Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach
You likely didn’t realize that the First Rule for the Carbon Tax Club is … nobody talks about the Carbon Tax Club.
And not only that … it could cost the poor Aussies big bucks if they say what I just said about the Carbon Tax Club.
Gotta love totalitarianism in the service of national eco-themed suicide …
From Miranda Devine’s blog at the Australian Telegraph (emphasis mine):
THE whitewash begins. Now that the carbon tax has passed through federal parliament, the government’s clean-up brigade is getting into the swing by trying to erase any dissent against the jobs-destroying legislation.
On cue comes the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, which this week issued warnings to businesses that they will face whopping fines of up to $1.1m if they blame the carbon tax for price rises.
It says it has been “directed by the Australian government to undertake a compliance and enforcement role in relation to claims made about the impact of a carbon price.”
Businesses are not even allowed to throw special carbon tax sales promotions before the tax arrives on July 1.
“Beat the Carbon Tax – Buy Now” or “Buy now before the carbon tax bites” are sales pitches that are verboten. Or at least, as the ACCC puts it, “you should be very cautious about making these types of claims”.
There will be 23 carbon cops roaming the streets doing snap audits of businesses that “choose to link your price increases to a carbon price”.
Instead, the ACCC suggests you tell customers you’ve raised prices because “the overall cost of running (your) business has increased”.
So if some Australian business prints up this post, and tapes it to his window … he can be fined up to one megabuck. A million dollar crime.
Eco-terrorism at its finest, where Australia now has criminalized free speech … carbon. A word to conjure with, the name that cannot be spoken.
w.
PS—I think we should have a contest for the best sign within the Aussie law. To open the bidding, I suggest that Australian businesses post a big sign inside their stores that says:
WE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO SAY THAT
THE CARBON TAX IS RESPONSIBLE
FOR OUR PRICE INCREASES.
Sincerely,
The Management
Bulldust says:
November 17, 2011 at 2:10 pm
If one visits the ACCC site one can see that Miranda Devine has grossly misrepresented the position of the organisation. The Chairman was quite clear about the organisations’s position in his presentation, which is no different than it has been in the past about any other misleading advertising:
http://www.accc.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/1017300/fromItemId/142
“Business costs increase all the time, and businesses are free to set their own prices. However, if a business chooses to raise their prices they should not misrepresent this as a result of the carbon price when it is not the case.”
“This is not new – the message is simple: if you are going to make a claim, you need to make sure it is right.”
I would suggest that Ms Devine has reading comprehension difficulties, or she is being deliberately misleading. The full guidance brochure can be found here, but the Chairman’s statements sum it up neatly:
http://www.accc.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/1017091
My BS meter went off immediately reading this story… always good to check the source first folks.
Thanks, Bulldust. While you are correct in theory, in reality there’s no way to do what the ACCC suggests. They say that if you want to say that the increase is due to increased carbon costs, you have to get a statement from your supplier that verifies that their increase is due to increased carbon costs.
However, a moment’s thought reveals the problem with that. If a man selling bread wants to make a statement about carbon, he has to get a statement from his baker. For his baker to make that statement, he has to get a statement from his miller, and his electricity supplier, and the man who sells petrol for his bread trucks, and the truck manufacturers where he buys the trucks, and for the increases in phone costs and every other cost.
And each of those, in an endless loop, all have to get statements from the other one. Try this on for size.
If I drive a Ford truck and I sell materials to Ford that they make cars with, they can’t make a statement about carbon without supporting carbon evidence from their suppliers … including me. But I can’t say how much my carbon costs have gone up without the carbon statement from Ford. Cute, huh?
The net results of this chilling regulation will be:
1. The actual costs due to the carbon tax will be underestimated at the business end. Since you can get fined up to a million dollars for exaggeration, every single estimate of the cost will be on the low side. This will no doubt be used to make the claim that the costs are minimal. They are not.
2. Many people will just say “sorry, I don’t have an estimate”, because a) it’s far too much work and hassle to contact every one of their suppliers and ask if they have an estimate, and b) you can get fined if you overestimate. Most folks will wisely say nothing … chilling. Unfortunately, when a supplier says that they have no estimate, what is the retailer to do? He is muzzled, he can’t say anything, because of another man’s inaction.
3. Any tax on energy, direct or indirect, is a much larger drag on the economy than a tax on a finished product. Simple economics, taxing the inputs to a manufacturing process is a greater burden on the economy than the same tax on a finished product. See my discussion in “Firing up the economy, literally“.
