IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/empiri/v44y2017i4d10.1007_s10663-017-9384-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analysis and quantification of a new fiscally neutral European tax

Author

Listed:
  • Mikuláš Luptáčik

    (University of Economics in Bratislava)

  • Peter Luptáčik

    (Industriewissenschaftliches Institut Wien)

Abstract

The present study contributes to the discussion on the new European tax or excise which would be based on taxing end consumption (taxing the products and not the production) according to how much CO2 is emitted during the production of particular commodities, irrespective of whether all or a part of this process takes place inside or outside the EU. The analysis is based on the input–output model, which provides an appropriate and unique approach for measuring the total CO2 content of the various commodities taking the entire production chain into account. The calculation by products can be the basis for the estimation of product specific CO2 taxes. The model calculations based on the input–output table for the EU-27 for the year 2011 leads to the tax rate of 40.69 euros per tonne of CO2 emissions, which could have generated fiscal revenue in the amount of 1% of EU GDP. In line with the principle of fiscal neutrality, a reduction of the labour costs by −2.03% could compensate the introduction of a CO2 tax by the amount of 40.69 euros per tonne of CO2. The cost push effects lead to change of relative prices in favour of environmentally produced goods and services.

Suggested Citation

  • Mikuláš Luptáčik & Peter Luptáčik, 2017. "Analysis and quantification of a new fiscally neutral European tax," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 44(4), pages 635-663, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:empiri:v:44:y:2017:i:4:d:10.1007_s10663-017-9384-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s10663-017-9384-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10663-017-9384-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10663-017-9384-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. I�aki Arto & Jos� M. Rueda-Cantuche & Glen P. Peters, 2014. "Comparing The Gtap-Mrio And Wiod Databases For Carbon Footprint Analysis," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(3), pages 327-353, September.
    2. Klaus Conrad & Tobias Schmidt, 1998. "Economic Effects of an Uncoordinated Versus a Coordinated Carbon Dioxide Policy in the European Union: An Applied General Equilibrium Analysis," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(2), pages 161-182.
    3. Bram Edens & Rutger Hoekstra & Daan Zult & Oscar Lemmers & Harry Wilting & Ronghao Wu, 2015. "A Method To Create Carbon Footprint Estimates Consistent With National Accounts," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(4), pages 440-457, December.
    4. Alberto Majocchi, 1996. "Green fiscal reform and employment: A survey," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 8(4), pages 375-397, December.
    5. Arnold Tukker & Erik Dietzenbacher, 2013. "Global Multiregional Input-Output Frameworks: An Introduction And Outlook," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(1), pages 1-19, March.
    6. Sommer, Mark & Kratena, Kurt, 2017. "The Carbon Footprint of European Households and Income Distribution," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 62-72.
    7. Terry Barker & Jonathan Köhler (ed.), 1998. "International Competitiveness and Environmental Policies," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1454.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Caroline Hambÿe & Bart Hertveldt & Bernhard Michel, 2018. "Does consistency with detailed national data matter for calculating carbon footprints with global multi-regional input–output tables? A comparative analysis for Belgium based on a structural decomposi," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 7(1), pages 1-22, December.
    2. Kucukvar, Murat & Haider, Muhammad Ali & Onat, Nuri Cihat, 2017. "Exploring the material footprints of national electricity production scenarios until 2050: The case for Turkey and UK," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 251-263.
    3. José M. Rueda-Cantuche & Tamas Revesz & Antonio F. Amores & Agustín Velázquez & Marian Mraz & Emanuele Ferrari & Alfredo J. Mainar-Causapé & Letizia Montinari & Bert Saveyn, 2020. "Improving the European input–output database for global trade analysis," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 9(1), pages 1-16, December.
