Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Obama quietly signs bill shielding airlines from carbon fees in Europe

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 28 2012 @ 01:48 AM
link   
Obama quietly signs bill shielding airlines from carbon fees in Europe

President Obama signed a law that will stop the European Union from taxing carbon emissions from U.S. owned airlines.

This is good news I suppose, but what will environmentalists think now ?

They were attempting to sway Obama into vetoing the law.


President Obama has signed into law a bill that requires U.S. airlines be excluded from European carbon emissions fees.

Environmentalists had framed the bill as the first test of the president's commitment to fighting climate change in his second term and urged him to veto it. Obama quietly signed it Tuesday over their objections.

"The Obama administration is firmly committed to reducing harmful carbon pollution from civil aviation both domestically and internationally, but, as we have said on many occasions, the application of the EU [Emissions Trading System] to non-EU air carriers is the wrong way to achieve that objective," a White House spokesman said in a statement to The Hill. ....

Obama quietly signs bill shielding airlines from carbon fees in Europe




Perhaps he is "saving" his own version for American companies ??


Link to the Legislation




posted on Nov, 28 2012 @ 01:54 AM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


So what's the anti-american Obozo up to now?

Anyone who follows what this clown does, knows it's no-good for US/us.



posted on Nov, 28 2012 @ 02:12 AM
link   
So, what’s to stop any country exempting any of their industries from any other carbon charges? Can Australia exempt QANTAS? Seems a bit us. You’re flying over their air space and should be subject to their laws. I think that’s a fairly simple and common sense approach to international matters. If you wish not to pay their charges, as unfounded and utterly ridiculous as they may be (man made climate change, haha. We’re that insulator and self absorbed that we believe we’re wrecking the earth after couple of hundred years and in the same breath dismiss any other form of remotely intelligent life in the universe despite it being unfathomably huge and billions upon billions of years old... Makes sense) then don’t fly there. Simple as that. If you don’t wish to pay road tolls for a tollway, then don’t use that road! You can’t make yourself exempt from the road tolls.



posted on Nov, 28 2012 @ 02:17 AM
link   
I can't see how the tax would be helpful, that tax would get passed onto the consumer, thus drastically reducing tourism for one thing. How much would it impact general consumer products transported by plane?
I could see basic olive oil jump from $7 now to $10, depending on how high the carbon fee will be.



posted on Nov, 28 2012 @ 10:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by xuenchen
Obama quietly signs bill shielding airlines from carbon fees in Europe

President Obama signed a law that will stop the European Union from taxing carbon emissions from U.S. owned airlines.

This is good news I suppose, but what will environmentalists think now ?

They were attempting to sway Obama into vetoing the law.


President Obama has signed into law a bill that requires U.S. airlines be excluded from European carbon emissions fees.

Environmentalists had framed the bill as the first test of the president's commitment to fighting climate change in his second term and urged him to veto it. Obama quietly signed it Tuesday over their objections.

"The Obama administration is firmly committed to reducing harmful carbon pollution from civil aviation both domestically and internationally, but, as we have said on many occasions, the application of the EU [Emissions Trading System] to non-EU air carriers is the wrong way to achieve that objective," a White House spokesman said in a statement to The Hill. ....

Obama quietly signs bill shielding airlines from carbon fees in Europe




Perhaps he is "saving" his own version for American companies ??


Link to the Legislation


Just curious... will these airlines be taxed within the U.S.? If not, then why would anything else be carbon-taxed?
edit on 11/28/2012 by new_here because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2012 @ 10:22 AM
link   


Chickens coming home to roost! Not even 1 month after the election and he is already selling out his base.

I read an article yesterday about the business owner who was promised help from Obama during one of his photo ops post hurricane Sandy and now feels betrayed. Another 1 a week ago about the wife who complained that her husband who is an engineer was having difficulty finding a job - and again, during a photo op made a promise to get her help which predictably, never came.

Last election he sold out the LGTB community. He sold out the latinos. He even sold out blacks. The only ones he didn't sell out was the green energy community - who received billions in tax-payer largesse while generating nothing but failure in return.

Why are people expecting things to be different this time around? Are they that dumb? What's the definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over again but expecting a different result!



posted on Nov, 28 2012 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by kozmo


Chickens coming home to roost! Not even 1 month after the election and he is already selling out his base.

I read an article yesterday about the business owner who was promised help from Obama during one of his photo ops post hurricane Sandy and now feels betrayed. Another 1 a week ago about the wife who complained that her husband who is an engineer was having difficulty finding a job - and again, during a photo op made a promise to get her help which predictably, never came.

Last election he sold out the LGTB community. He sold out the latinos. He even sold out blacks. The only ones he didn't sell out was the green energy community - who received billions in tax-payer largesse while generating nothing but failure in return.