So while you are correct in saying this is framed by the Govt as a “truth in advertising” issue, Bulldust, in reality it is nothing of the sort. It is designed specifically to make it very hard to say anything about carbon, with draconian fines. The net result is guaranteed to be a suppression of comment on the carbon issue. I see no reason to conclude that it is accidental that the regulations will have a chilling effect. The regulations have made it a practical impossibility for a businessman to determine the effect of CO2 on the business.
w.
PS—Beyond that, what kind of nanny state is it that tries to keep shopkeepers from making ludicrous claims? Why can’t they say what they want about carbon? At the end of the day the market rules, if they jack their prices too far they’ll lose customers. Who is hurt if they say “20% price rise due to carbon” instead of “20% price rise due to our kids going to college” or “20% price rise due to general business conditions” or “20% price rise due astrological influences”?
Me, I think the Australian consumers are smart enough to look at a sign saying “20% price increase due to carbon tax” and say “I’ll shop next door, they raised their prices 3%”.
So truly … what is the harm to the consumer? For me, that’s government gone mad.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
All too subtle.
Something like “WE didn’t increase the price”.
Can you be fined for a single capital? Bold font? Italics?
Damn, 2011 is starting to feel like 1929 all over again. The Not-a-carbon-tax Tax seems to be Australian for Smoot-Hawley.
Carbon has an atomic number of 6. Oxygen has an atomic number of 8.
C has an atomic mass of 12.0107g/mol. O has an atomic mass of 15.9994g/mol.
There are 2 atoms of O to each atom of C in CO2.
So, no matter how you measure it, there is more oxygen than carbon in a molecule of CO2.
Therefore, rather than being referred to as a carbon tax, surely it would be more accurate to refer to it as an oxygen tax.
Would Ozzie legislators be OK with that?
“Just stating the facts, y’know …”
Ahh… you Americans and your rights.
The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.
Willis, outside the US there are very few formal ‘constitutions’. The Aus bureaucracy can do anything they want, including silencing victims of their robbery. While it may be plain as daylight to those not infected by the green fungus that everyone in the chain simply passes their additional costs on to the next level in the chain (stopping at consumers). Those not Green Fungus Impaired will quickly realise that it is simply another tax, no different from income tax.
All systems of ‘Government’ eventually degenerate into legitimised theft from your neighbours wood pile and food store. Difference in 2011 is that we then take the stolen wood and sell it to 400,000 suckers as ‘paper wood’ to keep ourselves ‘in employment’. Take a long look at Europe (and soon the US) for the end-game. There was a reason Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon and put an end to ‘democracy’.
Are customers allowed to blame the carbon tax in public for rising prices?
Looking at the brochure (I hope the http address goes well):
http://www.accc.gov.au/content/item.phtml?itemId=1017091&nodeId=22195ddaa7b152dc06b9a94b984f9fda&fn=Carbon%20price%20claims%20-%20Guide%20for%20business.pdf
I would say it is allowed to say that “price increase is due to carbon tax”. The only thing is that you have to be god damn 100% sure and backed up with confirmation from delivery guys and so on that it is indeed due only to carbon tax, and not only 99% due to carbon tax (in that case, if you make the claim, you’re f**d).
Therefore i would advice (if possible to do it):
– Make all needed/expected price increases not related to carbon taxes in June
– get letters from other parties stating how much % they expect from carbon tax
– 1st of July, do price increase only related to carbon tax, with your claims backed up, and put “This month prices increased by xx% due to carbon tax imposed by our government, please come in to share views about it (coffee offered)”
Play by their rules and play safe, there are enough room to get an edge and make the point without risking your business and/or lifestyle (in particular for those who are really tight, that is those who unfortunately will be the most concerned by the tax!)
Perhaps they should all put a notice on their front door saying exactly what has happened and they are being threatened with punishment by this neo-fascist/marxist/green eugenic goverment unless they lie. Before those 23 carbon cops become 23,000…
how many Aussie’s died in WWII so these people wouldn’t take over our lives?
Apologies to our valued clients – this price increase is simply a taxing carbon copy of previous increases.
The opportunities for parody seem endless. I prefer just saying it straight.
“Recent price increases are, of course, not due to the carbon tax.”
The backfire may be overwhelming. Humor is the most powerful force in politics.
First, they disarmed the Australians and now, this.
This carbon scheme and attendant repression is not a grand social experiment. This is a clear demonstration to the rest of the world that even the ‘free’ people of a western democracy can be completely dominated by the ruling elites.
It’s all coming apart and it won’t be long now…
I seldom coment, however when the money from the TAX is used to ‘sweeten’ the people with things like ‘extra social services’ its hoped that the next goverment will keep it going ‘somehow’.
