Well considering the huge amount of petrochemical companies and jobs at the port of Antwerp that doesn’t really surprise me. It’s just a super big sector so it gets a big share of subsidies. It would be nice if those would strategically be lowered.
Finland, Ireland, Cyprus, Belgium, France, Greece, Romania, Lithuania, Poland, Bulgaria, Sweden, Hungary, Slovakia, Slovenia and Latvia
In case anyone was curious
>But new rules, currently under discussion, would introduce fresh taxes based on environmental performance, eliminate the favourable treatment of diesel over petrol, and remove the tax exemption of kerosene for air passenger flights.
Hmm. I’m not sure I’d consider that a subsidy. If I understand correctly, they’re saying that — for example — diesel fuel is taxed more than jet fuel. They’re then taking the difference as a subsidy to fossil fuels versus non-fossil-fuel energy.
But the level at which diesel is taxed is arbitrary relative to the taxation/subsidy level of non-fossil-fuel energy. You cannot meaningfully sum these and then treat it as a fossil fuel subsidy relative to non-fossil-fuel.
Like, let’s say tomorrow diesel taxes rise by one euro a liter. That increases the taxation disparity between jet fuel and diesel. This would then have jet fuel be considered more-subsidized, and thus fossil fuels as a whole to be more-heavily subsidized than non-fossil-fuels. But all one has done is to increase taxation of a fossil fuel energy source. By any reasonable metric, I am *penalizing* fossil fuels relative to non-fossil-fuels, not increasing a subsidy of them.
Well that feels embarrassing but somehow I question the methodology of this which doesn’t put it into perspective at all. With the exception of HK we’ve got the most expensive diesel prices in the world. This along with the highest carbon taxes in the world by a [large](https://files.taxfoundation.org/20201204100039/Carbon-Taxes-in-Europe-2020-FV-C-01.png) *large* margin for decades is surprising. Renewables have directly and indirectly been subsidised in relation to nuclear which this winter have resulted in the highest energy prices we’ve ever experienced. Our energy supply doesn’t depend on oil, gas nor coal but some of our neighbours are which have lead to inflation spike of our currency.
Without exception every article about fossil fuel subsidies have a very weird way of calculating and defining such “subsidies”.
6 comments
That’s a shame
Well considering the huge amount of petrochemical companies and jobs at the port of Antwerp that doesn’t really surprise me. It’s just a super big sector so it gets a big share of subsidies. It would be nice if those would strategically be lowered.
Finland, Ireland, Cyprus, Belgium, France, Greece, Romania, Lithuania, Poland, Bulgaria, Sweden, Hungary, Slovakia, Slovenia and Latvia
In case anyone was curious
>But new rules, currently under discussion, would introduce fresh taxes based on environmental performance, eliminate the favourable treatment of diesel over petrol, and remove the tax exemption of kerosene for air passenger flights.
Hmm. I’m not sure I’d consider that a subsidy. If I understand correctly, they’re saying that — for example — diesel fuel is taxed more than jet fuel. They’re then taking the difference as a subsidy to fossil fuels versus non-fossil-fuel energy.
But the level at which diesel is taxed is arbitrary relative to the taxation/subsidy level of non-fossil-fuel energy. You cannot meaningfully sum these and then treat it as a fossil fuel subsidy relative to non-fossil-fuel.
Like, let’s say tomorrow diesel taxes rise by one euro a liter. That increases the taxation disparity between jet fuel and diesel. This would then have jet fuel be considered more-subsidized, and thus fossil fuels as a whole to be more-heavily subsidized than non-fossil-fuels. But all one has done is to increase taxation of a fossil fuel energy source. By any reasonable metric, I am *penalizing* fossil fuels relative to non-fossil-fuels, not increasing a subsidy of them.
Well that feels embarrassing but somehow I question the methodology of this which doesn’t put it into perspective at all. With the exception of HK we’ve got the most expensive diesel prices in the world. This along with the highest carbon taxes in the world by a [large](https://files.taxfoundation.org/20201204100039/Carbon-Taxes-in-Europe-2020-FV-C-01.png) *large* margin for decades is surprising. Renewables have directly and indirectly been subsidised in relation to nuclear which this winter have resulted in the highest energy prices we’ve ever experienced. Our energy supply doesn’t depend on oil, gas nor coal but some of our neighbours are which have lead to inflation spike of our currency.
Without exception every article about fossil fuel subsidies have a very weird way of calculating and defining such “subsidies”.