IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eneeco/v33y2011i3p388-398.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Taxing incumbent monopoly to foster entry

Author

Listed:
  • Wirl, Franz

Abstract

This paper investigates whether it is welfare enhancing to tax the output of a monopoly in order to foster cost-inefficient entry. This question is of particular concern in the energy markets dominated by cartel-like affiliations (OPEC and oil, Russia's gas exports to Europe) and the interest and practice to stimulate the development of alternative fuels. Making the realistic assumption that none of the players can commit to future policies, subsidies are not a viable strategy for the government. A tax cannot be first best but can be second best if the government cannot force the incumbent monopoly to sell its output at no profit and if the incumbent's profit is discounted. However, stimulating supply by improving the conditions for entry is not the prime concern of taxation (after all it lowers aggregate supplies and may even lower the entrant's supply) but to accrue parts of the monopoly rent.

Suggested Citation

  • Wirl, Franz, 2011. "Taxing incumbent monopoly to foster entry," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 388-398, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:eneeco:v:33:y:2011:i:3:p:388-398
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140-9883(10)00208-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    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. Matti Liski & Juan-Pablo Montero, 2009. "On Coase and Hotelling," Working Papers 0903, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research.
    2. Franz Wirl, 2007. "Energy Prices and Carbon Taxes under Uncertainty about Global Warming," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 36(3), pages 313-340, March.
    3. Conrad, Klaus & Wang, Jianmin, 1993. "The effect of emission taxes and abatement subsidies on market structure," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 499-518.
    4. Strand, Jon, 2010. "Optimal fossil-fuel taxation with backstop technologies and tenure risk," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 418-422, March.
    5. De Fraja, Gianni, 1999. "Regulation and access pricing with asymmetric information," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 109-134, January.
    6. Loeb, Martin & Magat, Wesley A, 1979. "A Decentralized Method for Utility Regulation," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 22(2), pages 399-404, October.
    7. Palokangas, Tapio, 1994. "Taxation, cost-benefit analysis, and monopoly in an open economy," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 529-543, October.
    8. Tahvonen, Olli, 1996. "Trade with Polluting Nonrenewable Resources," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 1-17, January.
    9. Lambert Schoonbeek & Frans Vries, 2009. "Environmental taxes and industry monopolization," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 94-106, August.
    10. Dockner,Engelbert J. & Jorgensen,Steffen & Long,Ngo Van & Sorger,Gerhard, 2000. "Differential Games in Economics and Management Science," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521637329, April.
    11. Potters, Jan & Sloof, Randolph, 1996. "Interest groups: A survey of empirical models that try to assess their influence," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 403-442, November.
    12. Wirl, Franz, 2003. "Regulating Vertically Integrated Utilities When Transfers are Costly but Revenues are Beneficial," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 114(1-2), pages 175-195, January.
    13. Katsoulacos, Yannis & Xepapadeas, Anastasios, 1995. " Environmental Policy under Oligopoly with Endogenous Market Structure," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 97(3), pages 411-420, September.
    14. Johannes Horner & Morton I. Kamien, 2004. "Coase and Hotelling: A Meeting of the Minds," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(3), pages 718-723, June.
    15. Wirl Franz, 1994. "Pigouvian Taxation of Energy for Flow and Stock Externalities and Strategic, Noncompetitive Energy Pricing," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 1-18, January.
    16. Im, Jeong-Bin, 2002. "Optimal taxation of exhaustible resource under monopoly," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 183-197, May.
    17. Maskin, Eric S & Newbery, David M, 1990. "Disadvantageous Oil Tariffs and Dynamic Consistency," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(1), pages 143-156, March.
    18. David S. Bullock, 1994. "In Search of Rational Government: What Political Preference Function Studies Measure and Assume," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 76(3), pages 347-361.
    19. Baffes, John, 1993. "Optimal Tax/Subsidy Intervention in Commodity Markets When the Groups of Interest Are Weighted Unequally," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 20(3), pages 365-378.
    20. Kydland, Finn E & Prescott, Edward C, 1977. "Rules Rather Than Discretion: The Inconsistency of Optimal Plans," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 85(3), pages 473-491, June.
    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. Wirl, Franz, 2014. "Taxes versus permits as incentive for the intertemporal supply of a clean technology by a monopoly," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 248-269.

    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:eee:eneeco:v:33:y:2011:i:3:p:388-398. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eneco .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.