Gøril L. Andreassen , Steffen Kallbekken , Knut Einar Rosendahl
{"title":"政策组合能否帮助克服皮古夫避税效应?税收与补贴相结合的实验室实验","authors":"Gøril L. Andreassen , Steffen Kallbekken , Knut Einar Rosendahl","doi":"10.1016/j.jeem.2024.103010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Tax aversion makes it politically challenging to introduce Pigouvian taxes. One proposed solution to overcome this resistance is to package policies. Using an online lab experiment, we investigate whether combining a tax and a subsidy is perceived as more acceptable than the tax or the subsidy alone. The purpose of the policies is to reduce demand for a good with a negative externality to the socially optimal level. We find that support for a combination of a tax and a subsidy equals the simple average of support for the two instruments alone. Combining a tax and a subsidy therefore does not reduce tax aversion. We examine potential mechanisms behind the tax aversion. Participants believe they will receive a lower share of the tax revenue when the tax is implemented alone than when it is combined with a subsidy, i.e. the participants in the tax alone group hold more pessimistic beliefs about the tax revenue. We also find that the participants expect the tax to be more effective in reducing demand for the good with a negative externality than both the subsidy alone and the combinations of tax and subsidy. This belief does not, however, translate into support for the tax.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":15763,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Economics and Management","volume":"127 ","pages":"Article 103010"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0095069624000846/pdfft?md5=26d189f28591006f53ada590d92c9f00&pid=1-s2.0-S0095069624000846-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Can policy packaging help overcome Pigouvian tax aversion? A lab experiment on combining taxes and subsidies\",\"authors\":\"Gøril L. Andreassen , Steffen Kallbekken , Knut Einar Rosendahl\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jeem.2024.103010\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Tax aversion makes it politically challenging to introduce Pigouvian taxes. One proposed solution to overcome this resistance is to package policies. Using an online lab experiment, we investigate whether combining a tax and a subsidy is perceived as more acceptable than the tax or the subsidy alone. The purpose of the policies is to reduce demand for a good with a negative externality to the socially optimal level. We find that support for a combination of a tax and a subsidy equals the simple average of support for the two instruments alone. Combining a tax and a subsidy therefore does not reduce tax aversion. We examine potential mechanisms behind the tax aversion. Participants believe they will receive a lower share of the tax revenue when the tax is implemented alone than when it is combined with a subsidy, i.e. the participants in the tax alone group hold more pessimistic beliefs about the tax revenue. We also find that the participants expect the tax to be more effective in reducing demand for the good with a negative externality than both the subsidy alone and the combinations of tax and subsidy. This belief does not, however, translate into support for the tax.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15763,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Environmental Economics and Management\",\"volume\":\"127 \",\"pages\":\"Article 103010\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0095069624000846/pdfft?md5=26d189f28591006f53ada590d92c9f00&pid=1-s2.0-S0095069624000846-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Environmental Economics and Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0095069624000846\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Environmental Economics and Management","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0095069624000846","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Can policy packaging help overcome Pigouvian tax aversion? A lab experiment on combining taxes and subsidies
Tax aversion makes it politically challenging to introduce Pigouvian taxes. One proposed solution to overcome this resistance is to package policies. Using an online lab experiment, we investigate whether combining a tax and a subsidy is perceived as more acceptable than the tax or the subsidy alone. The purpose of the policies is to reduce demand for a good with a negative externality to the socially optimal level. We find that support for a combination of a tax and a subsidy equals the simple average of support for the two instruments alone. Combining a tax and a subsidy therefore does not reduce tax aversion. We examine potential mechanisms behind the tax aversion. Participants believe they will receive a lower share of the tax revenue when the tax is implemented alone than when it is combined with a subsidy, i.e. the participants in the tax alone group hold more pessimistic beliefs about the tax revenue. We also find that the participants expect the tax to be more effective in reducing demand for the good with a negative externality than both the subsidy alone and the combinations of tax and subsidy. This belief does not, however, translate into support for the tax.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Environmental Economics and Management publishes theoretical and empirical papers devoted to specific natural resources and environmental issues. For consideration, papers should (1) contain a substantial element embodying the linkage between economic systems and environmental and natural resources systems or (2) be of substantial importance in understanding the management and/or social control of the economy in its relations with the natural environment. Although the general orientation of the journal is toward economics, interdisciplinary papers by researchers in other fields of interest to resource and environmental economists will be welcomed.