Reynaert & James M. Sallee, 2016. "Corrective Policy and Goodhart's Law: The Case of Carbon Emissions from Automobiles," NBER Working Papers 22911, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Gray, Wayne & Linn, Joshua & Morgenstern, Richard D., 2024. "Modeling Industrial Sector Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Policies with Plant-Level Data," RFF Working Paper Series 24-10, Resources for the Future.
    12. Christopher Hansman & Jonas Hjort & Gianmarco León, 2015. "Firms' Response and Unintended Health Consequences of Industrial Regulations," Working Papers 809, Barcelona School of Economics.
    13. Ritz, Robert A., 2022. "Global carbon price asymmetry," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    14. Yujie Lin & Joshua Linn, 2023. "Environmental Regulation and Product Attributes: The Case of European Passenger Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 10(1), pages 1-32.
    15. Baudry, Marc & Faure, Anouk & Quemin, Simon, 2021. "Emissions trading with transaction costs," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    16. Frédéric Branger & Jean-Pierre Ponssard & Oliver Sartor & Misato Sato, 2015. "EU ETS, Free Allocations, and Activity Level Thresholds: The Devil Lies in the Details," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 2(3), pages 401-437.
    17. Maogang Tang & Silu Cheng & Wenqing Guo & Weibiao Ma & Fengxia Hu, 2023. "Relationship between carbon emission trading schemes and companies’ total factor productivity: evidence from listed companies in China," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(10), pages 11735-11767, October.
    18. Stefan Lamp & Mario Samano, 2023. "(Mis)allocation of Renewable Energy Sources," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 10(1), pages 195-229.
    19. Sharat Ganapati & Joseph S. Shapiro & Reed Walker, 2016. "The Incidence of Carbon Taxes in U.S. Manufacturing: Lessons from Energy Cost Pass-through," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2038R3, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University, revised Mar 2018.
    20. Ino, Hiroaki & Matsumura, Toshihiro, 2024. "Are fuel taxes redundant when an emission tax is introduced for life-cycle emissions?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:clh:briefi:v:14:y:2021:i:34. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Bev Dahlby (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/spcalca.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.