Why are people expecting things to be different this time around? Are they that dumb? What's the definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over again but expecting a different result!


He's got 11 former Goldman Sachs guys in his government to appointed positions. A Bank he gave 10 billion taxpayer dollars to. He's not part of the solution no matter what which team- er party- you back in the two party system.Without a fundamental shift, the road to ruin is an 8-lane highway.



posted on Nov, 28 2012 @ 10:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by xuenchen
Obama quietly signs bill shielding airlines from carbon fees in Europe


President Obama signed a law that will stop the European Union from taxing carbon emissions from U.S. owned airlines.



I don't see how he can do this at all in the first place. I think it's illegal.


How can a US Law mandate what another country can or can not do with any private business that operates in it's country no matter the origin of that business?

Please someone give me a good answer on this craziness.

Mind you, I don't agree with a carbon emission tax, I think it's a scam but that's a separate issue.
edit on 28-11-2012 by JohnPhoenix because: sp



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 08:49 AM
link   
O.k. It's been over 24 hours.. can someone please try to answer my question above?

Perhaps this is illegal and is an impeachable offense? I really need to know how and why Obama can legally get away with dictating what another country can and cannot do.

Did Obama suddenly become dictator of the Earth and no one told us?
edit on 30-11-2012 by JohnPhoenix because: sp



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 07:45 AM
link   
It's certainly unenforceable. After all, US law is quite irrelevant when it comes to the operation of businesses within the EU.

Although this is just another typical action from the US empire that sees itself as ruling the planet. They feel like, of course, that their laws should apply everywhere, even when they quite clearly do not apply.



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 08:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Yazman
 


The same can be said of the EU law however. They don't have the right to tell businesses from other countries that they have to pay for operating, especially when this includes operations in their home country.

As for the legality of it, they're not saying that the airlines aren't participating in it, they're saying that if it's determined that it's in the public interest to do so, the airlines will be prohibited from participating. They have also included a rider in it that states, that if the EU changes the policy, or the US reaches an agreement with ICAO or their own version, then the airlines will be required to participate. It also requires the US to participate in global negotiations to limit aircraft emissions.


The legislation calls for the Secretary of Transportation to prohibit civil aircraft operators from participating in the EU emissions scheme if, after a public hearing, he or she deems it in the public interest to do so. The amendments permit the Secretary to reassess a prohibition in the event of an EU amendment to its scheme, an international agreement is adopted or the “enactment of a public law or issuance of a final rule after formal agency rulemaking, in the United States to address aircraft emissions”.

Under the bill, operators are to be held “harmless” from any adverse impact resulting from non-compliance with the EU ETS, such as over the non-payment of taxes and penalties. However, an amendment to the original bill stipulates that funds made available under the Airport and Airway Trust Fund or to the Department of Transportation or other Federal agency (such as the FAA) may not be used to settle any tax or penalty.

The bill also calls on the Secretary of Transportation, the FAA Administrator and appropriate US government officials to conduct international negotiations to pursue a worldwide approach to address aircraft emissions.

www.greenaironline.com...

There is a link to the full Senate bill at the bottom of the page.



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 08:23 AM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


all the carbon emissions laws are ILLEGAL. You can't charge someone for producing CO2 since we produce it when we breath. It is inherit in our nature to produce it. The carbon market will be another speculative market that will drive up debt and pocket wealth. These taxes are designed to tax the very poor for owning a car, house or anything that will drive up your CO2 production. In essence, the necessary surveillance of all your activities so a tax can be applied.

They are an affront to everything we stand for. As Americans, we should be considering war if they be imposed on our country. The UN and Europe go too far.

Politicians that support them in any facet of implementation are traitors and should be tried and expelled from the country. No citizen should pay for his right to breath and function in society!

WAR.

edit on 2-12-2012 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 08:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Yazman
 


The same can be said of the EU law however. They don't have the right to tell businesses from other countries that they have to pay for operating, especially when this includes operations in their home country.

As for the legality of it, they're not saying that the airlines aren't participating in it, they're saying that if it's determined that it's in the public interest to do so, the airlines will be prohibited from participating. They have also included a rider in it that states, that if the EU changes the policy, or the US reaches an agreement with ICAO or their own version, then the airlines will be required to participate. It also requires the US to participate in global negotiations to limit aircraft emissions.


The legislation calls for the Secretary of Transportation to prohibit civil aircraft operators from participating in the EU emissions scheme if, after a public hearing, he or she deems it in the public interest to do so. The amendments permit the Secretary to reassess a prohibition in the event of an EU amendment to its scheme, an international agreement is adopted or the “enactment of a public law or issuance of a final rule after formal agency rulemaking, in the United States to address aircraft emissions”.

