A Third Benefit of Joint Non-OPEC Carbon Taxes: Transferring OPEC Monopoly Rent
This paper highlights the potential for joint OECD (or non-OPEC) carbon taxes to reduce OPEC’s monopoly rent and provide benefit to non-OPEC countries provided jointly agreed trigger strategies are adhered to. In traditional economic theory, the primary purpose of a carbon tax is to internalize a global negative externality. A second benefit for individual countries is that the revenue raised by carbon tax can be used to reduce other tax rates and so lower the deadweight loss of tax system. In this paper, we discuss a third benefit of carbon taxes: transferring rents from OPEC to the oil importing countries.We develop a multi-region general equilibrium structure with endogenously determined oil supply for the purpose in which emissions are endogenously determined. We calibrate our model to 2006 data. Our analytics and numerical simulation results highlight how a uniform carbon tax used by all non-OPEC countries will increase the buyer’s price of oil but decrease the supplier’s price of oil, thus decreasing non-OPEC countries’ oil demand, and transferring OPEC monopoly rent to non-OPEC countries. Carbon taxes reduce the welfare of OPEC and increase the welfare of non-OPEC countries. Results also show how carbon taxes reduce global emissions, but the effect is small.
|Date of creation:||2009|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Poschingerstrasse 5, 81679 Munich|
Phone: +49 (89) 9224-0
Fax: +49 (89) 985369
Web page: http://www.cesifo-group.de
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Dong, Yan & Whalley, John, 2011.
"Carbon motivated regional trade arrangements: Analytics and simulations,"
Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 2783-2792.
- Yan Dong & John Whalley, 2009. "Carbon Motivated Regional Trade Arrangements: Analytics and Simulations," NBER Working Papers 14880, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Yan Dong & John Whalley, 2010. "Carbon, Trade Policy and Carbon Free Trade Areas," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(9), pages 1073-1094, 09.
- Yan Dong & John Whalley, 2008. "Carbon, Trade Policy, And Carbon Free Trade Areas," Trade Working Papers 22730, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
- Yan Dong & John Whalley, 2008. "Carbon, Trade Policy, and Carbon Free Trade Areas," NBER Working Papers 14431, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Warwick J. McKibbin & Martin T. Ross & Robert Shackleton & Peter J. Wilcoxen, 1999. "Emissions Trading, Capital Flows and the Kyoto Protocol," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 287-333.
- Warwick J. McKibbin & Martin T. Ross & Robert Shackleton & Peter J. Wilcoxen, 1999. "Emissions Trading, Capital Flows and the Kyoto Protocol," Economics and Environment Network Working Papers 9901, Australian National University, Economics and Environment Network.
- Terkla, David, 1984. "The efficiency value of effluent tax revenues," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 107-123, June.
- Pearce, David W, 1991. "The Role of Carbon Taxes in Adjusting to Global Warming," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 101(407), pages 938-948, July.
- Cai, Yuezhou & Riezman, Raymond & Whalley, John, 2013. "International trade and the negotiability of global climate change agreements," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 421-427.
- Yuezhou Cai & Raymond Riezman & John Whalley, 2009. "International Trade and the Negotiability of Global Climate Change Agreements," NBER Working Papers 14711, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.