From: Metcalf, Gilbert

To: Richards, Kimberly

Cc: Black, Laura; Tonkonogy, Bella; Fogle, Loretta; Urbanas, Elizabeth (Beth); Demopulos, Abigail

Subject: info memo on leveraging private sector climate finance: strategic plan for office

Date: Monday, March 19, 2012 4:25:00 PM

Attachments: InfoMemo-ML_privatesectorstrategy_031612.docx

InfoMemo-ML_privatesectorstrategy_031612_18.docx

Kim,

Attached is an info memo for Marisa detailing our thinking on how to make progress on the

question of leveraging private sector climate finance this year. I’ve attached 12 and 18 point

versions of the memo. There is no urgency to Marisa’s seeing this but her feedback will be

invaluable when she can turn to it.

Loretta: could you print out both versions to deliver to Kim’s office.

Thanks.

Gib

Gilbert E. Metcalf

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environment and Energy

U.S. Department of the Treasury

(202) 622-0173 (office)

(202) 316-8028 (mobile)

(202) 622-0037 (fax)

Email: gilbert.metcalf@treasury.gov

2012-08-054_000000000001320
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

1 

March 16, 2012 

INFORMATION MEMORANDUM FOR ASSISTANT SECRETARY LAGO

FROM: Gilbert E. Metcalf

 Deputy Assistant Secretary, Office of Environment and Energy 

SUBJECT: Private Sector Engagement Strategy

Summary: Developed countries committed at the 2009 UN climate negotiations in Copenhagen 

to mobilize jointly $100 billion annually in climate finance for developing countries by 2020. 

Given the increasingly scarce public funding for climate finance, reaching that goal will require 

effectively leveraging private climate finance through the careful use of public funds. Multiple 

USG efforts are underway to understand how we can best use bilateral institutions (e.g. OPIC) 

and multilateral institutions and funds (e.g. GEF, CIFs, and GCF) to help achieve this goal. In an 

effort to bring some systematic analysis to the problem, the E&E office has developed a private 

sector strategy and work plan for 2012 to develop a clear, consistent vision for multilateral 

institutions and funds in leveraging private climate finance.

Background: While the issue of leveraging private finance in climate change has been on the 

international climate agenda for a number of years, the issue has gained visibility and interest in 

recent years, due to several factors: 1) a commitment made at the Copenhagen climate 

negotiations in 2009 to mobilize jointly $100 billion of climate finance annually from developed 

to developing countries by 2020; 2) the lack of a global price on carbon to directly incentivize

private sector participation in clean energy; and 3) an increasing gap between the need for 

climate mitigation and adaptation funding and the availability of public funds. 

While several U.S. agencies have important equities in this topic, including State, USAID, DOE, 

OPIC, and Commerce, Treasury’s comparative advantage is in its role in oversight and design of 

multilateral funds and institutions, participation in various intergovernmental policy forums, and 

domestic policy experience.

Not Responsive

2012-08-054_000000000001321
E&E Private Sector Strategy

2 

Not Responsive

2012-08-054_000000000001322
E&E Private Sector Strategy

3 

Not Responsive

2012-08-054_000000000001323
E&E Private Sector Strategy

4 

Not Responsive

2012-08-054_000000000001324
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

1 

March 16, 2012 

INFORMATION MEMORANDUM FOR ASSISTANT 

SECRETARY LAGO

FROM: Gilbert E. Metcalf

 Deputy Assistant Secretary, Office of Environment 

and Energy

SUBJECT: Private Sector Engagement Strategy

Summary: Developed countries committed at the 2009 UN 

climate negotiations in Copenhagen to mobilize jointly $100 

billion annually in climate finance for developing countries by 

2020. Given the increasingly scarce public funding for climate 

finance, reaching that goal will require effectively leveraging 

private climate finance through the careful use of public funds. 

