Cuenca High Life logo

Ecuador News

Elimination of the ‘green tax’ appears likely

Ecuador’s so-called green tax appears headed for the dust bin.

Ecuador’s National Assembly.

In Tuesday’s debate at the National Assembly, there was overwhelming sentiment to eliminate the tax originally designed to protect the environment. “The intention was good but the unintended consequences were not,” said assemblyman Homero Castenier. “It did not meet its objective and now it’s time to acknowledge the mistake and eliminate it.”

A project of former president Rafael Correa, the green tax applied to “luxury cars” which were defined as those costing more than $30,000, cars older than 10 years and those with larger engines.

“Ultimately, this was a confiscatory tax and a money grab by the old government,” said Castenier. “It also unfairly targeted poor people who could not afford to buy newer cars.” He provided an example during debate of a 12-year-old car valued at $3,000 that was taxed at $1,200 annually.

The legislation to eliminate the tax goes to second debate next week.

19 thoughts on “Elimination of the ‘green tax’ appears likely

    1. Wrong any damages caused to others by business and individuals should be paid for in general taxation or a fund they pay in to. The oil and gas companies have caused irreparable damages in climate change death and disease to huge profit and lavish excess – they are are responsible to actions along with their ‘dear leader’ Trump all nerfing a day in court in a justice system of civilization to that need bring protection of the populace against the individual …

    1. I agree, the poor people are the only ones that love to drive a SUV brand new car, while middle or upper class love their classic old cars. No balance in the World!! Just saying:))

      1. classic old cars are unregulated with no pollution controls / the idea would suggest that there is a cost to people to pollution – their is. Another solution is to electric vehicles and alternate energies as clean relatively non polluting getting energy from sun, wind, and geothermal. Such careless people in the world …

    2. Having been raised in LA, which is a city made for cars not people, I’ll walk and skip the pollution for awhile

  1. So how about taxing those costing more than $30,000 and not taxing the ones older than 10 years?

      1. Yea, like the typical Ecuadorian can afford newer model cars, let along the price of electric. Spoken like a typical left-wing gringa.

    1. keep all of the taxes except for the cars over 10 years old … the only problem with that is the pollution from the older engines that haven’t been maintained properly. they need to enforce air pollution from vehicles. poorer people should be allowed to have a 30 year old car if they like as long as it doesn’t impact air quality. the cars, trucks and buses spewing out black smoke is appalling. that $1200 tax on the older vehicle could have been used to fix the engine but instead it went to the government

      1. People should be allowed to keep older cars on the road so long as they emit no more emissions than when they were produced.

  2. Well that makes more sense. Finally the government understands that adding high taxes to goods only hurts the poor. It is moments like this that I am glad Moreno is the leader and not Correa.

    1. Wrong the poor are most likely to be living in areas where pollution is highest . They suffer the most by it . While the wealthy can move away from it …. those business and individuals that support this toxicity to others and the poor need to pay up fir the damages they do in the world including climate change .

      1. The wealthy in Guayaquil, Quito, and even Cuenca live in the same city, even if frequently in different neighborhoods; they (we) all breathe the same air. Many pollution articles are micro in size, and these are the ones that leave the city and descend on the rural areas around the core.

        1. Not accurate, especially in a mountainous area with many thermal currents and wind. Your comment would be correct in other cities.

          That being said, wealth or poverty has not direct correlation with pollution levels locally. They are more of a function of national measures taken to stop pollution (which can be wealth related or, in a rare case, an aberrant national mindset).

    2. Esmeralda? Do you also believe that reducing taxes on the richest in society helps poor people and the Middle Class? Doesn’t seem to work in the USA, UK and Russia. The vast majority in those countries are getting poorer, not better off. In fact, in a handful of years, life expectancy in China (heading upwards) will surpass the life expectancy of Americans (going downwards). Everything else is unimportant. The society with the longest happy, healthy, lifespan, is the greatest success.
      Google for backup. The interesting thing is just WHO in America is dying earlier and earlier. It’s an eye-opener.

      1. A handful of years ago the Chinese were
        mass-murdering & cannibalizing each other. In no number of years ago, or to
        come, waswill mean reversion not be unimportant…but for the truly murderously
        revulsive mean reversions you gotta have “world improvin’” bean counters –
        & those have exceeded demand for all numbers of years, so far.

Comments are closed.