    4. Eivind Lekve Bjelle & Johannes Többen & Konstantin Stadler & Thomas Kastner & Michaela C. Theurl & Karl-Heinz Erb & Kjartan-Steen Olsen & Kirsten S. Wiebe & Richard Wood, 2020. "Adding country resolution to EXIOBASE: impacts on land use embodied in trade," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 9(1), pages 1-25, December.
    5. Mark Sommer & Kurt Kratena, 2020. "Consumption and production-based CO2 pricing policies: macroeconomic trade-offs and carbon leakage," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(1), pages 29-57, January.
    6. Timon Bohn & Steven Brakman & Erik Dietzenbacher, 2019. "Who's afraid of Virginia WU? The labor composition and labor gains of trade," CESifo Working Paper Series 7527, CESifo.
    7. Fournier Gabela, Julio G. & Freund, Florian, 2022. "Potential carbon leakage risk: A cross-sector cross-country assessment in the OECD area," Conference papers 333468, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    8. Dietzenbacher, Erik & Kulionis, Viktoras & Capurro, Filippo, 2020. "Measuring the effects of energy transition: A structural decomposition analysis of the change in renewable energy use between 2000 and 2014," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 258(C).
    9. Eisenmenger, Nina & Wiedenhofer, Dominik & Schaffartzik, Anke & Giljum, Stefan & Bruckner, Martin & Schandl, Heinz & Wiedmann, Thomas O. & Lenzen, Manfred & Tukker, Arnold & Koning, Arjan, 2016. "Consumption-based material flow indicators — Comparing six ways of calculating the Austrian raw material consumption providing six results," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 177-186.
    10. Kucukvar, Murat & Cansev, Bunyamin & Egilmez, Gokhan & Onat, Nuri C. & Samadi, Hamidreza, 2016. "Energy-climate-manufacturing nexus: New insights from the regional and global supply chains of manufacturing industries," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 889-904.
    11. Bruno Casella & Richard Bolwijn & Daniel Moran & Keiichiro Kanemoto, . "Improving the analysis of global value chains: the UNCTAD-Eora Database," UNCTAD Transnational Corporations Journal, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.
    12. Daniel Moran & Richard Wood, 2014. "Convergence Between The Eora, Wiod, Exiobase, And Openeu'S Consumption-Based Carbon Accounts," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(3), pages 245-261, September.
    13. Alberto Gago & Xavier Labandeira & Xiral López Otero, 2014. "A Panorama on Energy Taxes and Green Tax Reforms," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 208(1), pages 145-190, March.
    14. Airebule, Palizha & Cheng, Haitao & Ishikawa, Jota, 2023. "Assessing carbon emissions embodied in international trade based on shared responsibility," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    15. Boglioni, Michele & Zambelli, Stefano, 2018. "Specialization patterns and reduction of CO2 emissions. An empirical investigation of environmental preservation and economic efficiency," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 134-149.
    16. Gabriela Michalek & Reimund Schwarze, 2015. "Carbon leakage: pollution, trade or politics?," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 17(6), pages 1471-1492, December.
    17. Yannic Rehm & Lucas Chancel, 2022. "Measuring the Carbon Content of Wealth Evidence from France and Germany," PSE Working Papers halshs-03828939, HAL.
    18. Xi Wei & Nie Yingqin & Cheng Xiran, 2019. "Indirect Tax Burden of Regional Residents: Study on Long Term MRIO Model," Journal of Systems Science and Information, De Gruyter, vol. 7(6), pages 568-583, December.
    19. White, David J. & Hubacek, Klaus & Feng, Kuishuang & Sun, Laixiang & Meng, Bo, 2018. "The Water-Energy-Food Nexus in East Asia: A tele-connected value chain analysis using inter-regional input-output analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 210(C), pages 550-567.
    20. Inaki Arto & Erik Dietzenbacher & Jose Manuel Rueda-Cantuche, 2019. "Measuring bilateral trade in terms of value added," JRC Research Reports JRC116694, Joint Research Centre.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    EU own resource; CO2 tax; Entire production chain; Input–output-modelling; Compensation mechanism;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H87 - Public Economics - - Miscellaneous Issues - - - International Fiscal Issues; International Public Goods
    • H23 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Externalities; Redistributive Effects; Environmental Taxes and Subsidies
    • C67 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Input-Output Models

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:empiri:v:44:y:2017:i:4:d:10.1007_s10663-017-9384-4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.