Abstract

Summary The Swiss CO2 law runs out in 2012, together with the first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol. Currently, the Swiss parliament is deciding on the successor of the law that aims to achieve a 20% reduction of CO2 emissions below 1990 levels by 2020. As a means to achieve this ambitious target, the current tax on stationary fuels at 36 CHF/t CO2 will be maintained, while transportation fuels will still be exempted from the carbon tax. Currently, the tax revenues are fully redistributed as a per-capita lump-sum payment via mandatory health insurance and to the employers proportional to their wage payments. This recycling scheme is likely to be prolonged. However, in the presence of the actual debate on the revision of the CO2 law, this paper reexamines the exemption of transportation fuels and the revenue recycling scheme under two points of view. First, I examine the effects on cost-effectiveness and second, I study their impact on equity. Using a static computable general equilibrium model of the Swiss economy incorporating 14 household groups, I find that tax exemptions increase the economy-wide costs of a carbon tax, yet fail to ease the effect on over-proportionally affected households. However, adjusting CO2 tax rates to correct for pre-existing fuel taxes that do not internalize any external effects may decrease the economy-wide cost of a green tax reform. On the other hand the choice of the recycling scheme has less of an effect on efficiency, but its impact on the distributional outcome of the tax reform has to be considered. Choosing an optimal, economy-wide tax will decrease overall costs considerably, while a lump-sum per-capita rebate will result in a progressive tax package at reasonable costs.

Highlights

  • The carbon tax on transportation fuels is 90 CHF less than that for stationary fuels in order to correct for the distorting share of the petroleum tax

  • The carbon tax is either levied uniformly on all fossil fuels (“Uniform”), on stationary fuels only (“Exempt”), or less on transportation fuels than stationary fuels (“Optimal tax”) such that the reduced carbon tax rate on transportation fuels accounts for the distorting share of the pre-existing petroleum tax

  • Either case I choose the tax rates such that the total emission reduction is 20% compared to 1990 levels

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Efficiency and equity issues associated with green taxes are discussed broadly in the literature. While Böhringer and Rutherford (1997) show that sectoral tax exemptions may hurt economic efficiency considerably since marginal abatement cost are not equalized, Abrell (2010) finds that tax exemptions for transportation fuels increase welfare. Paltsev et al (2005) point out that pre-existing fuel taxes are important, as tax exemptions for transportation fuels may “correct pre-existing distortions and reduce the cost” in Europe, while a uniform taxation in the US can reach a given reduction target at least cost. The paper estimates the economy-wide cost of a reduction of CO2 emissions by 20% below 1990 levels and compares different revenue-neutral policy proposals regarding revenue recycling and exemptions for transportation fuels. The paper examines the distributional outcomes of the different tax regimes This will be accomplished using the static CEPE model..

The CEPE Model
Tax System
Energy Goods and Production
Policy Scenarios
Marginal Costs of Abatement and Carbon Emissions
Carbon Tax Revenue and Redistribution
Welfare Costs of Exemptions and the Double Dividend
Welfare Distribution
Income Decomposition
Sensitivity Analysis
Conclusion
Equity
Sectoral Impacts
Sectors
SUMMARY
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call