RES-ECON 162 Lecture 14: Res econ 262- 4:13
Premium

3 Pages
30 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Resource Economics
Course
RES-ECON 162
Professor
Laurence De Geeste
Semester
Spring

Description
Res econ 262- 4/13/17 Suppose we have only one source of emissions. We will see that if the firm faces an emissions tax, its incentive to adopt a new cost-saving abatement technology is much greater than when it faces an emissions standard. This is another reason that economists tend to favor emissions taxes over standards. If the regulator leaves the tax alone after the firm adopts the new technology, the firm will reduce 0 its emissions to E . Its costs of compliance (abatement costs plus the tax payment) Compare this to its cost-savings of adopting the new technology if it faced a fixed emissions standard E*. This would be only area a in the graph. We conclude that a fixed emissions tax provides a greater incentive for the firm to adopt a new technology than a fixed emissions standard. The main reason for this conclusion is that the firm has an incentive to reduce its emissions under a tax when its abatement costs are lower, but it doesn’t when it faces a fixed emissions standard. Note that leaving the tax unchanged after the firm adopts the new technology will not be efficient. In the graph below the regulator reduces the tax to its new efficient level, t**, after the firm adopts the new technology. The firm responds by choosing emissions, E**. Note that the firm’s cost-savings from adopting the new technology is increased to a + c + d + e when the regulator reacts to the adoption of the new technology with a lower tax. Go back to this section of the lecture on Command and Control Standards to remind yourself of the cost-savings from adopting the new technology when the firm faced efficient emissions standards. This is area a – b, and we concluded that the firm may not have an incentive to adopt the new technology. * The primary point here is that a firm’s incentive to adopt a new technology is greater under an emissions tax than under an emissions standard. We could treat the revenues from emissions taxes as a mere transfer from one part of an economy (polluters) to another (the government and the public). If this is true then these revenues generate neither social benefits or costs Double dividend- an emission tax that will reduce pollution and the emissions tax revenues can be used to reduce other taxes in an economy like income taxes. 1. The primary welfare effect is the value of emissions reductions. 2. The revenue-recycling effect occurs when the revenue generated by taxes is used to reduced the marginal rates of pre-existing taxes(on labor and capitol) 3. The tax interaction effect- an indirect cost of environmental regulations Environmental regulation→ higher production costs in regulated industries → higher prices for goods supplied by these industries → higher prices for consumption goods generally → lower real wages → reduced labor supply. Bottom line about revenue recycling Economy-wide cost of emissions control can be reduced if the policy generates public revenue, and this revenue is used to reduce other taxes that discourage productivity (i.e., labor and capital taxes). However, using emissions tax revenue to reduce tax rates woul
More Less

Related notes for RES-ECON 162

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit