DISTRIBUTIONAL IMPLICATIONS OF A NATIONAL CO2 TAX IN THE U.S. ACROSS INCOME CLASSES AND REGIONS: A MULTI-MODEL OVERVIEW

被引:24
作者
Caron, Justin [1 ,2 ]
Cole, Jefferson [3 ]
Goettle, Richard [4 ,5 ]
Onda, Chikara [6 ]
McFarland, James [3 ]
Woollacott, Jared [7 ]
机构
[1] MIT, 77 Massachusetts Ave, Cambridge, MA 02139 USA
[2] HEC Montreal, 3000 Chemin Cote St Catherine, Montreal, PQ H3T 2A7, Canada
[3] US EPA, 1200 Penn Ave NW, Washington, DC 20460 USA
[4] Northeastern Univ, 360 Huntington Ave, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[5] Dale Jorgenson Associates, 433 NH Route,119 East Fitzwilliam, Fitzwilliam, NH 03447 USA
[6] Stanford Univ, Emmett Interdisciplinary Program Environm & Resou, 473 Via Ortega,Y2E2 Suite 226, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[7] RTI Int, 3040 E Cornwallis Rd, Durham, NC 27709 USA
关键词
Climate policy; CO2; tax; carbon tax; distributional impacts; equity; progressivity; household welfare; double-dividends; model comparison; computable general equilibrium modeling; CARBON; PAYS; IMPACTS; POLICY;
D O I
10.1142/S2010007818400043
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
This paper presents a multi-model assessment of the distributional impacts of carbon pricing. A set of harmonized representative CO2 taxes and tax revenue recycling schemes is implemented in five large-scale economy-wide general equilibrium models. Recycling schemes include various combinations of uniform transfers to households and labor and capital income tax reductions. Particular focus is put on equity - the distribution of impacts across household incomes - and efficiency, evaluated in terms of household welfare. Despite important differences in the assumptions underlying the models, we find general agreement regarding the ranking of recycling schemes in terms of both efficiency and equity. All models identify a clear trade-off between efficient but regressive capital tax reductions and progressive but costly uniform transfers to households; all agree upon the inferiority of labor tax reductions in terms of welfare efficiency; and all agree that different combinations of capital tax reductions and household transfers can be used to balance efficiency and distributional concerns. A subset of the models go further and find that equity concerns, particularly regarding the impact of the tax on low income households, can be alleviated without sacrificing much of the double-dividend benefits offered by capital tax rebates. There is, however, less agreement regarding the progressivity of CO2 taxation net of revenue recycling. Regionally, the models agree that abatement and welfare impacts will vary considerably across regions of the U.S. and generally agree on their broad geographical distribution. There is, however, little agreement regarding the regions which would profit more from the various recycling schemes.
引用
收藏
页数:32
相关论文
共 30 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], DOUBLE DIVIDEND ENV
[2]  
BULL N, 1994, ENERGY J, V15, P145
[3]  
Burtraw D, 2009, 0917REV RFF
[4]   EXPLORING THE IMPACTS OF A NATIONAL U.S. CO2 TAX AND REVENUE RECYCLING OPTIONS WITH A COUPLED ELECTRICITY-ECONOMY MODEL [J].
Caron, Justin ;
Cohen, Stuart M. ;
Brown, Maxwell ;
Reilly, John M. .
CLIMATE CHANGE ECONOMICS, 2018, 9 (01)
[5]  
Cronin JA, 2017, CESIFO WORKING PAPER
[6]   Distributional effects of carbon allowance trading: How government decisions determine winners and losers [J].
Dinan, T ;
Rogers, DL .
NATIONAL TAX JOURNAL, 2002, 55 (02) :199-221
[7]  
Fawcett AA, 2018, CLIM CHANG ECON, V9
[8]   DISTRIBUTIONAL EFFECTS OF UNIFORM AIR-POLLUTION POLICY IN THE UNITED-STATES [J].
GIANESSI, LP ;
PESKIN, HM ;
WOLFF, E .
QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, 1979, 93 (02) :281-301
[9]   Climate change policy's interactions with the tax system [J].
Goulder, Lawrence H. .
ENERGY ECONOMICS, 2013, 40 :S3-S11
[10]   The cost-effectiveness of alternative instruments for environmental protection in a second-best setting [J].
Goulder, LH ;
Parry, IWH ;
Williams, RC ;
Burtraw, D .
JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ECONOMICS, 1999, 72 (03) :329-360