If you look at page 180 of the 451-page monster bailout bill that easily passed the Senate yesterday (PDF here), you will see that it includes at Section 116 language about the tax treatment of “industrial source carbon dioxide.” It also provides, at Section 117, for a “carbon audit of the tax code.”
What could a provision about the tax treatment of “industrial source carbon dioxide” and another provision about doing a “carbon audit” of the tax code possibly have to do with restoring confidence in Wall Street’s troubled credit and banking markets?
The answer: NOTHING.
This appears to be an attempt by global warming alarmists to lay the foundation for a carbon tax in the middle of another crisis, hoping nobody will notice.
Call your congressman now! More at Planet Gore
UPDATE FROM CAPITAL RESEARCH:
Apparently the bill with the carbon provisions existed already and was passed by the Senate. So, the Senate used the bill as a vehicle for advancing the bailout package. They couldn’t under the Constitution initiate a spending bill in the Senate, so they had to amend one that was already passed by the House. Nonetheless, what was so urgent about the carbon provisions that they had to go with the bailout bill? Who decided which bill to use as the vehicle? Why not pick a non-controversial bill? My guess would be that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid made the call but it’s just a guess.
An expert offers a better explanation of one of the carbon-related provisions that is in the Bailout 2.0 bill.
According to this wizard of Wall Street, one provision provides preferential tax treatment for publicly-traded partnerships when they trade so-called carbon offsets. It was reportedly already passed in another bill: What’s so urgent about that tax provision that it absolutely had to go into another bill that aims to deal with a financial emergency? So, you can see it’s a little more complex than explained above. However, it’s still bad because it gives legitimacy to these strange indulgences known as carbon offsets and provides a tax incentive for trading them.
I am also informed by this source that Henry Paulson did not push to insert these two carbon-related provisions, but he certainly didn’t object to them, and his track record strongly suggests he would support them. When he ran Goldman Sachs, Paulson released a statement specifically endorsing carbon trading. As the Washington Post reported (June 1, 2006) reported: Last year under Paulson’s direction, Goldman Sachs issued an eight-page position paper on environmental policy, saying it accepts a scientific consensus, led by United Nations climate experts, that global warming poses one of the greatest threats this century.
Like Bush, the Goldman Sachs statement endorsed a market for businesses to buy and sell rights to emit greenhouse gases, saying it will spur technology advances by companies “that lead to a less carbon-intensive economy.” But, it added, “Voluntary action alone cannot solve the climate change problem,” a position contrary to the Bush administration’s view.
Source: Capital Research
The text of the provision on page 180 of the bill (PDF here) is in full below:
Lines 1-4
SEC. 116. CERTAIN INCOME AND GAINS RELATING TO IN
DUSTRIAL SOURCE CARBON DIOXIDE TREATED AS QUALIFYING INCOME FOR PUBLICLY TRADED PARTNERSHIPS.
5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subparagraph (E) of section
6 7704(d)(1) (defining qualifying income) is amended by in7
serting ‘‘or industrial source carbon dioxide’’ after ‘‘tim8
ber)’’.
9 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by
10 this section shall take effect on the date of the enactment
11 of this Act, in taxable years ending after such date.
12 SEC. 117. CARBON AUDIT OF THE TAX CODE.
13 (a) STUDY.—The Secretary of the Treasury shall
14 enter into an agreement with the National Academy of
15 Sciences to undertake a comprehensive review of the Inter16
nal Revenue Code of 1986 to identify the types of and
17 specific tax provisions that have the largest effects on car18
bon and other greenhouse gas emissions and to estimate
19 the magnitude of those effects.
20 (b) REPORT.—Not later than 2 years after the date
21 of enactment of this Act, the National Academy of
22 Sciences shall submit to Congress a report containing the
23 results of study authorized under this section.
24 (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is
25 authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section
26 $1,500,000 for the period of fiscal years 2009 and 2010.
