C.D. Howe Institute op-ed piece on carbon taxes

Good summary of the anti-carbon tax position given in an op-ed piece in the National Post back in June. Boils down to:

1. carbon taxes don't change consumer behaviour that much because energy "essentials" aren't very price sensitive
2. although in theory carbon tax revenues could be used to reduce more distortionary taxes, in practice the revenues will end up dedicated to federal climate change programs. Bureaucrats will then be reluctant to ever give up the tax revenue in the future, even if emissions control is no longer necessary.
3. carbon taxes put a disproportionate burden on the poor and low income, but compensating for this with income-linked rebates a la GST will negate the behaviour-changing goal of the tax.

Link to archived article text.

My comments
re Item 1: My understanding is that a sufficiently high carbon tax would change consumer behaviour over the long term. Sure, heating oil and gas aren't very price sensitive compared to non essentials, but people and companies are going to invest more in energy efficiency and substitute technologies when prices double or triple over time.
Item 2: This is not an inevitable feature of carbon taxes. A revenue-neutral tax would completely avoid this problem, and go far to overcome resistance to the idea.
Item 3: Not a strong argument. If lower-income families get a bigger piece of income tax reductions to compensate for the higher impact of a carbon tax, this doesn't negate the point of the tax at all. Those families will still have a strong incentive over time to switch to other technologies or less energy intensive behaviour. And the tax will still create the exact same incentives for richer Canadians and industry.