Multiple USG efforts are underway to understand how we can 

best use bilateral institutions (e.g. OPIC) and multilateral 

institutions and funds (e.g. GEF, CIFs, and GCF) to help achieve 

this goal. In an effort to bring some systematic analysis to the 

problem, the E&E office has developed a private sector strategy 

and work plan for 2012 to develop a clear, consistent vision for 

multilateral institutions and funds in leveraging private climate 

finance. 

Background: While the issue of leveraging private finance in 

climate change has been on the international climate agenda for 

a number of years, the issue has gained visibility and interest in 

2012-08-054_000000000001325
E&E Private Sector Strategy

2 

recent years, due to several factors: 1) a commitment made at 

the Copenhagen climate negotiations in 2009 to mobilize jointly

$100 billion of climate finance annually from developed to

developing countries by 2020; 2) the lack of a global price on 

carbon to directly incentivize private sector participation in 

clean energy; and 3) an increasing gap between the need for 

climate mitigation and adaptation funding and the availability of 

public funds. 

While several U.S. agencies have important equities in this 

topic, including State, USAID, DOE, OPIC, and Commerce, 

Treasury’s comparative advantage is in its role in oversight and 

design of multilateral funds and institutions, participation in 

various intergovernmental policy forums, and domestic policy 

experience. 

Not Responsive

2012-08-054_000000000001326
E&E Private Sector Strategy

3 

Not Responsive

2012-08-054_000000000001327
E&E Private Sector Strategy

4 

Not Responsive

2012-08-054_000000000001328
E&E Private Sector Strategy

5 

Not Responsive

2012-08-054_000000000001329
E&E Private Sector Strategy

6 

Not Responsive

2012-08-054_000000000001330
E&E Private Sector Strategy

7 

Not Responsive

2012-08-054_000000000001331
From: Tonkonogy, Bella

To: Climate Team

Subject: Readout from Rio+20 Finance Ministers discussion

Date: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 6:11:34 PM

Attachments: Readout of G20 Ministerial Seminar_062112.docx

In case this is of interest, these are my notes from the discussion last week in Rio that Fazenda put

together. Lots of FFS and GCF mentions.

2012-08-054_000000000001332
Readout of G20 Ministerial Seminar on A Green and Inclusive Economy: The 

Finance Ministers’ Perspective

July 21, 2012 3:30-6:30pm

Rio+20

Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Participants:

Two Panels were moderated by Minister Mantega of Brazil (Panel 1: “Green and 

inclusive economy: the road to sustainable development”) and Minister Meade of 

Mexico (Panel 2: “Changes in patterns of production and consumption in a context of 

structural economic change”) to a packed audience.

Interventions from Switzerland, South Africa, Antigua & Barbuda, Ecuador, 

Denmark, UAE, Greenland, Korea, Turkey, Nigeria, Algeria, China, and Japan; and 

IMF, World Bank, IADB, UNCTAD, and the International Labor Organization (ILO). 

Common Themes:

Key themes of many Ministers and International Organization (IO) representatives 

were 1) phase-out of inefficient subsidies, particularly fossil fuels; 2) the need for 

green growth to be inclusive- to address rich/poor disparities; 3) green 

infrastructure investment, including mentions of the Green Climate Fund; and 4) 

measurement to aid green growth policies- with natural capital accounting 

highlighted several times. 

Specific Highlights:

Panel 1:

Brazil: discussed its strategy of economic growth + environment preservation + 

social inclusion, noting that each country has its own path and choices on 

development policies. Mantega noted often higher cost of environmental protection 

in the short run offset in long run with lower costs. 

South Africa: Who benefits from growth is central- must be inclusive to be 

sustainable. The financial crisis has increased need of finding synergies among the 3 

pillars of sustainable development (economic, environment, and social). Also 

discussed South Africa’s tax policies- a fuel levy on consumption, an electricity 

generation tax, and accelerated depreciation for renewable energy. A carbon tax is 

under discussion. Highlighted South Africa’s national Green Fund. 

