Swap Federal Income Tax for a Carbon Tax

A unique and interesting idea

sponsored by aGREATER.US • Become a Co-sponsor

primary topic: Tax Reform
secondary topics: Energy Policy


From the Unity Party website: Eliminate the Federal Income Tax. Unity supports replacing federal income taxes with a revenue measure based on the carbon content of fossil fuels as a simple way of balancing the budget, combating global warming, and encouraging the development of alternative energy sources.

A reduction in fossil fuel consumption would enhance American power abroad by making this nation less dependent on foreign sources of oil.

[Editors note: What a great incentive for business to invest in the capital improvements needed to reduce their carbon footprint. It would be an immediate boost in green jobs. It is mostly a progressive tax, as those who use the most energy would pay the most tax. However, it does beg the question, as the carbon footprint is dramatically reduced how does the country raise enough revenue to fund itself? One can only surmise that this would be a transitional taxation scheme that needs to be gradually phased out as the US capitalizes its green infrastructure.]


Submit an Op-ed



Op-ed Guidelines
Please bring up points that were missed, elaborate on issues not fleshed out, add ways to make the idea/bill better, suggest a companion for GREATER Raters to consider. Please check your facts, grammar, syntax, punctuation, credit sources and quotes, and keep it under 500 words unless you absolutely cannot—then never more than 700 words. Please keep your criticism constructive. We will likely not print destructive criticism although a well written partisan rant bringing up new issues in the idea/bill or previous Op-eds may be accepted if it ends on a constructive note—especially if it offers an alternative idea/bill.

Shorter "letters" are encouraged that bring a new facet to the subject. The intent of the Op-eds is to fully cover the issue for the kind reader to consider before rating, and not waste their time with redundancy or the dreaded—"people-screaming-at-one-another-while-wearing-earplugs-syndrome." Think of the idea/bill as the base with the Op-eds stacked on top to form a structurally sound argument. The goal here is to have a GREATER US for the greatest number of citizens/neighbors. We may publish your piece without notice—so please only submit completed articles. We may, also, contact you for a rewrite or edit. We might even offer suggestions. It is our intention to fairly present the views of fiscal conservatives, independents, and social liberals—to find the overlap of whole-hearted support (nonpartisan) plus the commonality of the "I-can-live-with-that" (bipartisan).

Your Ad Here