A Tax On Ghost Money?

An anonymous letter writer to the Taipei Times thinks a tax on ghost money is a good idea. Here's his (her?) letter in its entirety:

I am writing this letter to highlight a significant problem for people living in Taiwan.Many recent news reports had showed that the air quality is getting worse. Most people are aware of the dangers of secondhand smoke. The government has designated no smoking areas in most public buildings and has stepped up non-smoking campaigns. It has even added a tax on cigarettes to decrease consumption and offset healthcare costs.

However, one kind of secondhand smoke still seems to be widely accepted by the public - even if it is potentially twice as harmful. It is highly concentrated and covers a wider area. I am referring to the smoke created by the burning of ghost money by both individuals and temples.
Every time my neighbors burn ghost money, my house is filled with a heavy smoke and strong odor. While it has been proven that the burning of ghost money causes the release of harmful and cancer-causing chemicals, the government has hardly taken any action to address this form of pollution.

What is strange is how the public seems to be oblivious to the impact it has or will have on children, the elderly and people with respiratory problems. People who would never think of smoking in a non-smoking area are the same ones who burn large wads of ghost money outside their homes without giving it a second thought. The problem is exacerbated when local temples burn ghost money in their large incinerators. In my area, the whole neighborhood is layered with gray smog. I live a few blocks from a temple and the air is terrible. I can't imagine what the air quality is like for people who live near the temple.

Since banning this practice is probably impossible, an alternative is in order. The government should place an environment tax on the sale of ghost money. Through this, people who insist on burning ghost money would have to offset the environmental and healthcare costs of doing so.

I foresee some problems. Some people will undoubtedly complain that by taxing ghost money, the government is infringing on their rights. Also, if the tax is especially high, contraband ghost money (which, in terms of chemicals could be even worse than the stuff currently being burned) will appear.

As the letter writer says, the money raised by a tax could be used to offset the environmental and healthcare costs of burning ghost money. But instead of having those costs offset, I'd prefer to see less ghost money going up in smoke.

I think ghost money is like cigarettes in that demand for it is fairly price inelastic. It's not addictive, but people think it's necessary. A price hike may not do much. Religious institutions should be pushed to educate their followers about the hazards of this habit. Certain temples do already discourage the burning of ghost money: Xingtian Temple in Taipei is one.

The Environmental Protection Administration and local governments are doing something. And it's worth remembering that it's not just foreigners who complain about the burning of ghost money.

According to Michael Turton's blog, ghost money that is offered (but not burned) sometimes get recycled. I've never seen this.