Denmark: green growth is more efficient, need for natural capital accounting, bulk of 

investment is from private sector

Switzlerland, Korea: both mentioned their candidacies to host the GCF

OECD (SG Gurria): began with the statement “there is life after debt” and then gave a 

succinct slogan to the green growth cause: “go structural, go social, go green.” In 

highlighting OECD’s recent report to the G20, he discussed the need for broad 

2012-08-054_000000000001333
framework policies; incentives, such as price signals, to use natural resources 

efficiently; and the importance of reducing fossil fuel subsidies. 

World Bank: Highlighted two elements- first that countries need data to guide 

policymakers, mentioning the World Bank’s Natural Capital Accounting initiative 

(Brazil, Japan, and Nigeria also supported this initiative in the panel); and secondgreen growth is affordable, particularly in comparison with the costs of 

environmental degradation. 

IMF: Subsidy reform provides fiscal space to promote inclusive green growth. Also 

highlighted carbon taxes, and IMF’s cooperation with WB & UNDP to leverage 

knowledge.

Ecuador: spent most of allotted time describing need for developed countries to pay 

for developing countries’ sustainable development and take primary action (also a 

central theme of Algeria’s and China’s interventions in Panel 2; China even blamed 

developed countries for transferring dirty technology previously). 

Panel 2:

Nigeria: Ngozi was a real highlight of the event by describing in detail her efforts to 

phase out fossil fuel subsidies. She listed several areas where finance ministries can 

play an important role: first, on fiscal policies and subsidies; second, on structural 

reforms (Nigeria is in the process of privatizing their electricity generation sector); 

and third, on strategies to increase productivity in important sectors (for example, 

agriculture, which is a leading contributor of GHG emissions in Africa). She 

suggested that the Green Climate Fund might be able to help on introducing the 

“right kind of prices.” 

Japan (Naoko Ishii): 1) price public bads, do it nationally but coordinated; 2) do 

major things differently- i.e., natural capital accounting; and 3) put finance into the 

equation- i.e., use limited public funds to induce change. 

IADB (President Moreno): Highlighted need for information and green infrastructure 

investment. On information, mentioned the launch at Rio+20 of the MIF’s 

ClimateScope investment climate tool. On green infrastructure investment, 

mentioned the joint announcement of 8 IFIs at Rio+20 to provide $175 billion in 

sustainable transport financing.

UNCTAD: He noted that the GCF was unlikely to be able to operate in “normal 

manner” due to budget issues; it would need to find innovative ways of financing. 

ILO: Highlighted the role of finance ministries in the integration/coherence of 

policies, noting especially such a role for the development of the Sustainable 

Development Goals which were initiated at Rio+20. 

2012-08-054_000000000001334
2012-08-054_000000000001335
From: Metcalf, Gilbert

To: Tonkonogy, Bella; Demopulos, Abigail

Cc: Urbanas, Elizabeth (Beth); Lien, Elizabeth

Subject: TPs for IETA Carbon Forum

Date: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 6:10:00 PM

Attachments: IETA Panel100212.doc

I’m on a panel at the IETA Carbon Forum next Tuesday on the following topic:

Low-Carbon Finance & Investment: Where Will the Money Come From?

This session looks at the quickly-evolving international climate finance landscape, as well as explores the

emerging breed of innovative low-carbon financial products & instruments. The audience will be introduced to a

selection of public & private thought leaders across the eco-financial spectrum. Examples of recent

developments & initiatives that will be explored by panelists include: the status of UN’s Green Climate Fund;

green bonds; de-risking and risk-sharing structures; carbon market insurance products; new market platforms

and tools etc...This session provides an invaluable opportunity to join an exciting deep-dive into the eco-financial

toolkit(s) of today, and what that toolkit might look like in the years to come.

Other panel members are Jane Ebinger, Bob Dixon, Maria Netto (IDB) and Cameron Prell

(McGuire Woods) moderating. There will be brief opening remarks followed by panel discussion

and Q&A.

I cribbed comments from several sources. Would welcome feedback and suggestions on these.

Also, any questions that you think I’ll need to be prepared for. I jotted down a few (no answers

needed for those); you may have others.