I posted it in the comments before – Henry Paulson, the secretary of the Treasury is an AGW nut.
Classic move by the Alarmist…talk about 3 card Monty… “Quick!!…Look over there!!…The market’s crashing!!!…(and you won’t even notice me slipping this little teencyweeency provision in this important bill over HERE, heh heh heh).
I posted on another blog that I wasn’t sure which was more offensive, the inclusion of carbon credits or the $6M for wooden arrows.
You just can’t make this up.
Jim
The line item veto is a concept that’s way overdue. This is just nonsense. The legal precedent for taxing CO2 starts here. Sheesh.
Oh… FIRST!
And the democrats are wondering why the only true conservatives in Washington (the house republicans) would never vote for the bailout.
It must be frustrating to be a conservative in Washington.
Fasten your seat belts and hang onto your wallets — the ride’s about to get bumpy.
Here are extracts inserting CO2 sequestration and tax credits into this emergency bill without debate.
O:\AYO\AYO08C32.xml
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES—110th Cong., 2d Sess.
H. R. 1424
Subtitle B—Carbon Mitigation and Coal Provisions
Sec. 115. Tax credit for carbon dioxide sequestration.
Sec. 116. Certain income and gains relating to industrial source carbon dioxide treated as qualifying income for publicly traded partnerships.
Sec. 117. Carbon audit of the tax code.
(3) CAPTURE AND SEQUESTRATION OF CARBON
16 DIOXIDE EMISSIONS REQUIREMENT.—
17 (A) IN GENERAL.—Section 48A(e)(1) is
18 amended by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of sub
19 paragraph (E), by striking the period at the
20 end of subparagraph (F) and inserting ‘‘; and’’,
21 and by adding at the end the following new sub
22 paragraph:
23 ‘‘(G) in the case of any project the applica
24 tion for which is submitted during the period
25 described in subsection (d)(2)(A)(ii), the project
157
1 includes equipment which separates and seques
2 ters at least 65 percent (70 percent in the case
3 of an application for reallocated credits under
4 subsection (d)(4)) of such project’s total carbon
5 dioxide emissions.’’.
6 (B) HIGHEST PRIORITY FOR PROJECTS
7 WHICH SEQUESTER CARBON DIOXIDE EMIS
8 SIONS.—Section 48A(e)(3) is amended by strik
9 ing ‘‘and’’ at the end of subparagraph (A)(iii),
10 by striking the period at the end of subpara
11 graph (B)(iii) and inserting ‘‘, and’’, and by
12 adding at the end the following new subpara
13 graph:
14 ‘‘(C) give highest priority to projects with
15 the greatest separation and sequestration per
16 centage of total carbon dioxide emissions.’’.
17 (C) RECAPTURE OF CREDIT FOR FAILURE
18 TO SEQUESTER.—Section 48A is amended by
19 adding at the end the following new subsection:
20 ‘‘(i) RECAPTURE OF CREDIT FOR FAILURE TO SE
21 QUESTER.—The Secretary shall provide for recapturing
22 the benefit of any credit allowable under subsection (a)
23 with respect to any project which fails to attain or main
24 tain the separation and sequestration requirements of sub
25 section (e)(1)(G).’’.
17 SEC. 112. EXPANSION AND MODIFICATION OF COAL GASIFI
18 CATION INVESTMENT CREDIT.
19 (a) MODIFICATION OF CREDIT AMOUNT.—Section
20 48B(a) is amended by inserting ‘‘(30 percent in the case
21 of credits allocated under subsection (d)(1)(B))’’ after ‘‘20
22 percent’’.
23 (b) EXPANSION OF AGGREGATE CREDITS.—Section
24 48B(d)(1) is amended by striking ‘‘shall not exceed
160
1 $350,000,000’’ and all that follows and inserting ‘‘shall
2 not exceed—
3 ‘‘(A) $350,000,000, plus
4 ‘‘(B) $250,000,000 for qualifying gasifi
5 cation projects that include equipment which
6 separates and sequesters at least 75 percent of
7 such project’s total carbon dioxide emissions.’’.
