I don’t often have reason to praise the White House. But the Administration occasionally winds up fighting on the right side when dealing with the statists on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean.
I lauded the Obama Administration two years ago when the Treasury Department was fighting against a scheme from the Europeans to impose a tax on financial transactions.
And now it’s time to praise the White House again. In this case, they are fighting against a proposal by the European Union to impose an emissions tax on airliners. And even though the proposed tax is similar to the cap-and-trade scheme supported by Obama, the Administration is on the right side, as noted in this AP story.
The House voted Monday to exclude U.S. airlines from an emissions cap-and-trade program that the European Union plans to impose on all airlines flying to and from the continent beginning next year. With the legislation, which passed by voice vote, lawmakers joined the airline industry and the Obama administration in opposing the EU Emissions Trading Scheme scheduled to go into effect on Jan. 1. The bill now goes to the Senate, where there is currently no companion legislation. The measure directs the transportation secretary to prohibit U.S. carriers from participating in the program if it is unilaterally imposed. It also tells other federal agencies to take steps necessary to ensure that U.S. carriers are not penalized by the emissions control scheme. …The U.S. aviation industry says the cost between 2012 and 2020 could hit $3.1 billion. It says it is unfair that a flight from the United States, for example from Los Angeles, would have to pay for emissions for all parts of flights to Europe, including time spent over the United States and the Atlantic. “It’s a tax grab by the European Union,” Transportation Committee Chairman John Mica, R-Fla., said. “The meter starts running the minute the plane departs from any point in the U.S. until it reaches Europe.” …That drew fire from Krishna R. Urs, the U.S. deputy assistant secretary of State for transportation affairs, who repeated the U.S.’s “strong legal and policy objections to the inclusion of flights by non-EU carriers” in the EU program.
Individual nations have the right, of course, to impose tax on activities that take place inside national borders. And a group of nations, such as the European Union, has the right to impose taxes on things that take place within their combined borders.
In this case, however, the EU wants to levy the tax based on miles flown inside the United Stats and over international waters. This type of extraterritorial tax grab should be strongly resisted.
Fiscal sovereignty is a very important principle, one that is necessary to preserve tax competition and constrain the greed of the political class.
As such, even though the Obama Administration often is guilty of supporting schemes to impose bad US tax law on a worldwide basis, I’m glad they are fighting this European Union tax grab.
[…] But the good news is that global taxation is a toxic issue, which means politicians who have to get votes from non-crazy people are very reluctant to support taxing powers for the United Nations or any other entity. President Obama, for instance, already has rejected some global tax proposals and his Administration has been resisting other European proposals for global taxation. […]
[…] But the good news is that global taxation is a toxic issue, which means politicians who have to get votes from non-crazy people are very reluctant to support taxing powers for the United Nations or any other entity. President Obama, for instance, already has rejected some global tax proposals and his Administration has been resisting other European proposals for global taxation. […]
[…] But the good news is that global taxation is a toxic issue, which means politicians who have to get votes from non-crazy people are very reluctant to support taxing powers for the United Nations or any other entity. President Obama, for instance, already has rejected some global tax proposals and his Administration has been resisting other European proposals for global taxation. […]
I’m not sure I understand the US legislation…
The legislation does not absolve American carriers from having to pay the EU climate planning tax. It only seems to be setting up a showdown between the US and EU legislatures with American carriers caught in the middle. The EU tells American Airlines “You will pay this tax when you land or take off from Madrid” the US says “No we declare paying more than this much tax illegal under US law”. What is American Airlines going to do? It can either stop flying to Madrid or, if it continues to fly, it can refuse to pay the EU tax and be fined multiple times by the EU, or it can pay the tax and be fined multiple times by the US.
———————————
Confusion aside, if Europeans want to mimic the US tax system then their Climate Planning tax needs to stay with the European citizen:
So, on a flight from Paris to Atlanta, tax on American passengers will stop once the plane leaves European Union airspace but would continue accumulating for European passengers all the way to Atlanta. Then, if the European citizen rented that motorhome to drive across the Arizona desert, he’d have to declare his carbon emission to the EU and pay the corresponding Climate Change Brute tax. As a matter of fact, if the European tourist caused a cow in Texas to flatulate, he’d have to declare it to EU authorities and pay climate tax for the methane released. Then if a European finally got tired of all that and decided to relocate to Arizona (assuming some American gets caught off guard and lets him steal his job) the European would only be able to do so if he agreed to be banned forever from returning to Europe to visit his family, except for a limited time as a tourist. Mother got old, needs assistance back in the US? Too bad, you’re a traitor, you can only help her for 6 months. In addition he’d have to pay a one time large environmental-treason penalty tax, equal to twice the total EU climate tax he’d have paid over his entire lifetime, had he not defected to Arizona.
This is the tax system the US uses — and does not even have the pretense of global consequences to justify it. Yes, America is still a freer place (for a limited time going forward seems like, and now unstoppably on the route to Francification) but there are already some significant exceptions. Only liberalization of immigration (and also emigration and in the case of the US, Iran and N.Korea) will keep majorities of collectivists from imposing their plans and desires on all – or independent low tax jurisdictions with nuclear defenses. That will work too.
All of the right decision making of a broken clock.
Don’t be so quick to praise Obama. I’m sure the real reason is that he would like to tax those emissions himself and doesn’t want the EU taking *his* tax money.