Will need any feedback by COB Monday.

Thanks,

Gib

Gilbert E. Metcalf

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environment and Energy

U.S. Department of the Treasury

(202) 622-0173 (office)

(202) 316-8028 (mobile)

(202) 622-0037 (fax)

Email: gilbert.metcalf@treasury.gov

2012-08-054_000000000001336
1 

IETA Carbon Forum

Low-Carbon Finance & Investment: Where Will the Money Come From? 

2:00 – 3:15 pm, Oct. 2, 2012

Format: Panel discussion with 10 – 15 minutes of "structured discussion" followed by Q&A

This session looks at the quickly-evolving international climate finance landscape, as well as explores the emerging 

breed of innovative low-carbon financial products & instruments. The audience will be introduced to a selection of 

public & private thought leaders across the eco-financial spectrum. Examples of recent developments & initiatives 

that will be explored by panelists include: the status of UN’s Green Climate Fund; green bonds; de-risking and risksharing structures; carbon market insurance products; new market platforms and tools etc...This session provides 

an invaluable opportunity to join an exciting deep-dive into the eco-financial toolkit(s) of today, and what that 

toolkit might look like in the years to come.

I. Overview

• Stimulating low-carbon investments starts from a core premise: an appropriate risk adjusted 

return must be available to investors. That means getting the risk-return balance right. 

• If the GCF is to go beyond what the CIF has done, it will have to test out interventions that 

change market conditions such that private clean investment flows continue well beyond any 

intervention by the GCF. This is what it means to be transformational.

• Also important to recognize that the developed country public funds will not be sufficient to 

address the problem. It is too large for any single sector to tackle alone. We will need public 

and private moneys to flow if we are to move to a low-carbon world.

Not Responsive

2012-08-054_000000000001337
2 

Not Responsive

2012-08-054_000000000001338
3 

Questions to Anticipate:

• What is the role of the GCF in the commitment to mobilize $100 billion annually?

• What role does USG envision the PSF playing?

• What are the prospects for a carbon tax in the US?

• ??

NR

2012-08-054_000000000001339
From: Metcalf, Gilbert

To: Eberly, Janice; Mazur, Mark

Cc: Gelber, Alexander; Aaronson, Stephanie

Subject: leader in most recent Economist

Date: Tuesday, July 10, 2012 9:42:00 AM

Attachments: Economist 7_7_12 Leader-Australias new taxes-Underland Revenue.pdf

Thought you might find this leader from the most recent Economist on Australia’s new carbon tax

of interest.

Gilbert E. Metcalf

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environment and Energy

U.S. Department of the Treasury

(202) 622-0173 (office)

(202) 316-8028 (mobile)

(202) 622-0037 (fax)

Email: gilbert.metcalf@treasury.gov

2012-08-054_000000000001340
Jul 7th 2012 | from the print edition 

Australia’s new taxes

Underland revenue

The right place to look for fiscal resources

CASHSTRAPPED governments everywhere are on the hunt for new sources of 

revenue. Some are casting their net outwards, chasing expatriates and 

tax refugees. Some are looking upwards, taxing high earners and 

corporate jet-setters. One or two are even looking backwards. India, for 

example, has imposed a retroactive tax on some big foreign 

acquisitions dating back five years or more.

Australia is looking, er, down under. On July 1st it imposed two new 

taxes: a mining levy and a carbon tax. Both taxes are controversial, 

and the manner in which they were introduced was shoddy. And yet, 

Australia’s new taxes: Underland revenue | The Economist Page 1 of 3

http://www.economist.com/node/21558258/print 7/10/2012

2012-08-054_000000000001341
compared with some clumsy revenue-raising elsewhere, Australia’s two 

new taxes bear at least a family resemblance to sound policymaking.

No one likes taxes. Economists dislike them not because they relieve 

people of their money, but because they distort people’s behaviour. 

