IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/uwo/epuwoc/20093.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How Large are the Impacts of Carbon Motivated Border Tax Adjustments?

Author

Abstract

This paper discusses the size of impact of carbon motivated border tax adjustments on world trade. We report numerical simulation results which suggest that impacts on welfare, trade, and emissions will likely be small. This is because proposed measures use carbon emissions in the importing country in producing goods similar to imports rather than carbon content in calculating the size of barriers. Moreover, because border adjustments involve both tariffs and export rebates, it is the differences in emissions intensity across sector rather than emissions level which matters. Where there is no difference in emissions intensities across sectors, Lerner symmetry holds for the border adjustment and no relative effects occur. In our numerical simulation analyses border tax adjustments accompany carbon emission reduction commitments made either unilaterally , or as part of a global treaty and to be applied against non signatories. We use a four-region (US, EU, China, ROW) general equilibrium structure which captures energy trade and has endogenously determined energy supply so that global emissions can change with policy changes. We calibrate our model to 2006 data and analyze the potential impacts of both EU and US carbon pricing at various levels, either along with or without carbon motivated BTAs policies on welfare, emissions, trade flows and production. Results indicate only small impacts of these measures on global emissions, trade and welfare, but the signs of effects are as expected. BTAs alleviate leakage effects as expected. In trade impacts, compared with no BTAs, BTAs reduce imports of committing countries, and increase imports by other countries. EU and US BTAs against China reduce exports by China. With BTAs, the value of production in the country with carbon reduction measures are introduced increases, and other country’s production decreases compared with the case of no BTAs. With the contraction of world trade flows caused by the financial crisis, carbon motivated BTAs offer a prospect of a compounding effect in a world which is going protectionist and decarbonized at the same time, but the added effects of BTAs seems small.

Suggested Citation

  • Yan Dong & John Whalley, 2009. "How Large are the Impacts of Carbon Motivated Border Tax Adjustments?," University of Western Ontario, Economic Policy Research Institute Working Papers 20093, University of Western Ontario, Economic Policy Research Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:uwo:epuwoc:20093
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1054&context=economicsepri_wp
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Aaditya Mattoo & Arvind Subramanian & Dominique van der Mensbrugghe & Jianwu He, 2009. "Reconciling Climate Change and Trade Policy," Working Papers 189, Center for Global Development.
    2. Susanne Dröge & Claudia Kemfert, 2005. "Trade Policy to Control Climate Change: Does the Stick Beat the Carrot?," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 74(2), pages 235-248.
    3. Philippe Quirion & Damien Demailly, 2006. "Leakage from climate policies and border tax adjustment:lessons from a geographic model of the cement industry," CIRED Working Papers halshs-00009337, HAL.
    4. Weber, Christopher L. & Peters, Glen P., 2009. "Climate change policy and international trade: Policy considerations in the US," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 432-440, February.
    5. Whalley, John, 1979. "Uniform domestic tax rates, trade distortions and economic integration," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 213-221, March.
    6. Fischer, Carolyn & Fox, Alan K., 2009. "Comparing Policies to Combat Emissions Leakage: Border Tax Adjustments versus Rebates," RFF Working Paper Series dp-09-02, Resources for the Future.
    7. Shoven, John B & Whalley, John, 1984. "Applied General-Equilibrium Models of Taxation and International Trade: An Introduction and Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 22(3), pages 1007-1051, September.
    8. repec:bla:econom:v:39:y:1972:i:156:p:357-82 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Ben Lockwood & John Whalley, 2010. "Carbon‐motivated Border Tax Adjustments: Old Wine in Green Bottles?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(6), pages 810-819, June.
    10. Ben Lockwood & David Meza & Gareth Myles, 1994. "When are origin and destination regimes equivalent?," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 1(1), pages 5-24, February.
    11. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Yan Dong & John Walley, 2012. "How Large Are The Impacts Of Carbon Motivated Border Tax Adjustments?," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 3(01), pages 1-28.
    2. Ben Lockwood & John Whalley, 2010. "Carbon‐motivated Border Tax Adjustments: Old Wine in Green Bottles?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(6), pages 810-819, June.
    3. Aaditya Mattoo & Arvind Subramanian & Dominique Mensbrugghe & Jianwu He, 2013. "Trade effects of alternative carbon border-tax schemes," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 149(3), pages 587-609, September.
    4. Böhringer, Christoph & Fischer, Carolyn & Rosendahl, Knut Einar, 2014. "Cost-effective unilateral climate policy design: Size matters," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 318-339.
    5. Eyland, Terry & Zaccour, Georges, 2014. "Carbon tariffs and cooperative outcomes," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 718-728.
    6. Buiter, Willem H., 2017. "Exchange rate implications of Border Tax Adjustment neutrality," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 11, pages 1-41.
    7. Monjon, Stéphanie & Quirion, Philippe, 2010. "How to design a border adjustment for the European Union Emissions Trading System?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 5199-5207, September.
    8. Christoph Böhringer & Jared C. Carbone & Thomas F. Rutherford, 2018. "Embodied Carbon Tariffs," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 120(1), pages 183-210, January.
    9. Sheldon, Ian M., 2010. "Climate Policy and Border Tax Adjustments: Some New Wine Mixed with Old Wine in New Green Bottles?," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 11(1), pages 1-27, May.
    10. Carol McAusland & Nouri Najjar, 2015. "Carbon Footprint Taxes," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 61(1), pages 37-70, May.
    11. Li, Aijun & Zhang, Aizhen, 2012. "Will carbon motivated border tax adjustments function as a threat?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 81-90.
    12. Ghosh, Madanmohan & Luo, Deming & Siddiqui, Muhammad Shahid & Zhu, Yunfa, 2012. "Border tax adjustments in the climate policy context: CO2 versus broad-based GHG emission targeting," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(S2), pages 154-167.
    13. Bao, Qin & Tang, Ling & Zhang, ZhongXiang & Wang, Shouyang, 2013. "Impacts of border carbon adjustments on China's sectoral emissions: Simulations with a dynamic computable general equilibrium model," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 77-94.
    14. Misato Sato, 2014. "Embodied Carbon In Trade: A Survey Of The Empirical Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 831-861, December.
    15. Stibniati Atmadja & Louis Verchot, 2012. "A review of the state of research, policies and strategies in addressing leakage from reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+)," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 311-336, March.
    16. R. Seymore & M. Mabugu & J. H. van Heerden, 2012. "The Welfare Effects of Reversed Border Tax Adjustments as a Remedy under Unilateral Environmental Taxation," Energy & Environment, , vol. 23(8), pages 1209-1220, December.
    17. Winchester Niven & Paltsev Sergey & Reilly John M, 2011. "Will Border Carbon Adjustments Work?," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 1-29, January.
    18. Lin, Boqiang & Li, Aijun, 2011. "Impacts of carbon motivated border tax adjustments on competitiveness across regions in China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 5111-5118.
    19. Ian Sheldon & Steve McCorriston, 2012. "Climate policy and border tax adjustments: Might industrial organization matter?," EconoQuantum, Revista de Economia y Finanzas, Universidad de Guadalajara, Centro Universitario de Ciencias Economico Administrativas, Departamento de Metodos Cuantitativos y Maestria en Economia., vol. 9(2), pages 7-28, Julio-Dic.
    20. Sakai, Marco & Barrett, John, 2016. "Border carbon adjustments: Addressing emissions embodied in trade," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 102-110.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F18 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade and Environment
    • F53 - International Economics - - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy - - - International Agreements and Observance; International Organizations

    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:uwo:epuwoc:20093. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://economics.uwo.ca/research/research_papers/epri_workingpapers.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.