Martin Waller
We've made some changes
to The Sunday Times
An environmental “stealth tax” on business could raise hundreds of million of pounds for the taxman over the next five years through the auction of a large chunk of the next round of carbon emission permits.
Officials from the Debt Management Office, which handles among other things gilt auctions, have been quietly sounding out City experts over how to auction 7 per cent of the emission permits issued to industry over the next five years.
These will come from the portion of the permits that would have gone free to the “large electricity producers”, according to the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra). If these are forced to put up prices as a consequence, the impact will be felt most by the large industrial users.
The auction is permissible under the EU rules that set up the scheme, which set a maximum of 10 per cent that could be retained by national governments for sale.
However, the British decision to auction 7 per cent represents the highest proportion retained by any EU country, business organisations complain.
The European Union Emissions Trading Scheme is designed to put pressure on those industries emitting carbon dioxide to cut emissions by constricting the number of allowances to produce the gas.
The next phase, Phase II, starts on January 1 and runs until the end of 2012. Next year the annual total of emission permits across the EU will be 1.9 million tonnes.
UK business is thought to get about a tenth of this, minus the Government’s 7 per cent.
There exists a forward market in CO2 permits at the European Climate Exchange in the City.
Permission to emit a tonne of CO2 is trading at €20 or more.
At this level the auction would raise hundreds of millions of pounds.
Some City sceptics question the Government’s ability to conduct such an auction, in the light of Gordon Brown’s bungled sale of the UK’s gold reserves.
One senior trader suggested the sale should be conducted through City institutions used to dealing in derivatives and other financial instruments.
Businesses will be keen to take part in the auction because the Government’s 7 per cent withholding will create an artificial shortage, meaning they would otherwise have to buy unwanted carbon permits on the exchange or elsewhere.
A document seen by The Timessuggests there is a degree of sensitivity in Whitehall over whether the proceeds of the auction should be regarded as a tax.
Defra said: “Greenhouse gas emissions cause damage to the environment that, without policy action, no one has to pay for. Business requires a price signal for carbon in order to take full account of the cost of their emissions and to drive reductions.”
When pressed, it said: “The classification of EU ETS auctioning receipts by Eurostat (the EU office that advises on statistics) will happen in due course.”
Defra refused to comment on the potential amount that could be raised, by deduction from the current price of carbon permits being traded.
A spokesman for the Debt Management Office confirmed: “There is some discussion about how the auction system may work.”
Employers’ organisations are known to be concerned at the added burden placed on them by the requirement to bid for permits.
In some sectors, such as power generation, this could rise to 50 per cent, says Gareth Stace, head of environmental affairs at the EEF.
If the consequent price rises are passed straight on to the consumer, these could make sectors such as steel less able to compete with other parts of the world.
Of the Phase II auction, he said: “It’s dead money. It does not in any way go to achieve what the EU is trying to achieve.”
Instead, says the EEF, the money raised could be spent on low carbon technology within the UK.
The EU emissions trading scheme: how it works
— Companies are issued 'permits to pollute'
— Covers power, cement, oil, steel and paper industries
— Total CO2 emissions allowed to reduce over time
— Unused permits can be sold
— Governments keep some permits back
— Not intended to be a tax
How the new breed of location based mobile services can find your nearest cashpoint, restaurant or wi-fi hotspot
Enjoy screenings of all the classic films you love, plus take advantage of two-for-one tickets
We explore leisure activities that are safe and suitable for all of the family
Times Online's new TV show helps you make the right decisions for your pet
Are you California dreaming? Explore the wonders of the Golden State. Also enter our fantastic competition
See the best entries in this year's competition
Your brain is capable of more than you might think...
An interactive preview of the brand new For Your Eyes Only exhibition
The latest travel news plus the best hotels and gadgets for business travellers

Love Sudoku? Play our brand new interactive game: with added functionality and daily prizes

Are you irritable when you return from work? Drained of emotion? You could be suffering from boreout
Prepare for some shock and awe, petrol lovers. Despite the greens trying to wipe it out, the car is about to offer us the most exciting year ever
We've trawled the brochures and websites to find this summer’s best holidays for every taste and budget

