{"title":"向住户退还二氧化碳排放配额价值的方案","authors":"D. Burtraw, I. Parry","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1767411","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper examines alternative ways that the value of CO2 emissions allowances created under cap-and-trade policy could be returned to households. One approach (based on principles of economic efficiency) is effectively a “tax shift” that would use revenues from an auction of CO2 emissions allowances to reduce preexisting distortionary taxes. A second approach (based on principles of property rights for common-pool resources), known as cap-and-dividend, would refund allowance value as equal lump-sum cash transfers to households. Economic theory suggests (with some caveats) that a tax shift would be considerably less costly to the overall economy. In contrast, cap-and-dividend provides ample compensation for low-income households, though it appears to be more costly than other approaches, including perhaps well-designed regulatory policies. A dividend approach might be combined with other policies to provide incentives for households to invest in energy-efficient technologies and thereby lower the costs of the carbon policy.","PeriodicalId":176966,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Externalities; Redistributive Effects; Environmental Taxes & Subsidies (Topic)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Options for Returning the Value of CO2 Emissions Allowances to Households\",\"authors\":\"D. Burtraw, I. Parry\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.1767411\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper examines alternative ways that the value of CO2 emissions allowances created under cap-and-trade policy could be returned to households. One approach (based on principles of economic efficiency) is effectively a “tax shift” that would use revenues from an auction of CO2 emissions allowances to reduce preexisting distortionary taxes. A second approach (based on principles of property rights for common-pool resources), known as cap-and-dividend, would refund allowance value as equal lump-sum cash transfers to households. Economic theory suggests (with some caveats) that a tax shift would be considerably less costly to the overall economy. In contrast, cap-and-dividend provides ample compensation for low-income households, though it appears to be more costly than other approaches, including perhaps well-designed regulatory policies. A dividend approach might be combined with other policies to provide incentives for households to invest in energy-efficient technologies and thereby lower the costs of the carbon policy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":176966,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ERN: Externalities; Redistributive Effects; Environmental Taxes & Subsidies (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-02-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ERN: Externalities; Redistributive Effects; Environmental Taxes & Subsidies (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1767411\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERN: Externalities; Redistributive Effects; Environmental Taxes & Subsidies (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1767411","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Options for Returning the Value of CO2 Emissions Allowances to Households
This paper examines alternative ways that the value of CO2 emissions allowances created under cap-and-trade policy could be returned to households. One approach (based on principles of economic efficiency) is effectively a “tax shift” that would use revenues from an auction of CO2 emissions allowances to reduce preexisting distortionary taxes. A second approach (based on principles of property rights for common-pool resources), known as cap-and-dividend, would refund allowance value as equal lump-sum cash transfers to households. Economic theory suggests (with some caveats) that a tax shift would be considerably less costly to the overall economy. In contrast, cap-and-dividend provides ample compensation for low-income households, though it appears to be more costly than other approaches, including perhaps well-designed regulatory policies. A dividend approach might be combined with other policies to provide incentives for households to invest in energy-efficient technologies and thereby lower the costs of the carbon policy.