Does this seem like a cost that should be transferred to consumer?
In: 2
[deleted]
Right now the cost is voluntary, since most jurisdictions don’t have a carbon tax. As a result, the cost isn’t being “transferred” per se, since no one has to pay it. It’s offered as an option for people who want to do it. As people get more wealthy, they can also afford to care about the environment more, and that’s one of the ways they can do that.
If it were mandatory, of course, most of the cost of it would just be folded into the price of the item, which would be more expensive. (Sales & VAT taxes are also mostly passed to the consumer, with only a small part being reduced seller profits.) A carbon tax would still be a good idea, mind you, but that’s because it would lead us to consume less carbon, and it would do that by making consuming it more expensive to us.
Latest Answers