Overseas contacts and local business information

Find a course, arrange a game and save money
2006
£189,500
NW England
2008/08
£169,950
NW England
2007/57
£35,000
South East England
Great car insurance deals online
Circa £82,000 per annum
Birmingham Women's Hospital
Birmingham
To £28k
Barclaycard
Northampton/Liverpool/Teeside
£
Up to £66,000 per annum
Hertfordshire County Council
South East
To £38k
Barclaycard
Northampton/Liverpool
2 Bathrooms, Balcony and Garden
Beautiful Gardens w/ stunning Thames Views
Dining, Shopping & Riverside Pk
Mortgages, bank acc & money transfers to help you buy abroad
Explore mystical Jordan
From £1030 for 7nts 4*
to USA's Most Cosmopolitan City; San Francisco!
£POA
Book Now for Winter 08/09 and Get 10% off!
Great travel insurance deals online
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times. Search globrix.com to buy or rent UK property.
© Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
Isn't this just going to mean that UK companies will export manufacturing to China and thereby export emissions too? I personally know of two companies moved to China lock, stock and barrel because Health and Safety is less stringent and COSHH (Control Of Substances Hazerdous to Health) is almost non-existent - never mind pollution laws. So we will hold up our hands and say how clean we are when all we have done is move it to the other side of the globe.
Chris Oakham, Corsley, UK
The politicians idea of saving the world! Ha, these idiots couldn't save themselves if they fell in a paddling pool. They are rubbing their hands with glee at the prospect of millions in tax revenue, and since when did taxes save anything? more money to fund even more beaurocratic morons for the state machine. Anyone with more than two brain cells knows that these inept politicians cannot put anything right only make it worse, but unfortunately there is a vast amount of gullible twits out there taken in by all this panic causing, fear mongering. They already have the means to make industry clean up their emmisions, many have already done so, but since when did common sense and politicians go together?
John Korn, North Bay, Canada
In the UK one of the biggest single problems facing those trying to develop clean energy and related technologies is raising the risk equity funding they need.
Carbon trading is not and does not help with this problem and in fact is providing more in commission payments to City type institutions than the institutions are investing in clean tech companies.
It therefore strikes me that companies forced to buy carbon credits should in fact insist that the money be put into a pot to be invested in new technologies and that this pot should not be run either by Govt or the City but by a specialist energy technologies organisation.
I wouldn't even wait for Govt approval to do this but just get on with it. Govt has already proven itself untrustworthy in the use of carbon taxes claiming it would go into new clean technologies whereas in fact most has ended up as general taxation.
If industry wants better value for its money it's better for it to manage it itself.
Dick Winchester, Aberdeenshire, Scotland
I have to ask two simple questions;
1). WHO owns the carbon emmission certificates? Isn't it the first rule of "brokerage" that ownership of shares/certificates must first be established before these certificates can be sold?
2). Isn't it true that first one has to establish "hype" before one can sell anything?
There is little to recommend Green House Effect anyway. We are now entering a period of temperature REDUCTION although no one will admit as much for to do this would be to spoil the "hype". Wake up people; "Groan Hearse" is and always has been nonsense as the whole lot of temperature changes is CYCLIC, as you will see from about February 2008 onwards!
Patrick Bagot in Istanbul
Patrick Bagot, Istanbul, Turkey
Maybe an increase in CO2 levels are good .We have gone over 10,000 years without an ice- age.We appear to be tampering with things that we really don't understand in order to raise taxes.Anyway,how much CO2 has the war in Iraq caused?
stephen hulton, eure, france
It is as simple as this. A group of people (they know who they are) gather together and decide they will manipulate the masses to fear Co2. Once the trap has been set all the little trolls do their dastardly deeds and bingo! We need a tax on Co2! WOW, what a novel idea. And mark my words, these added costs will be passed down to the consumer, which is as good as a tax. These manipulators have been doing this to us for centuries and like sheep we run into our holding pens like a good little flock.
How many others out there see this for what it really is, a money grab. And why do they need to grab the money? It's the ultimate controlling tool other than war.
We all need to wake up and look at the evidence. They will always do what they want regardless of the voters wishes. No? Then why did Brown sign the UK to the new EU laws without asking the people of the UK!
PS. Hmm, I wonder how the world's central banks are doing lately?
Steve, Michigan, USA
The overall cost on business of any emissions' trading should be neutralised through offsetting revenue from permit sales/auctions with commensurate cuts in the corporate tax rate. The competitiveness of heavy polluters would fall (emissions costs not fully offset by tax cuts) while that of low emitters would rise, facilitating a market-based switch from high- to low-emitting industries. The latter would become more attractive to investors.
(I'm a sceptic about the need for and effectiveness of reducing CO2 etc emissions, but any measures which are taken to reduce emissions should be the most economically efficient, providing the biggest bang for the buck so as to reduce the overall cost of compliance with any targets.)
Faustino, Brisbane, Australia
We have entered the twilight zone..........strange things happen here.....wierd ideas prevail.......normal rules of physics do not apply...<cue twilight music>.......politicians futile attempts to save the world end in (predictable) disaster.......
andy, doncaster,
Surely your Title is a Typo? Is CO Carbon Offset? If not then Sale of CO2 Not CO surely? Thats Carbon Monoxide, then things are worse than I thought!
Hawkins, Dorset,