Business: Carter Considers a Gas Tax

(2 of 4)

Last week the Administration disclosed the details of its proposed emergency rationing plan. Each registered vehicle would be limited to a fixed number of gallons per week, and any driver who did not use his quota could sell his ration coupons on a "white market" for whatever the traffic would bear. Congress rejected a similar scheme last May, and adoption of almost any rationing plan is not expected before next autumn—unless Middle East oil is cut off.

Compounding the sense of drift, Energy Secretary Charles Duncan made public a confusing state-by-state conservation plan that calls for holding 1980 gasoline consumption to about 7 million bbl. per day, just about where economists expect it to be anyway. In an embarrassingly typical DOE bungle, the targets set for New York, New Jersey and Connecticut during the first three months of next year would allow drivers in those states to increase their auto usage.

Almost in desperation, the White House for the past month has been examining a consumption-cutting tax on gasoline. In late October, an Administration task force headed by Deputy Energy Secretary John Sawhill began looking at what the U.S. could do in event of a major supply interruption. From a list of 28 options, the task force came down to two: rationing or a gasoline tax.

In November, Carter instructed Budget Boss James McIntyre to draw up a detailed plan for a tax that might work. McIntyre's proposal was sent for consideration and amendment last week to the White House's economic policy group, which includes Treasury Secretary G. William Miller, Vice President Walter Mondale, Chief Economic Adviser Charles Schultze, Domestic Adviser Stuart Eizenstat and McIntyre.

The five-man group favored a high tax but could not agree on the particulars. So each member sent a separate proposal to Carter. The differences revolve around the size and timing of the tax and how to distribute the projected $50 billion in revenues that it would collect. One popular idea is to rebate perhaps $40 billion to workers and employers in the form of lowered Social Security and income tax levies. Another suggestion involves using some $10 billion to help balance the fiscal 1981 federal budget.

Any tax proposal would face tough, almost insurmountable opposition in Congress, which considers a new tax as a pox in an election year. Typical of what special-interest groups will tell their Congressmen is the observation of a Southern California Auto Club spokesman: "The tax is just a scam to increase Government revenues and the federal bureaucracy at the expense of good-hearted people across the country."

Even as Carter was telling 100 Congressmen at a White House buffet dinner last week that the idea of a stiff gasoline tax "is looking better and better," legislators were beginning to snipe at the idea. Said powerful Democratic Congressman Charles Vanik of Ohio: "Are you crazy? Fifty cents is out of the ballpark!"

Whether by taxation or rationing, cutting back on gasoline would jolt an economy in which the jobs of one worker in seven somehow spin around the automotive industry. Millions of Americans not only build, sell and service cars but also supply the tires, windows and other parts, construct highways, drive trucks or otherwise deliver the goods.