Income taxes discourage work; corporate taxes inhibit enterprise; even 

consumption taxes obstruct some mutually beneficial exchanges. These 

lost purchases deprive customers of a deal and shops of a sale, without 

raising any money for the government. The best taxes impinge little on 

the decisions people make, or fall on things worth inhibiting. Carbon 

taxes are an example of the second, forcing people to bear more of the 

cost of the carbon they burn, including its unpriced contribution to 

global warming. Australia, which emits more carbon dioxide per head 

than any other member of the G20, now charges 300 firms A$23 ($24) 

per tonne for the privilege, a higher price than prevails under the 

European Union’s emissions-trading scheme.

Australia is carbon-intensive largely because it is rich in coal, one 

example of its enviable mineral wealth. Those God-given minerals earn 

“rents”, returns greater than the minimum required to attract the 

labour, capital and expertise necessary to extract them. As commodity 

prices have risen, those rents have grown conspicuously. A tax on such 

excess returns makes sense, helping to raise money without hurting 

motivation.

A government review of Australia’s taxes proposed such a tax in 2010. 

Alas, the mining levy introduced this month falls short in several ways. 

It is confined to iron ore and coal, and charges a lower rate than an 

existing tax on oil and gas. An ideal tax would treat all resources 

equally. The current tax also fails to replace the royalties imposed by 

Australia’s states, because the government did not leave time for the 

negotiations such a fiscal consolidation would have required.

Tax things you want less of

Australia’s carbon tax is also marred by politics. It reflects not only the 

environmental cost of carbon but also the political price extracted by 

the Australian Greens for supporting the minority Labor government. 

Labor wants to convert it into a trading scheme in a few years; the 

opposition has vowed to repeal it. That makes it hard for people to plan 

around it.

Australia’s new taxes: Underland revenue | The Economist Page 2 of 3

http://www.economist.com/node/21558258/print 7/10/2012

2012-08-054_000000000001342
Copyright © The Economist Newspaper Limited 2012. All rights reserved. Accessibility

Privacy policy Cookies info Terms of use Help

from the print edition | Leaders

Both taxes, therefore, have birth defects. But that should not obscure 

the merits in their conception. They have allowed the government to 

lower taxes on work, by raising the threshold for income tax. And 

although the opposition blocked a cut in corporate income tax, the 

government will offer other tax breaks for business instead. Other 

governments would do well to emulate and improve upon Australia’s 

efforts to shift the tax burden from hard-earned wages and profits to 

unearned rents and uncompensated harms.

Australia’s new taxes: Underland revenue | The Economist Page 3 of 3

http://www.economist.com/node/21558258/print 7/10/2012

2012-08-054_000000000001343
From: Metcalf, Gilbert

To: Urbanas, Elizabeth (Beth); Lien, Elizabeth; Demopulos, Abigail; Tonkonogy, Bella

Subject: IMF climate finance chapter

Date: Friday, May 04, 2012 5:34:00 PM

Attachments: Ch 7.docx

FYI. This is from a book that the IMF will be publishing later this year on using fiscal policy to

mitigate climate change. Mick Keen, Ian Parry and Ruud de Mooij are the editors.

Gilbert E. Metcalf

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environment and Energy

U.S. Department of the Treasury

(202) 622-0173 (office)

(202) 316-8028 (mobile)

(202) 622-0037 (fax)

Email: gilbert.metcalf@treasury.gov

2012-08-054_000000000001344
The attachment is being withheld because it contains a chapter 

(or chapters) from a book that is available for sale at: 

http://www.imfbookstore.org/ProdDetails.asp?ID=DFPMEA

2012-08-054_000000000001345
From: Metcalf, Gilbert

To: Jaffe, Judson; Hall, Daniel

Cc: Urbanas, Elizabeth (Beth); Demopulos, Abigail

Subject: RE: Korea cap and trade

Date: Friday, May 04, 2012 9:16:00 AM

That would be great. thanks.

