IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_325.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Emission Taxes and the Design of Refunding Schemes

Author

Listed:
  • Hans Gersbach
  • Till Requate

Abstract

We examine how emission taxes should be refunded to firms in order to create optimal incentives to invest in cleaner technologies. Since refunds cannot be made dependent on investments, an alternative way is to give back taxes to firms according to market shares. We show that universally applicable refunding schemes must be linear in market shares. Moreover, a socially optimal tax/tax refunding scheme exists if pollution is proportional to output and firms compete à la Cournot. If short-term abatement technologies exist, tax/tax refunding schemes can still provide second-best allocations. If firms are price takers, however, refunding taxes according to market shares is harmful. Since imperfect competition is a prominent phenomenon in many polluting industries, the design of socially optimal refunding schemes is an essential part of environmental regulation.

Suggested Citation

  • Hans Gersbach & Till Requate, 2000. "Emission Taxes and the Design of Refunding Schemes," CESifo Working Paper Series 325, CESifo.
    • Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_325
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cesifo.org/DocDL/cesifo_wp325.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hans Gersbach, 2002. "How to get firms to invest: A simple solution to the hold-up problem in regulation," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 7(1), pages 45-56.
    2. Jung, Chulho & Krutilla, Kerry & Boyd, Roy, 1996. "Incentives for Advanced Pollution Abatement Technology at the Industry Level: An Evaluation of Policy Alternatives," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 95-111, January.
    3. Barnett, A H, 1980. "The Pigouvian Tax Rule under Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(5), pages 1037-1041, December.
    4. Gersbach, Hans & Glazer, Amihai, 1999. "Markets and Regulatory Hold-Up Problems," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 151-164, March.
    5. Amacher, Gregory S. & Malik, Arun S., 1996. "Bargaining in Environmental Regulation and the Ideal Regulator," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 233-253, March.
    6. Laffont, Jean-Jacques & Tirole, Jean, 1996. "Pollution permits and environmental innovation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(1-2), pages 127-140, October.
    7. Malik, Arun S., 1991. "Permanent versus interim regulations: A game-theoretic analysis," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 127-139, September.
    8. Cansier, Dieter & Krumm, Raimund, 1997. "Air pollutant taxation: an empirical survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 59-70, October.
    9. Till Requate, 1995. "Incentives to adopt new technologies under different pollution-control policies," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 2(2), pages 295-317, August.
    10. Yao, Dennis A., 1988. "Strategic responses to automobile emissions control: A game-theoretic analysis," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 419-438, December.
    11. Milliman, Scott R. & Prince, Raymond, 1989. "Firm incentives to promote technological change in pollution control," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 247-265, November.
    12. Biglaiser, Gary & Horowitz, John K & Quiggin, John, 1995. "Dynamic Pollution Regulation," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 33-44, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Inés Macho-Stadler & David Pérez-Castrillo, 2010. "Optimal monitoring to implement clean technologies when pollution is random," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 1(3), pages 277-304, July.
    2. Requate, Till, 2005. "Environmental Policy under Imperfect Competition: A Survey," Economics Working Papers 2005-12, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Department of Economics.

    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. Breitscheidel, Jörg, 2005. "Hold-up Problems with Respect to R&D Investment and Licensing in Environmental Regulation," ZEW Discussion Papers 05-86, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    2. Gersbach, Hans & Glazer, Amihai, 1999. "Markets and Regulatory Hold-Up Problems," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 151-164, March.
    3. Haucap, Justus & Kirstein, Roland, 2002. "Warum Staaten Ökosteuern statt Lizenzen einführen, und wann das schlecht für die Wohlfahrt ist," CSLE Discussion Paper Series 2002-07, Saarland University, CSLE - Center for the Study of Law and Economics.
    4. Haucap, Justus & Kirstein, Roland, 2003. "Government Incentives When Pollution Permits Are Durable Goods," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 115(1-2), pages 163-183, April.
    5. Gersbach, Hans & Requate, Till, 2004. "Emission taxes and optimal refunding schemes," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(3-4), pages 713-725, March.
    6. Joerg Breitscheidel & Hans Gersbach, 2005. "Self-Financing Environmental Mechanisms," CESifo Working Paper Series 1528, CESifo.
    7. Dagmar Nelissen & Till Requate, 2007. "Pollution-reducing and resource-saving technological progress," International Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 6(1), pages 5-44.
    8. Requate, Till, 2005. "Dynamic incentives by environmental policy instruments--a survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2-3), pages 175-195, August.
    9. Mohr, Robert D., 2006. "Environmental performance standards and the adoption of technology," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 238-248, June.
    10. Sangeeta Bansal & Shubhashis Gangopadhyay, 2005. "Incentives for Technological Development: BAT Is BAD," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 30(3), pages 345-367, March.
    11. Breitscheidel, Jörg, 2005. "Self-financing Tax/Subsidy Mechanisms in Environmental Regulation with Many Firms," ZEW Discussion Papers 05-87, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    12. Stavins, Robert & Jaffe, Adam & Newell, Richard, 2000. "Technological Change and the Environment," Working Paper Series rwp00-002, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    13. Arguedas, Carmen & van Soest, Daan P., 2009. "On reducing the windfall profits in environmental subsidy programs," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 192-205, September.
    14. Cowen, Tyler & Glazer, Amihai & Zajc, Katarina, 2000. "Credibility may require discretion, not rules," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 295-306, May.
    15. Zhao, Jinhua, 2003. "Irreversible abatement investment under cost uncertainties: tradable emission permits and emissions charges," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(12), pages 2765-2789, December.
    16. Gregory S. Amacher & Arun S. Malik, 2002. "Pollution Taxes When Firms Choose Technologies," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 68(4), pages 891-906, April.
    17. Puller, Steven L., 2006. "The strategic use of innovation to influence regulatory standards," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 690-706, November.
    18. Florian Habermacher & Paul Lehmann, 2020. "Commitment Versus Discretion in Climate and Energy Policy," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 76(1), pages 39-67, May.
    19. Jessica Coria & Magnus Hennlock, 2012. "Taxes, permits and costly policy response to technological change," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 14(1), pages 35-60, January.
    20. Ioulia Ossokina & Otto Swank, 2008. "Adoption Subsidy Versus Technology Standards Under Asymmetric Information," De Economist, Springer, vol. 156(3), pages 241-267, September.

    More about this item

    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:ces:ceswps:_325. 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: Klaus Wohlrabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.html .

    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.