A green tax code for American businesses and individual taxpayers appears to be in the works by the US Treasury. The $1.5 million study is being carried out under the auspices of the National Academy of Science.
Eco-Taxes? Study Financed by U.S. Treasury Will Link Tax Code to Carbon Emissions
A major tax study currently being sponsored by the U.S. Treasury will give environmental activists a powerful new weapon in their campaign to alter the entire American economic and social landscape in the name of halting “climate change”—including the possible levying of new carbon taxes…
“They are simply trying to bypass the people’s representatives and use technocrats to achieve their agenda,” [Congressman James Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin] argues. Sensenbrenner, a Republican, is a former member of the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, created by the Democratic congressional majority during the Bush Administration.
It is there, he says, that the National Academy study was first ordered up, by Congressman Earl Blumenauer of Oregon, in 2008—but never funded, until the advent of the Obama Administration. Rep. Blumenauer, a Democrat, is a strong advocate of “sustainable communities” and environmental causes….
The description of the project at the National Academy of Sciences website is worth checking out. It was originally supposed to be released this month, but has been delayed so that it will be released next spring, after the election. As the NAS explains, the committee will write a consensus report on taxes that will have substantial effects on carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions. It adds:
The panel will necessarily focus heavily on energy, both the life cycles of different energy sources and their uses in different sectors such as electricity generation, transportation, industrial processes, and consumer uses (including in households). The study may extend to areas beyond energy, such as agriculture, forestry, urban development, and other land uses which can have significant effects on GHG emissions.
Are we likely to get a sound economic policy from the committee of experts conducting this study? Readers can go down the list of members to check out their clear viewpoints. For example, the Committee is headed by William Nordhaus, a Yale environmental economist who has made quite a career of global warming. He authored such publications as the book, Warming the World. It was based on the belief of an overwhelming scientific concensus that global warming is occuring and is caused at least in part by human activity, complete with ozone eating chemicals and destruction wrought by greenhouse gas emissions. Junkscience readers may remember his piece in the New York Times earlier this year entitled, “Why the Global Warming Skeptics are Wrong.” The article opened by saying: “The threat of climate change is an increasingly important environmental issue for the globe.” His objective for the article, he said, was to correct the misleading attempts by skeptics to “discredit scientists and scientific research on climate change.” David Middleton concisely debunked Nordhaus’ argument in a piece for Watts Up With That.
JunkScience.com 
If you like this initiative you will love it when President Obama accedes to UN initiatives that will also tax us and will levy a heavier burden on the US than on any other country.
Pretty soon a condo in Haiti and a bank account in the Caymans will be attractive to basically everyone.
We’ve already got enough taxes to deal with and now we have to worry about a possible environmental tax?
Reblogged this on edwardgallagher and commented:
More hidden taxes to come
Look at the list of committee members and it is not hard to predict what the outcome will be; more implementation of Agenda 21. NRDC has a representative on the committee along with some of the more liberal universities in the country.
Hrrm. The USA has about the lowest taxrate of the westernworld. Eco-tax has been implemented in Europe about a decade ago. And to top it off, you pay TVA over the Eco-tax. Tax is being taxed.
You shall assimilate….
Don’t we already have a huge tax burden called the EPA?
EPA is a pussy compared to the EU environmental commission. Directed by rabid anti-joy pro-green econut Connie Hedegaard who is proud to have tripled the energy prices in Denmark.
In Paris, france they want to ban ALL vehicles older then 17 years. Particulate matter you know, deadly stuff.
Policy-based science and government, what won’t they do? Give up.
In the UK the government changed the car tax laws to encourage “environmentaly friendly” cars. Now that we have lots of lower tax cars they are looking at raising the tax to make up the shortfall in revenue. It’s all a big con.
Many skeptics think we are winning the debate, as evidenced by the lowered public interest in global warming. But the bureaucrats could care less. Everywhere one turns, “carbon” taxes are being imposed on the citizenry. We, the skeptics have lost. Even if there is no more earth surface temperature rise during the next 50 years, those taxes will never be repealed.
There is already a free-market, world-wide economy that is not taxed, nor is it subject to the arbitrary and capricious ‘bans’ imposed by the tyrannical nanny-states. It is called the Black Market, and will no doubt be coming soon to an Internet near you!