Gilbert E. Metcalf

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environment and Energy

U.S. Department of the Treasury

(202) 622-0173 (office)

(202) 316-8028 (mobile)

(202) 622-0037 (fax)

Email: gilbert.metcalf@treasury.gov

From: Jaffe, Judson 

Sent: Friday, May 04, 2012 9:13 AM

To: Metcalf, Gilbert; Hall, Daniel

Cc: Urbanas, Elizabeth (Beth); Demopulos, Abigail

Subject: RE: Korea cap and trade

I have not. But we can pull together a summary.

_____________________________

Judson Jaffe

Office of Environment and Energy

U.S. Department of the Treasury

Phone:  202.622.7751

Fax:    202.622.6728

Email:  judson.jaffe@treasury.gov

From: Metcalf, Gilbert 

Sent: Friday, May 04, 2012 8:55 AM

To: Jaffe, Judson; Hall, Daniel

Cc: Urbanas, Elizabeth (Beth); Demopulos, Abigail

Subject: Korea cap and trade

Jud or Daniel,

Have you seen any details about this new scheme?

South Korea joins nations preparing

cap-and-trade markets

Lisa Friedman, E&E reporter

Published: Friday, May 4, 2012

Senate Foreign Relations Chairman John Kerry (D-Mass.) yesterday hailed South Korea for approving

an economywide carbon market as part of a broad government attack on climate change.

Under the measure, approved 148-0 with three abstentions, Korea's cap-and-trade system will take

2012-08-054_000000000001346
effect by 2015. The National Assembly vote comes on the heels of sweeping new climate legislation in

Mexico and marks Korea as one of a growing number of nations making good on pledges to cut

greenhouse gas emissions.

"What else is new?" Kerry said in a statement to ClimateWire. "South Korea just joins China, New

Zealand, Mexico, Australia and the European Union in seizing the economic rewards of a sustainable

economy by putting a price on carbon. The big question is why we're among the outliers.

"It's negligent for Congress to continue ignoring and obstructing when other countries realize they're

getting an economic boost out of leading the way," Kerry said.

Environmental activists echoed Kerry's comments. Several said Korea's decision -- made after intense,

months-long negotiations with business and industry lobbies, underscores America's absence from the

clean-energy race.

"This is definitely a significant development in global climate policy," said Jennifer Haverkamp,

international climate director for the Environmental Defense Fund.

"It's not only the first Asian country to go forward and embrace comprehensive climate law, but it's also

a fast-growing economy that's basically just graduated from developing to developed country status,

and they're looking to the future and very consciously ... decided to benefit from low-carbon economy

of the future," she said.

Market linkage could be next step

Keya Chatterjee, director of international climate change policy for the World Wildlife Fund, said: "This

is a race, and we're clearly losing." Korea's vote, she said, puts new pressure on the United States to

"get together the courage to move" into emissions trading.

But Lee Lane, a visiting scholar at the conservative Hudson Institute, said he is comfortable seeing

America's economic competitors take the lead. "If those countries want to substitute more expensive

energy for less expensive industry in their own industries, the United States gains competitively from

that. So as far as I'm concerned, it's just fine from the standpoint of U.S. national interests," he said.

"The farther behind we fall, the better off we are in this particular race."

Moreover, Lane argued, until countries like China and India impose full carbon markets, incremental

moves by various countries do not add up to enough to curb global emissions.

China currently has several pilot carbon trading programs under way. Speaking in New York earlier this

year, the country's top climate negotiator said those could eventually become a nationwide carbon

market.

Korea's market, meanwhile, could be linked with Australia, New Zealand and the European Union's

markets by 2020, analysts said. Under the program, companies, factories and farms that emit 125,000

metric tons or more of carbon dioxide annually will be subject to the trading system. Over the coming

months, Haverkamp said, the government will hammer out the regulations putting the law into action.

She said the new moves by countries like Australia, Mexico and Korea could have a material impact

on the global climate talks.

"It's extremely interesting that it's a suite of mid-sized countries who have decided that they're not going

to wait around," she said. "The more countries that do it, I think, gives more encouragement to others

that it is in their national self-interest to go forward."

