I read the carbon tax policy document this evening

Just a short one tonight.  I have just finished reading the overerly long document that supposedly explains the Carbon Tax.  I'll give you the link as it took a little bit of searching to find it on the government website: http://www.cleanenergyfuture.gov.au/clean-energy-future/securing-a-clean-energy-future/#content01

AS with all these sort of things it is highly repetitive and could've been half the length but for the low brow sales pitches and examples.  Large chunks of this policy are also just extending existing programs and boosting their funding into the future.  If you want the facts go straight to Appendix A as everything is there without all the crap and ugly pictures.

Some of the interesting points that I picked up that I haven't seen in the newspapers:

• It is consistently called a Carbon Tax for reducing Carbon pollution.  At no stage is the word dioxide or gas used.  Some of the graphs do have CO2 on the axes though.
• Administration of the system will cost over $100million from FY2013-14
• Many elements of the tax/trading scheme will be subject to Productivity Commission review every two or three years.
• The economy-wide pollution volume cap will be set five years in advance and announced in the budget. (This obviously won't apply to the first five years of cap and trade which will all be announced 12 months prior to the start of trading)
• Real Gross National Income per capita is projected to grow at 1.5% per annum under the carbon tax plan between now and 2020
• At least three statutory bodies will be created to advise gpvernment and administer the trading and assistance schemes.  This is on top of the department of environment and  department of climate change.
• The announced tax cuts are below those recommended by the Henry Tax Review (http://taxreview.treasury.gov.au/content/Content.aspx?doc=html/pubs_reports.htm)

Now I know the details, I plan to critique the Carbon Tax (that name really annoys me) in the next few days, especially in the light of the Henry review and prevailing economic conditions.