SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Bill

Bill C-358

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
October 04, 2023
An Act to amend the Excise Tax Act (carbon pollution pricing)
  • This is a bill called C-358 that is being introduced in the Canadian House of Commons. It aims to amend the Excise Tax Act by removing the goods and services tax (GST) on carbon pollution pricing. The bill is in its first reading and can be found on the House of Commons website. It includes amendments to various sections of the Excise Tax Act related to carbon pollution pricing.
  • H1
  • H2
  • H3
  • S1
  • S2
  • S3
  • RA
  • Yea
  • Nay
  • star_border

SteelmanSpren in Favour

  • Steelman Argument in Favor of Bill C-358: One possible steelman argument in favor of Bill C-358 is that it aims to address the issue of carbon pollution by eliminating the goods and services tax (GST) in respect of carbon pollution pricing. By exempting carbon pollution pricing from the GST, this bill seeks to incentivize businesses and individuals to reduce their carbon emissions and adopt cleaner practices. Proponents of this bill argue that carbon pollution pricing is an effective tool in combating climate change and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. By removing the GST on carbon pollution pricing, the cost burden on businesses and consumers is reduced, making it more financially feasible for them to invest in cleaner technologies and practices. This, in turn, can lead to a decrease in carbon emissions and contribute to the overall goal of mitigating climate change. Furthermore, supporters of this bill argue that by exempting carbon pollution pricing from the GST, it encourages businesses to innovate and develop sustainable solutions. The financial relief provided by the elimination of the GST can be redirected towards research and development of cleaner technologies, which can lead to job creation and economic growth in the green sector. Additionally, proponents of this bill argue that it promotes fairness and equity. By exempting carbon pollution pricing from the GST, it ensures that the burden of addressing climate change is shared more evenly among businesses and individuals. This can prevent the regressive impact of carbon pricing on low-income households, who may be disproportionately affected by the increased costs associated with carbon pollution pricing. In summary, supporters of Bill C-358 argue that by eliminating the GST in respect of carbon pollution pricing, it incentivizes businesses and individuals to reduce their carbon emissions, promotes innovation in clean technologies, and ensures fairness in the distribution of the costs associated with addressing climate change.

SteelmanSpren Against

  • Steelman Argument Opposing Bill C-358: While the intention behind Bill C-358 may be to reduce the burden of taxation on individuals and businesses, it is important to consider the potential negative consequences of eliminating the goods and services tax (GST) in respect of carbon pollution pricing. Here are some right-wing anti-government talking points to consider: 1. Limited Government Intervention: The government should have a limited role in the economy and should not be involved in regulating and pricing carbon emissions. By eliminating the GST on carbon pollution pricing, the government is further expanding its reach into the private sector and interfering with free market dynamics. 2. Economic Impact: Carbon pollution pricing is often seen as a burden on businesses and consumers, leading to increased costs and reduced competitiveness. By removing the GST on carbon pollution pricing, businesses would have more resources to invest in growth and job creation, ultimately benefiting the economy as a whole. 3. Individual Freedom: The imposition of carbon pollution pricing is an infringement on individual freedom and personal choices. It assumes that the government knows best and should dictate how individuals and businesses should behave. By eliminating the GST on carbon pollution pricing, individuals would have more freedom to make their own decisions without government interference. 4. Ineffectiveness of Carbon Pricing: Some argue that carbon pricing is an ineffective policy tool for reducing carbon emissions. They claim that it disproportionately affects lower-income individuals and businesses, while larger corporations can afford to pay for emissions allowances. By removing the GST on carbon pollution pricing, the government would acknowledge the limitations of this policy and allow for alternative approaches to addressing climate change. 5. Sovereignty and Competitiveness: Carbon pollution pricing is often seen as a globalist agenda imposed on nations by international organizations. By eliminating the GST on carbon pollution pricing, Canada can assert its sovereignty and protect its competitiveness in the global market, ensuring that domestic businesses are not disadvantaged compared to their international counterparts. It is important to note that these arguments are presented from a right-wing anti-government perspective and may not necessarily reflect the views of all individuals or political ideologies.
House First Reading
  • Oct. 4, 2023, 2 p.m.
  • Passed
House Second Reading
  • Oct. 4, 2023, 2 p.m.
  • In Progress
  • Read