Under the bill, operators are to be held “harmless” from any adverse impact resulting from non-compliance with the EU ETS, such as over the non-payment of taxes and penalties. However, an amendment to the original bill stipulates that funds made available under the Airport and Airway Trust Fund or to the Department of Transportation or other Federal agency (such as the FAA) may not be used to settle any tax or penalty.

The bill also calls on the Secretary of Transportation, the FAA Administrator and appropriate US government officials to conduct international negotiations to pursue a worldwide approach to address aircraft emissions.

www.greenaironline.com...

There is a link to the full Senate bill at the bottom of the page.



It doesn't matter what the US legislates. They can't dictate to the European Union how the EU runs its taxes or how its member states decide to tax businesses operating in their territory. If the EU decides all airlines operating within EU borders must pay the tax, then they must pay the tax.

The US congress can legislate until the cows come home but ultimately any business operations in the EU are subject to EU laws. The US government can't change this unless they manage to occupy the EU militarily.
edit on 2/12/12 by Yazman because: Fixed a typo.



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 08:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Yazman
 


And the EU has no right to dictate to other countries businesses how they operate. If the US tried this, then people would be screaming about how evil they are, and how illegal this is. They can regulate their own businesses all they want, and they can regulate other countries businesses that are partnered with EU businesses, but they have no right to tell other countries businesses that they have to pay a tax on operations that don't even take place in the EU. That's like the US telling Airbus that they have to pay taxes to the US gov't on all aircraft sold that operate in the US.
edit on 12/2/2012 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 08:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Yazman
 


And the EU has no right to dictate to other countries businesses how they operate. If the US tried this, then people would be screaming about how evil they are, and how illegal this is.


Actually, they have every right to dictate to those business how they operate when they are within EU borders. That is a standard part of international law. Any person or business is subject to the law of the land. This means that any branch of an American airline operating within the EU is subject to EU law. They don't get special treatment for being American.

When foreign businesses operate within the US, their operations inside the US are subject to US law. When foreign businesses operate within the EU, their operations inside the EU are subject to EU law.

Legislation in the US doesn't matter. What are they going to do? Economic sanctions against the EU? lmao.



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 08:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Yazman
 


Except that this law doesn't just tax operations in the EU. It taxes operations in the United States, and in international airspace that are going to the EU. The EU or any other country for that matter has no right to require payment for the operation of a business that is taking place outside of their borders.
edit on 12/2/2012 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 08:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Except it does just tax operations in the EU. EU law only applies to EU member states, including the EU's emissions trading scheme. Any airlines that operate within an EU member state are subject to the tax in regards to planes that come in and out of EU territory.

The text of the full agreement on the ETS, as you can see on the website of the UK government's Department of Energy and Climate Change, explicitly states the carbon emissions tax only means "inclusion of all flights arriving at and departing from EU airports".
Source: www.decc.gov.uk...

Operations in the US are irrelevant. It literally doesn't matter what happens in the US congress, or in the US at all. Any planes arriving at and departing from EU airports must pay the tax. Including American ones.



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 09:00 AM
link   
In fairness, taxes for an airline ticket should only be from the country and airline that a person originates from. The next thing you know there would be a security tax, carbon tax, airport fees etc. being tacked on from 2 countries. Lets not start a new wave here, we are all taxed enough already. Plus they are already nickel and diming us as it is by charging for baggage, seats and meals.

But if they push this, then perhaps we could charge foreigners for taking their Xray picture or groping them?
Welcome to the USSA, please bend over, and when you are done, please place a $10 bill in the collection plate.



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by elouina
In fairness, taxes for an airline ticket should only be from the country and airline that a person originates from. The next thing you know there would be a security tax, carbon tax, airport fees etc. being tacked on from 2 countries. Lets not start a new wave here, we are all taxed enough already. Plus they are already nickel and diming us as it is by charging for baggage, seats and meals.

But if they push this, then perhaps we could charge foreigners for taking their Xray picture or groping them?
Welcome to the USSA, please bend over, and when you are done, please place a $10 bill in the collection plate.


Except they aren't taxes for airline tickets, they are taxes on aviation. American airlines like Delta, etc all have offices & branches in the EU and they are licensed to operate there. They have to comply with EU law in order to use the airports and be able to have their planes fly in and out. It isn't a matter of the individual flights or origins & destinations.



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Yazman
 


It only applies to flights arriving and departing from the EU, but it applies for the entire flight. Which means that they are taxing operations in the United States as well as the EU. They aren't just applying it for the portion of flight within the EU.


EU-ETS is aimed at lowering carbon-dioxide emissions. Aircraft operators are assessed a per-ton cost for their CO2 emissions based on miles flown to and from Europe. Rather than calculating those miles from the point of entry into EU airspace, EU-ETS calculates them from the point of departure to the point of arrival, raising the ire of operators and governments, which say the European Union has no right to charge fees for flight segments that take place outside of Europe.

www.nbaa.org...





new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join