Is this only the start? The Australian Government has instigated a media inquiry purportedly as a result of the shenanigans in the UK with the Murdoch Press but in reality more likely because Bob Brown did not like the “bias” some News Limited outlets were showing against green policies. And he despises the “uninitiated rants” of “radio shock jocks” like Alan Jones and Chris Smith questioning global warming.
Parts of the terms of reference of the inquiry are to look into “ways of substantially strengthening the independence and effectiveness of the Australian Press Council” and “any related issues pertaining to the ability of the media to operate according to regulations and codes of practice, and in the public interest.”
We have been told many times by Julia Gillard that a carbon tax “is the right thing to do” and is “in the public interest.”
So, stand by for another uniformed corps to go with the green carbon cops. Perhaps they could wear brown shirts. And next perhaps some book burnings of denier authors of unacceptable teachings against “the public interest”.
But do not worry Julia, the “enemies of the people are only in a stubborn, self willed exile from the loving breast. Everything will be alright; the struggle will soon be finished. They will all soon win a victory over themselves and will love Big Brother” for ever and ever, amen. Ignorance is Strength!
He learned from Rev Wright
He learned from Bill Ayres
I have no doubt he can learn from Julia.
This same government which gave us the “Carbon Tax” is also conducting a witch hunt focussing on the Murdoch papers which have been the only ones questioning the science and the government’s motives albeit rather quietly. Gillard is strongly of the left and her government contains not one who has business experience, all being union officials or party hacks. The Treasury has been totally politicised so it’s advice is already tainted. Government science advisers are in the Holdren mould and simply parrot what the government wants to hear, 100 feet sea level rise, more droughts(we are in a very rainy La Nina as we were last year), more heatwaves (we have just had a very mild spring and our summer growth is about a month late).
The Government spent the surplus left by John Howard on rubbish schemes in a panic to stimulate the economy. It continues to spend on spurious schemes such as a very expensive National Broadband Network and as such is broke and wants additional revenue. The Carbon scare is a godsend for socialist governments.
Just make sure that you US type people elect a non believer next November. So far the candidates don’t inspire confidence. I should say Barack Obama in his recent visit here did not give Julia any hope that the US would have a tax or tradiong scheme.
“I’m sure you agree that our sudden price increases have nothing whatsoever to do with the new carbon tax. However, we do promise to roll back this price rise the instant the carbon tax is repealed.”
The recent increase in prices is due to total morons being allowed to vote…………..
I would love to see someone take the Gillard government to court with this.
Any lawyer would tear this borderline-facist move to shreds!
Our prices have gone up because Julia Gillard said “There will be no carbon tax under the government I lead”.
or
Our prices have increased because we have been naughty by helping plants to grow faster.
or
Our prices have gone up because Julia Gillard broke THAT promise to the Australian people.
It’s all trivial because she is toast the next election anyway, and they should make her and her party, Green peace, the WWF, and any other Eco wacko group in the land down under pay for this mess that supported this carbon tax.
[Moderator’s Note: WUWT site policy requires a valid e-mail address. Please comply or risk getting snipped. -REP]
Our prices have gone up because the government is embarrassed about something Julia said.
If one visits the ACCC site one can see that Miranda Devine has grossly misrepresented the position of the organisation. The Chairman was quite clear about the organisations’s position in his presentation, which is no different than it has been in the past about any other misleading advertising:
http://www.accc.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/1017300/fromItemId/142
“Business costs increase all the time, and businesses are free to set their own prices. However, if a business chooses to raise their prices they should not misrepresent this as a result of the carbon price when it is not the case.”
“This is not new – the message is simple: if you are going to make a claim, you need to make sure it is right.”
I would suggest that Ms Devine has reading comprehension difficulties, or she is being deliberately misleading. The full guidance brochure can be found here, but the Chairman’s statements sum it up neatly:
http://www.accc.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/1017091
My BS meter went off immediately reading this story… always good to check the source first folks.
Pure socialism does not exist without totalitarianism. Equally, pure capitalism does not exist without freedom. These are pretty basic facts.
Our prices have gone down. No ? OK, we lied. We are just following our government’s example.
The carbon tax did not raise our prices, the ever lying socialist government raised the prices you pay come this date!
“As the products we manufacture have long lead times and we place orders based on predicted future costs, our prices have increased due to the future Emissions Trading Scheme”.
or
‘We apologise for the increase in prices caused by the recently introduced policies of the Green-Labor Coalition Government’ (i placed the Greens first as it is really they that are leading the Labor party along by the nose and driving this drivel).
This kind of thing was covered in Atlas Shrugs. They don’t want to enforce the law. They want to use it as a prod to get things they want.