IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Ireland's Carbon Tax and the Fiscal Crisis: Issues in Fiscal Adjustment, Environmental Effectiveness, Competitiveness, Leakage and Equity Implications


  • Frank J. Convery

    (University College, Dublin)

  • Louise Dunne

    (University College, Dublin)

  • Deirdre Joyce

    (University College, Dublin)


Beginning in late 2008, Ireland experienced a fiscal crisis. This resulted in November 2010 in agreement between the Irish government and the European Central Bank, the European Commission and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) – known collectively as ‘the Troika’ – whereby the latter provided substantial financial support, on condition that a number of revenue raising and expenditure reduction targets were met. Also in 2010, a carbon tax at a rate of EUR 15 per tonne of CO2 was introduced, covering most CO2 emissions from the non-traded sectors (mainly transport, heat in buildings and heat and process emissions by small enterprises). This paper describes the features of the tax, recounts the story of its interplay between fiscal adjustment and helping meet the obligations to raise taxes, and implications for competitiveness and carbon leakage, environmental effectiveness and equity issues, and draws some conclusions regarding why it happened, and provides some tentative insights for other countries in a similar situation. The circumstances that resulted in a carbon tax being proposed and subsequently introduced in Ireland include: Leadership by the Green Party; limited public opposition; Government need for the income; supports the Green Economy; support from the academic and wider policy population; exemptions for large emitters (many in EU ETS) and agriculture; effective engagement and good planning... L’Irlande a connu fin 2008 une crise budgétaire qui a conduit son gouvernement à conclure, en novembre 2010, un accord avec la Banque centrale européenne, la Commission européenne et le Fonds monétaire international (FMI) – collectivement dénommés la « Troïka » – dans lequel ce dernier s’engage à lui apporter une aide financière conséquente, sous réserve qu’elle remplisse un certain nombre d’objectifs en matière de prélèvements fiscaux et de réduction des dépenses. En 2010 a été également mise en place une taxe carbone de 15 EUR par tonne de CO2, couvrant la plupart des émissions de CO2 des secteurs hors SCEQE (transport, chauffage des bâtiments et chauffage et procédés des petites entreprises, principalement). Ce rapport décrit les caractéristiques de cette taxe, relate ses interactions avec le rééquilibrage budgétaire et les obligations de prélèvements fiscaux, examine ses conséquences pour la compétitivité et le transfert d’émissions de carbone, son efficacité environnementale et les questions d’équité, et tire certaines conclusions sur les raisons qui ont poussé l’Irlande à faire ce choix, en proposant plusieurs enseignements qui pourraient se révéler utiles aux pays confrontés à une situation analogue. La taxe carbone a été proposée puis mise en oeuvre en Irlande dans un contexte bien particulier caractérisé par : le rôle moteur du Green Party ; la faible opposition du public ; un État en quête de recettes ; la promotion de l’Économie verte ; le soutien des milieux universitaires et des responsables publics en général ; l’exonération des grands émetteurs (inclus pour beaucoup dans le SCEQE) et de l’agriculture ; un réel engagement et une bonne planification...

Suggested Citation

  • Frank J. Convery & Louise Dunne & Deirdre Joyce, 2013. "Ireland's Carbon Tax and the Fiscal Crisis: Issues in Fiscal Adjustment, Environmental Effectiveness, Competitiveness, Leakage and Equity Implications," OECD Environment Working Papers 59, OECD Publishing.
  • Handle: RePEc:oec:envaaa:59-en

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Daron Acemoglu & Philippe Aghion & Leonardo Bursztyn & David Hemous, 2012. "The Environment and Directed Technical Change," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(1), pages 131-166, February.
    2. Eric Malm, 1996. "An Actions-Based Estimate of the Free Rider Fraction in Electric Utility DSM Programs," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3), pages 41-48.
    3. Aalbers, Rob & van der Heijden, Eline & Potters, Jan & van Soest, Daan & Vollebergh, Herman, 2009. "Technology adoption subsidies: An experiment with managers," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 431-442, May.
    4. Popp, David & Newell, Richard G. & Jaffe, Adam B., 2010. "Energy, the Environment, and Technological Change," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, Elsevier.
    5. DeCanio, Stephen J. & Watkins, William E., 1998. "Information processing and organizational structure," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 275-294, August.
    6. Glenn Jenkins & RANJIT LAMECH, 1992. "Fiscal Policies To Control Pollution: International Experience," Development Discussion Papers 1992-01, JDI Executive Programs.
    7. Frank J. Convery, 2011. "Reflections--Energy Efficiency Literature for Those in the Policy Process," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 5(1), pages 172-191, Winter.
    8. Franz Wirl, 2000. "Lessons from Utility Conservation Programs," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1), pages 87-108.
    9. 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.
    10. Vollebergh, Herman R.J., 2008. "Lessons from the polder: Energy tax design in The Netherlands from a climate change perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 660-672, January.
    11. Baumol,William J. & Oates,Wallace E., 1988. "The Theory of Environmental Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521322249, March.
    12. Franz Wirl & Wolfgang Orasch, 1998. "Analysis of United States' Utility Conservation Programs," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 13(4), pages 467-486, August.
    13. van Soest, Daan P., 2005. "The impact of environmental policy instruments on the timing of adoption of energy-saving technologies," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 235-247, October.
    14. Don Fullerton & Ann Wolverton, 1997. "The Case for a Two-Part Instrument: Presumptive Tax and Environmental Subsidy," NBER Working Papers 5993, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Joëlle Noailly & Svetlana Batrakova & Ruslan Lukach, 2010. "Home green home; a case study of inducing energy-efficient innovations in the Dutch building sector," CPB Document 198, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    ajustement budgétaire; carbon tax; enseignements pour l’action; fiscal adjustment; policy lessons; taxe carbone;

    JEL classification:

    • P48 - Economic Systems - - Other Economic Systems - - - Political Economy; Legal Institutions; Property Rights; Natural Resources; Energy; Environment; Regional Studies
    • Q38 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Nonrenewable Resources and Conservation - - - Government Policy (includes OPEC Policy)
    • Q48 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Government Policy
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:oec:envaaa:59-en. 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: .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.