Gilbert E. Metcalf

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environment and Energy

U.S. Department of the Treasury

(202) 622-0173 (office)

(202) 316-8028 (mobile)

(202) 622-0037 (fax)

Email: gilbert.metcalf@treasury.gov

2012-08-054_000000000001347
From: Metcalf, Gilbert

To: Jaffe, Judson

Subject: RE: legislation

Date: Monday, August 20, 2012 9:22:00 AM

Interesting. This approach is similar in spirit to an idea I proposed in a paper a few years ago on

how a price based approach could be modified to account for quantity targets.

Gilbert E. Metcalf

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environment and Energy

U.S. Department of the Treasury

(202) 622-0173 (office)

(202) 316-8028 (mobile)

(202) 622-0037 (fax)

Email: gilbert.metcalf@treasury.gov

From: Jaffe, Judson 

Sent: Friday, August 03, 2012 9:13 AM

To: Metcalf, Gilbert

Subject: RE: legislation

Here’s a section by section summary of the bill from Congressman McDermott’s website. The text

of the legislation still is not available from his website or from Thomas/GPO. I’ll keep looking...

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d112:30:./temp/~bdydst::|/bss/|

_____________________________

Judson Jaffe

Office of Environment and Energy

U.S. Department of the Treasury

Phone:  202.622.7751

Fax:    202.622.6728

Email:  judson.jaffe@treasury.gov

From: Metcalf, Gilbert 

Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2012 10:46 AM

To: Jaffe, Judson

Subject: legislation

Can you get a copy of this?

McDERMOTT TO INTRO CARBON TAX LEGISLATION: Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) will

introduce a bill today to create a carbon tax that he says will create incentives for long-term

changes in the U.S. energy market without harming the economy, and in fact, providing much

needed revenues. McDermott: In politics, "you plant seeds. You put ideas out there and you let

people think about" it, he said. "If someone has a better idea, I'm willing to consider it. I think that

when we come back in January, we talk about tax reform, I don't want it to be thrown on the

table" at the last minute. "So I'm putting it out there as a think-piece.'

2012-08-054_000000000001348
Gilbert E. Metcalf

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environment and Energy

U.S. Department of the Treasury

(202) 622-0173 (office)

(202) 316-8028 (mobile)

(202) 622-0037 (fax)

Email: gilbert.metcalf@treasury.gov

2012-08-054_000000000001349
From: Metcalf, Gilbert E.

To: Metcalf, GilbertDisabled

Date: Wednesday, May 16, 2012 8:17:56 AM

Attachments: CH0_Metcalf_v2.docx

Gilbert E. Metcalf

Professor of Economics

Tufts University

Gilbert.Metcalf@tufts.edu<mailto:Gilbert.Metcalf@tufts.edu>

http://works.bepress.com/gilbert_metcalf/

2012-08-054_000000000001350
Carbon Taxes

Gilbert E. Metcalf

Department of Economics

Tufts University and NBER and

David Weisbach

University of Chicago Law School

May 4, 2012

Prepared for the Encyclopedia of Energy, 

Natural Resources and Environmental 

Resources. 

The article is available for purchase as part of the referenced encyclopedia. 

2012-08-054_000000000001351
From: Metcalf, Gilbert

To: Berg, Katie

Subject: forestry chapter from an upcoming IMF book on climate change policy

Date: Friday, May 04, 2012 5:29:00 PM

Attachments: Ch 5.doc

Katie,

I thought you might find this chapter from a book that Michael Keen and others at IMF are editing

of interest.

Gib

Gilbert E. Metcalf

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environment and Energy

U.S. Department of the Treasury

(202) 622-0173 (office)

(202) 316-8028 (mobile)

(202) 622-0037 (fax)

Email: gilbert.metcalf@treasury.gov

2012-08-054_000000000001352
The attachment is being withheld because it contains a chapter 

(or chapters) from a book that is available for sale at: 

http://www.imfbookstore.org/ProdDetails.asp?ID=DFPMEA

2012-08-054_000000000001353