IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_8364.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Refunding Emission Payments: Output-Based versus Expenditure-Based Refunding

Author

Listed:
  • Cathrine Hagem
  • Michael Olaf Hoel
  • Thomas Sterner

Abstract

We analyse two mechanism designs for refunding emission payments to polluting firms: output-based refunding (OBR) and expenditure-based refunding (EBR). In both instruments, emission fees are returned to the polluting industry, typically making the policy more politically acceptable than a standard tax. The crucial difference between OBR and EBR is that the fees are refunded in proportion to output in the former but in proportion to the firms’ expenditure on abatement technology equipment in the latter. To achieve the same abatement target as a standard tax, the fee level in the OBR design is higher, whereas the fee level in the EBR design is lower. The use of OBR and EBR may lead to large differences in the distribution of output and costs across firms. Both designs imply a cost-ineffective provision of abatement, as firms put relatively too much effort into reducing emissions through abatement technology compared with reducing output. However, a standard tax may be politically infeasible and maintaining output may be seen as a political advantage by policymakers if they seek to avoid activity reduction in the regulated sector.

Suggested Citation

  • Cathrine Hagem & Michael Olaf Hoel & Thomas Sterner, 2020. "Refunding Emission Payments: Output-Based versus Expenditure-Based Refunding," CESifo Working Paper Series 8364, CESifo.
  • Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_8364
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cesifo.org/DocDL/cesifo1_wp8364.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Susumu Cato, 2010. "Emission Taxes and Optimal Refunding Schemes with Endogenous Market Structure," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 46(3), pages 275-280, July.
    2. Fischer, Carolyn, 2011. "Market power and output-based refunding of environmental policy revenues," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 212-230, January.
    3. Sterner, Thomas & Hoglund Isaksson, Lena, 2006. "Refunded emission payments theory, distribution of costs, and Swedish experience of NOx abatement," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 93-106, April.
    4. Fredriksson, Per G. & Sterner, Thomas, 2005. "The political economy of refunded emissions payment programs," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 113-119, April.
    5. John Pezzey, 2003. "Emission Taxes and Tradeable Permits A Comparison of Views on Long-Run Efficiency," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 26(2), pages 329-342, October.
    6. Patrick Criqui & Mark Jaccard & Thomas Sterner, 2019. "Carbon Taxation: A Tale of Three Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-21, November.
    7. John Pezzey, 1992. "The Symmetry between Controlling Pollution by Price and Controlling It by Quantity," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 25(4), pages 983-991, November.
    8. Gersbach, Hans & Requate, Till, 2004. "Emission taxes and optimal refunding schemes," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(3-4), pages 713-725, March.
    9. Walls, Margaret & Palmer, Karen, 2001. "Upstream Pollution, Downstream Waste Disposal, and the Design of Comprehensive Environmental Policies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 94-108, January.
    10. Hoel, Michael, 1991. "Global environmental problems: The effects of unilateral actions taken by one country," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 55-70, January.
    11. Charles D. Kolstad, 2000. "Spatial Environmental and Resource Economics," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1918, November.
    12. Goulder, Lawrence H. & Parry, Ian W. H. & Williams III, Roberton C. & Burtraw, Dallas, 1999. "The cost-effectiveness of alternative instruments for environmental protection in a second-best setting," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(3), pages 329-360, June.
    13. Ian W.H. Parry & John Norregaard & Dirk Heine, 2012. "Environmental Tax Reform: Principles from Theory and Practice," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 4(1), pages 101-125, August.
    14. repec:ces:ifodic:v:2:y:2004:i:1:p:14567702 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Katrin Millock & Céline Nauges & Thomas Sterner, 2004. "Environmental Taxes: A Comparison of French and Swedish Experience from Taxes on Industrial Air Pollution," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 2(01), pages 30-34, April.
    16. Katrin Millock & Céline Nauges & Thomas Sterner, 2004. "Environmental Taxes: A Comparison of French and Swedish Experience from Taxes on Industrial Air Pollution," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 2(1), pages 30-34, 04.
    17. Fullerton Don & Mohr Robert D., 2003. "Suggested Subsidies are Sub-optimal Unless Combined with an Output Tax," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 2(1), pages 1-22, January.
    18. Hepburn, Cameron J. & Quah, John K.-H. & Ritz, Robert A., 2013. "Emissions trading with profit-neutral permit allocations," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 85-99.
    19. Katrin Millock & Céline Nauges, 2006. "Ex Post Evaluation of an Earmarked Tax on Air Pollution," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 82(1), pages 68-84.
    20. Fischer, Carolyn & Preonas, Louis, 2010. "Combining Policies for Renewable Energy: Is the Whole Less Than the Sum of Its Parts?," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 4(1), pages 51-92, June.
    21. Meunier, Guy & Montero, Juan-Pablo & Ponssard, Jean-Pierre, 2018. "Output-based allocations in pollution markets with uncertainty and self-selection," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 832-851.
    22. Carolyn Fischer & Alan K. Fox, 2007. "Output-Based Allocation of Emissions Permits for Mitigating Tax and Trade Interactions," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 83(4), pages 575-599.
    23. Bernard, Alain L. & Fischer, Carolyn & Fox, Alan K., 2007. "Is there a rationale for output-based rebating of environmental levies?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 83-101, May.
    24. Adam Jaffe & Richard Newell & Robert Stavins, 2002. "Environmental Policy and Technological Change," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 22(1), pages 41-70, June.
    25. Coria, Jessica, 2009. "Taxes, permits, and the diffusion of a new technology," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 249-271, November.
    26. Kallbekken, Steffen & Kroll, Stephan & Cherry, Todd L., 2011. "Do you not like Pigou, or do you not understand him? Tax aversion and revenue recycling in the lab," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 53-64, July.
    27. Mr. Dirk Heine & Mr. John Norregaard & Ian W.H. Parry, 2012. "Environmental Tax Reform: Principles from Theory and Practice to Date," IMF Working Papers 2012/180, International Monetary Fund.
    28. Requate, Till, 2005. "Dynamic incentives by environmental policy instruments--a survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2-3), pages 175-195, August.
    29. Isaksson, Lena Hoglund, 2005. "Abatement costs in response to the Swedish charge on nitrogen oxide emissions," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 102-120, July.
    30. Felder, Stefan & Schleiniger, Reto, 2002. "Environmental tax reform: efficiency and political feasibility," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1-2), pages 107-116, August.
    31. Edwards, T. Huw. & Hutton, John P., 2001. "Allocation of carbon permits within a country: a general equilibrium analysis of the United Kingdom," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 371-386, 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. Gren, Ing-Marie & Höglind, Lisa & Jansson, Torbjörn, 2021. "Refunding of a climate tax on food consumption in Sweden," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).