8 (c) RECAPTURE OF CREDIT FOR FAILURE TO SE
9 QUESTER.—Section 48B is amended by adding at the end
10 the following new subsection:
11 ‘‘(f) RECAPTURE OF CREDIT FOR FAILURE TO SE
12 QUESTER.—The Secretary shall provide for recapturing
13 the benefit of any credit allowable under subsection (a)
14 with respect to any project which fails to attain or main
15 tain the separation and sequestration requirements for
16 such project under subsection (d)(1).’’.
161
1 ‘‘(B) give high priority to applicant partici
2 pants who have a research partnership with an
3 eligible educational institution (as defined in
4 section 529(e)(5)).’’.
19 SEC. 115. TAX CREDIT FOR CARBON DIOXIDE SEQUESTRA20
TION.
21 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subpart D of part IV of sub22
chapter A of chapter 1 (relating to business credits) is
23 amended by adding at the end the following new section:
175
O:\AYO\AYO08C32.xml S.L.C.
1 ‘‘SEC. 45Q. CREDIT FOR CARBON DIOXIDE SEQUESTRATION.
2 ‘‘(a) GENERAL RULE.—For purposes of section 38,
3 the carbon dioxide sequestration credit for any taxable
4 year is an amount equal to the sum of—
5 ‘‘(1) $20 per metric ton of qualified carbon di6
oxide which is—
7 ‘‘(A) captured by the taxpayer at a quali8
fied facility, and
9 ‘‘(B) disposed of by the taxpayer in secure
10 geological storage, and
11 ‘‘(2) $10 per metric ton of qualified carbon di12
oxide which is—
13 ‘‘(A) captured by the taxpayer at a quali14
fied facility, and
15 ‘‘(B) used by the taxpayer as a tertiary
16 injectant in a qualified enhanced oil or natural
17 gas recovery project.
18 ‘‘(b) QUALIFIED CARBON DIOXIDE.—For purposes of
19 this section—
20 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘qualified carbon
21 dioxide’ means carbon dioxide captured from an in22
dustrial source which—
23 ‘‘(A) would otherwise be released into the
24 atmosphere as industrial emission of green25
house gas, and
176
O:\AYO\AYO08C32.xml S.L.C.
1 ‘‘(B) is measured at the source of capture
2 and verified at the point of disposal or injec3
tion.
4 ‘‘(2) RECYCLED CARBON DIOXIDE.—The term
5 ‘qualified carbon dioxide’ includes the initial deposit
6 of captured carbon dioxide used as a tertiary
7 injectant. Such term does not include carbon dioxide
8 that is re-captured, recycled, and re-injected as part
9 of the enhanced oil and natural gas recovery process.
10 ‘‘(c) QUALIFIED FACILITY.—For purposes of this
11 section, the term ‘qualified facility’ means any industrial
12 facility—
13 ‘‘(1) which is owned by the taxpayer,
14 ‘‘(2) at which carbon capture equipment is
15 placed in service, and
16 ‘‘(3) which captures not less than 500,000 met
17 ric tons of carbon dioxide during the taxable year.
18 ‘‘(d) SPECIAL RULES AND OTHER DEFINITIONS.—
19 For purposes of this section—
20 ‘‘(1) ONLY CARBON DIOXIDE CAPTURED AND
21 DISPOSED OF OR USED WITHIN THE UNITED STATES
22 TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT.—The credit under this sec
23 tion shall apply only with respect to qualified carbon
24 dioxide the capture and disposal or use of which is
25 within—
177
O:\AYO\AYO08C32.xml S.L.C.
1 ‘‘(A) the United States (within the mean
2 ing of section 638(1)), or
3 ‘‘(B) a possession of the United States
4 (within the meaning of section 638(2)).
5 ‘‘(2) SECURE GEOLOGICAL STORAGE.—The Sec
6 retary, in consultation with the Administrator of the
7 Environmental Protection Agency, shall establish
8 regulations for determining adequate security meas
9 ures for the geological storage of carbon dioxide
10 under subsection (a)(1)(B) such that the carbon di
11 oxide does not escape into the atmosphere. Such
12 term shall include storage at deep saline formations
13 and unminable coal seems under such conditions as
14 the Secretary may determine under such regulations.
18 ‘‘(4) QUALIFIED ENHANCED OIL OR NATURAL
19 GAS RECOVERY PROJECT.—The term ‘qualified en20
hanced oil or natural gas recovery project’ has the
21 meaning given the term ‘qualified enhanced oil re
22 covery project’ by section 43(c)(2), by substituting
23 ‘crude oil or natural gas’ for ‘crude oil’ in subpara
24 graph (A)(i) thereof.
178
1 ‘‘(5) CREDIT ATTRIBUTABLE TO TAXPAYER.—
2 Any credit under this section shall be attributable to
3 the person that captures and physically or contrac
4 tually ensures the disposal of or the use as a tertiary
5 injectant of the qualified carbon dioxide, except to
6 the extent provided in regulations prescribed by the
7 Secretary.
8 ‘‘(6) RECAPTURE.—The Secretary shall, by reg
9 ulations, provide for recapturing the benefit of any
10 credit allowable under subsection (a) with respect to
11 any qualified carbon dioxide which ceases to be cap
12 tured, disposed of, or used as a tertiary injectant in
13 a manner consistent with the requirements of this
14 section.
15 ‘‘(3) TERTIARY INJECTANT.—The term ‘ter
16 tiary injectant’ has the same meaning as when used
17 within section 193(b)(1).
179
O:\AYO\AYO08C32.xml S.L.C.
1 ‘‘(e) APPLICATION OF SECTION.—The credit under
2 this section shall apply with respect to qualified carbon
3 dioxide before the end of the calendar year in which the
4 Secretary, in consultation with the Administrator of the
5 Environmental Protection Agency, certifies that
6 75,000,000 metric tons of qualified carbon dioxide have
7 been captured and disposed of or used as a tertiary
8 injectant.’’.
9 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 38(b) (re
10 lating to general business credit) is amended by striking
11 ‘‘plus’’ at the end of paragraph (32), by striking the period
12 at the end of paragraph (33) and inserting ‘‘, plus’’, and
13 by adding at the end of following new paragraph:
14 ‘‘(34) the carbon dioxide sequestration credit
15 determined under section 45Q(a).’’.
16 (c) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections
17 for subpart B of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1
18 (relating to other credits) is amended by adding at the
19 end the following new section:
‘‘Sec. 45Q. Credit for carbon dioxide sequestration.’’.
20 (d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by
21 this section shall apply to carbon dioxide captured after
22 the date of the enactment of this Act.
180
1 SEC. 116. CERTAIN INCOME AND GAINS RELATING TO IN
2 DUSTRIAL SOURCE CARBON DIOXIDE TREAT
3 ED AS QUALIFYING INCOME FOR PUBLICLY
4 TRADED PARTNERSHIPS.
5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subparagraph (E) of section
6 7704(d)(1) (defining qualifying income) is amended by in
7 serting ‘‘or industrial source carbon dioxide’’ after ‘‘tim
8 ber)’’.
9 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by
10 this section shall take effect on the date of the enactment
11 of this Act, in taxable years ending after such date.
12 SEC. 117. CARBON AUDIT OF THE TAX CODE.
13 (a) STUDY.—The Secretary of the Treasury shall
14 enter into an agreement with the National Academy of
15 Sciences to undertake a comprehensive review of the Inter
16 nal Revenue Code of 1986 to identify the types of and
17 specific tax provisions that have the largest effects on car
18 bon and other greenhouse gas emissions and to estimate
19 the magnitude of those effects.