    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. Hagem, Cathrine & Hoel, Michael & Holtsmark, Bjart & Sterner, Thomas, 2015. "Refunding Emissions Payments," Discussion Papers dp-15-05, Resources For the Future.
    2. Cathrine Hagem & Bjart Holtsmark & Thomas Sterner, 2012. "Mechanism design for refunding emissions payment," Discussion Papers 705, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    3. Heimvik, Arild, 2020. "Refunded emission payments scheme – a cost-efficient and politically acceptable instrument for reduction of NOx-emissions?," Working Papers in Economics 2/20, University of Bergen, Department of Economics.
    4. Yuanguang Yu, 2012. "An Optimal Ad Valorem Tax/Subsidy with an Output-Based Refunded Emission Payment for Permits Auction in an Oligopoly Market," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 52(2), pages 235-248, June.
    5. Gren, Ing-Marie & Höglind, Lisa & Jansson, Torbjörn, 2021. "Refunding of a climate tax on food consumption in Sweden," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    6. Knut Einar Rosendahl & Halvor Briseid Storrøsten, 2011. "Output-based allocation and investment in clean technologies," Discussion Papers 644, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    7. Coria, Jessica & Mohlin, Kristina, 2017. "On Refunding of Emission Taxes and Technology Diffusion," Strategic Behavior and the Environment, now publishers, vol. 6(3), pages 205-248, March.
    8. Bonilla, Jorge & Coria, Jessica & Mohlin, Kristina & Sterner, Thomas, 2015. "Refunded emission payments and diffusion of NOx abatement technologies in Sweden," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 132-145.
    9. Sterner, Thomas & Hoglund Isaksson, Lena, 2006. "Refunded emission payments theory, distribution of costs, and Swedish experience of NOx abatement," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 93-106, April.
    10. Fischer, Carolyn, 2011. "Market power and output-based refunding of environmental policy revenues," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 212-230, January.
    11. Pezzey, John C.V., 2006. "Neither the rock nor the hard place: using payment thresholds to balance the politics and the economics of emissions control," 2006 Conference (50th), February 8-10, 2006, Sydney, Australia 139892, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    12. Khezr, Peyman & MacKenzie, Ian A., 2018. "Consignment auctions," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 42-51.
    13. Alexeev, Alexander & Good, David H. & Krutilla, Kerry, 2016. "Environmental taxation and the double dividend in decentralized jurisdictions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 90-100.
    14. Sterner, Thomas & Muller, Adrian, 2006. "Output and Abatement Effects of Allocation Readjustment in Permit Trade," Discussion Papers dp-06-49, Resources For the Future.
    15. Ioanna Pantelaiou & Panos Hatzipanayotou & Panagiotis Konstantinou & Anastasios Xepapadeas, 2020. "Can Cleaner Environment Promote International Trade? Environmental Policies as Export Promoting Mechanisms," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 75(4), pages 809-833, April.
    16. Frédéric Branger & Misato Sato, 2017. "Solving the clinker dilemma with hybrid output-based allocation," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 140(3), pages 483-501, February.
    17. Xenophon, Aleksis Kazubiernis & Hill, David John, 2019. "Emissions reduction and wholesale electricity price targeting using an output-based mechanism," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 242(C), pages 1050-1063.
    18. Fischer, Carolyn, 2004. "Are Absolute Emissions Better for Modeling? It's All Relative," Discussion Papers dp-04-14, Resources For the Future.
    19. Meunier, Guy & Montero, Juan-Pablo & Ponssard, Jean-Pierre, 2018. "Output-based allocations in pollution markets with uncertainty and self-selection," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 832-851.
    20. Philippe Quirion, 2021. "Output-Based Allocation and Output-Based Rebates: A survey," Working Papers 2021.03, FAERE - French Association of Environmental and Resource Economists.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    emission payments; carbon tax; refunding; CO2; NOX; policy design;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q28 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Government Policy
    • Q25 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Water
    • H23 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Externalities; Redistributive Effects; Environmental Taxes and Subsidies

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:_8364. 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: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.html .

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