20 (b) REPORT.—Not later than 2 years after the date
21 of enactment of this Act, the National Academy of
22 Sciences shall submit to Congress a report containing the
23 results of study authorized under this section.
24 (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is
25 authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section
26 $1,500,000 for the period of fiscal years 2009 and 2010.
188
22 (c) CARBON CAPTURE REQUIREMENT FOR CERTAIN
23 FUELS.—
24 (1) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (d) of section
25 6426, as amended by subsection (a), is amended by
189
1 redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (5) and
2 by inserting after paragraph (3) the following new
3 paragraph:
4 ‘‘(4) CARBON CAPTURE REQUIREMENT.—
5 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The requirements of
6 this paragraph are met if the fuel is certified,
7 under such procedures as required by the Sec
8 retary, as having been derived from coal pro
9 duced at a gasification facility which separates
10 and sequesters not less than the applicable per
11 centage of such facility’s total carbon dioxide
12 emissions.
13 ‘‘(B) APPLICABLE PERCENTAGE.—For
14 purposes of subparagraph (A), the applicable
15 percentage is—
16 ‘‘(i) 50 percent in the case of fuel pro
17 duced after September 30, 2009, and on or
18 before December 30, 2009, and
19 ‘‘(ii) 75 percent in the case of fuel
20 produced after December 30, 2009.’’.
21 (2) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Subparagraph
22 (E) of section 6426(d)(2) is amended by inserting
23 ‘‘which meets the requirements of paragraph (4) and
24 which is’’ after ‘‘any liquid fuel’’.
210
1 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘qualified con
2 servation purpose’ means any of the following:
3 ‘‘(A) Capital expenditures incurred for
4 purposes of—
5 ‘‘(i) reducing energy consumption in
6 publicly-owned buildings by at least 20
7 percent,
8 ‘‘(ii) implementing green community
9 programs,
10 ‘‘(iii) rural development involving the
11 production of electricity from renewable
12 energy resources, or
13 ‘‘(iv) any qualified facility (as deter
14 mined under section 45(d) without regard
15 to paragraphs (8) and (10) thereof and
16 without regard to any placed in service
17 date).
18 ‘‘(B) Expenditures with respect to research
19 facilities, and research grants, to support re
20 search in—
21 ‘‘(i) development of cellulosic ethanol
22 or other nonfossil fuels,
23 ‘‘(ii) technologies for the capture and
24 sequestration of carbon dioxide produced
25 through the use of fossil fuels,
211
. . .
13 ‘‘(D) Demonstration projects designed to
14 promote the commercialization of— . . .
23 ‘‘(v) technologies for the capture and
24 sequestration of carbon dioxide emitted
212
1 from combusting fossil fuels in order to
2 produce electricity.
I think I smell the fetid aroma of the “night soil of a large, well fed male ox.” Or, from Space Cowboys – “I can tell you that’s unadultrated pure ——–“.
Mike
Would anyone else like to see laws written with a standard format that has strikethrough for eliminations of language and bold for new insertions? It seems like the method that is being used, while sound in a parliamentary way, is to a large extent obfuscation. You have to have another page open to the relevant part of US Code just to try to figure out where the changes occur in the text and what the changes are.
I don’t mind if the lawmakers use the existing format, they’re familiar with it and all, but they should have to hyperlink it to an addendum where the relevant sections of the law read as changed and show me the changes they’re proposing. That is not too much to ask, if “Google for Government” is worth the time then eliminating Gobbledegook for Government is equally worthwhile.
It’s the least we can ask for 10 grand per taxpayer, or whatever the final cost ends up being.
When so many politicians say so loudly that this MUST be passed.
Ain’t it obvious.
GRAVY TRAIN.
nb – David L Hagen’s post above, – much applause.
CO2 credit prices are starting to be defined: P. 175 – CO2 tax credit is worth $20 per metric ton if disposed “in secure geological storage”, but only $10 per ton if disposed “as a tertiary injectant in a qualified enhanced oil or natural gas recovery project”
Instead of “A chicken in every pot” we are getting the biggest kickback feeding frenzy in history.
The social and political elite will be murdering each other to get at this Bonanza like bloody hamburger to piranha.
The Senate dug a trillion dollar carbon sequestration hole to bury tax payers money. This CO2 black hole cancer will be even worse than HUD’s cancer of requiring 56% of taxpayer backed mortgages must go to very low income housing.
[…] the original: Sneaky: Current credit bailout bill contains carbon tax provisions! Tags: carbon-dioxide, case, climate, Climate Change, global-warming, national, politics, science, […]
This is why most of us do not trust politicians. Perhaps instead of a tea party we should dump thousands of barrels of oil into harbors and ignite them. Afterall, Big Al said it’s OK to do stuff like this as long as you believe in your cause.
Of course, Goldman et al want to see a CO2 cap and trade program. Who but Goldman et al will make the market and who but Hedge Funds will benefit from the purchase and sale of another commodity? SO2 credits get treated this way, why not CO2? These times are more than interesting.
Call your Representative and let him or her know your opinion on Bailout bill 2.0.
I’m an outsider, so take my opinion with a pinch of salt….
Me think that the socialist taking over the American Liberals
allied with the Green AGW-ers. The vilification of CO2 is well
on the way in a hurry. Way? Because the need a proof for global cooling,
and not other way around. Cooling then CO2 reduction. All over the World
socialist gov. rushing to introduce any form of control, before anyone notice
the scam.
I think this is a revenge from the collapse of the old Soviets and it’s allies
in the West. Call me paranoid, I think the new World order is on the way,
and the destruction of America began. I s##t myself.
Mick.
How bad would it be if Congress didn’t pass a bailout?
This bill looks to do more harm than good.
I sense Al Gore is behind this sneaky end run.
When one trough, based in this case on virtuality, empties another one will be made available.
The ‘Elite’, whatever colors they wear, will always see to that just as they always have in the past.
I never thought I would see the end of the current western civilization in my lifetime but I fear I well might if this herd insanity prevails.
Is anyone really surprised at this?
It has been said once 50% of the public receives direct government benefits in one form or another, voters will elect those who promise more still until the country’s economic system collapses under its own weight. Sooner than we realize, it may be cheaper to burn money than buy the energy to heat our homes.
American Capitalism is at death’s door.
“Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.”
This is getting off topic, but Paulson ran Goldman-Sachs when it was ratchetting up bad debts? Now her wants to force the taxpayer to cover them??
Anyone else smell something!
Is there a total on the earmarks contained in the bill for which McCain voted?
It is true, that you get the government you voted for. So grin and bear it. Eat your cat/dog food and be quiet.
This is nothing new. In general, the art of government consists of taking as much money as possible from one party of the citizens to give to the other.
-Voltaire (1764)
In this case, monwy flows from main-street to wall-street.
Let’s see how many conservatives reject the bill and send it back to the Senate. Can you imagine to anger? House Conservatives reject the bill because of this little toxic piece of legislation? The credit markets will crash all becuase some “militant conservatives” refused the bill in toto because of this carbon provision.
This is a normal way Congress has done business for decades. The more important the bill, the more pieces of anti-democratic earmarks that are attached to it. The Liberals are playing this nation for fools. The Carbon trading an other AGW riders should cause the entire GOP Caucus to reject this POS in full. If this credit crisis is so dire, the Senate should only allow financial related legislation to ride this thing (ie the lifting of FDIC insurance limits). All else should be rejected. This is not the way a democracy works.
In Canada’s election currently underway, one party (akin to the Democrats in the US) has proposed a Carbon Tax of $40 per ton of CO2 (offset with revenue neutral reductions in income tax and increased green spending). This is the latest proposal from the green fringe which is to tax Carbon but offset the increased revenue with income tax reductions or credits.
The Canadian public has generally turned a huge thumbs down to the proposal so it is not easy to actually implement these kind of programs.