IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/dre/wpaper/2011-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Who Should Bear the Administrative Costs of an Emissions Tax?

Author

Listed:
  • John K. Stranlund

    (Department of Resource Economics, University of Massachusetts Amherst)

  • Carlos A. Chavez

    (Departmento de Economics, Universidad de Concepcion Chile)

Abstract

All environmental policies involve administrative costs, the costs of implementing and managing policies that extend beyond abatement costs. We examine theoretically the optimal distribution of these costs between the public and regulated sources of pollution. The distribution of administrative costs affects social welfare only if public funds are more expensive than private funds, or if the distribution of administrative costs affects the size of a regulated industry. If having the public take on a larger part of administrative costs increases the size of the industry and this does not lead to lower emissions for a given emissions tax, then it is optimal to make the pollution sources bear all of the administrative costs. A necessary, but not sufficient, reason for having the public bear part of the cost burden is if aggregate emissions decrease as a result.

Suggested Citation

  • John K. Stranlund & Carlos A. Chavez, 2011. "Who Should Bear the Administrative Costs of an Emissions Tax?," Working Papers 2011-3, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Department of Resource Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:dre:wpaper:2011-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://courses.umass.edu/resec/workingpapers/documents/ResEcWorkingPaper2011-3.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. William A. Brock & David S. Evans, 2001. "The Economics of Regulatory Tiering," Chapters, in: W. D. Dechert (ed.), Growth Theory, Nonlinear Dynamics and Economic Modelling, chapter 9, pages 215-226, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Marcelo Caffera & Carlos Chávez, 2011. "The Cost-Effective Choice of Policy Instruments to Cap Aggregate Emissions with Costly Enforcement," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 50(4), pages 531-557, December.
    3. Sjak Smulders & Herman R. J. Vollebergh, 2001. "Green Taxes and Administrative Costs: The Case of Carbon Taxation," NBER Chapters, in: Behavioral and Distributional Effects of Environmental Policy, pages 91-130, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Macho-Stadler, Ines & Perez-Castrillo, David, 2006. "Optimal enforcement policy and firms' emissions and compliance with environmental taxes," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 110-131, January.
    5. Tom Tietenberg, 2003. "The Tradable-Permits Approach to Protecting the Commons: Lessons for Climate Change," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 19(3), pages 400-419.
    6. Stranlund, John K. & Chávez, Carlos A. & Villena, Mauricio G., 2009. "The optimal pricing of pollution when enforcement is costly," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 183-191, September.
    7. Montero, Juan-Pablo, 2002. "Prices versus quantities with incomplete enforcement," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(3), pages 435-454, September.
    8. Cremer, Helmuth & Gahvari, Firouz, 2002. "Imperfect observability of emissions and second-best emission and output taxes," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(3), pages 385-407, September.
    9. Agnar Sandmo, 2002. "Efficient Environmental Policy with Imperfect Compliance," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 23(1), pages 85-103, September.
    10. John Stranlund, 2007. "The regulatory choice of noncompliance in emissions trading programs," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 38(1), pages 99-117, September.
    11. Schmutzler, Armin & Goulder, Lawrence H., 1997. "The Choice between Emission Taxes and Output Taxes under Imperfect Monitoring," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 51-64, January.
    12. Evans, Mary F. & Gilpatric, Scott M. & Liu, Lirong, 2009. "Regulation with direct benefits of information disclosure and imperfect monitoring," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 284-292, May.
    13. Harford, Jon D., 1978. "Firm behavior under imperfectly enforceable pollution standards and taxes," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 26-43, March.
    14. Parry Ian W. H. & Williams Roberton C., 2010. "What are the Costs of Meeting Distributional Objectives for Climate Policy?," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(2), pages 1-35, December.
    15. Steven Shavell & A. Mitchell Polinsky, 2000. "The Economic Theory of Public Enforcement of Law," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(1), pages 45-76, March.
    16. Mitchell Polinsky, A. & Shavell, Steven, 1982. "Pigouvian taxation with administrative costs," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 385-394, December.
    17. Malik, Arun S, 1992. "Enforcement Costs and the Choice of Policy Instruments for Controlling Pollution," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 30(4), pages 714-721, October.
    18. Carlo Carraro & Gilbert E. Metcalf, 2001. "Behavioral and Distributional Effects of Environmental Policy," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number carr01-1.
    19. Athanasios Kampas & Ben White, 2004. "Administrative Costs and Instrument Choice for Stochastic Non-point Source Pollutants," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 27(2), pages 109-133, February.
    20. Parry, Ian W.H. & Williams, Roberton C. III, 2010. "What Are the Costs of Meeting Distributional Objectives in Designing Domestic Climate Policy?," RFF Working Paper Series dp-10-51, Resources for the Future.
    21. Harford, Jon D., 1987. "Self-reporting of pollution and the firm's behavior under imperfectly enforceable regulations," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 293-303, September.
    22. Carmen Arguedas, 2008. "To Comply or Not To Comply? Pollution Standard Setting Under Costly Monitoring and Sanctioning," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 41(2), pages 155-168, October.
    23. repec:bla:scandj:v:97:y:1995:i:3:p:411-20 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zafer Kanik & Serkan Kucuksenel, 2013. "The Promise of Transferable Fishing Concessions on EU Fisheries," ERC Working Papers 1312, ERC - Economic Research Center, Middle East Technical University, revised Dec 2013.
    2. Kanik, Zafer & Kucuksenel, Serkan, 2014. "Transferable Fishing Concessions and EU Fisheries," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 183092, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Lenka Hyklová, 2017. "Administrative Costs of Environmental Taxes in the Czech Republic," European Financial and Accounting Journal, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2017(4), pages 19-29.

    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. Stranlund, John K. & Chávez, Carlos A. & Villena, Mauricio G., 2009. "The optimal pricing of pollution when enforcement is costly," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 183-191, September.
    2. Stranlund, John K., 2010. "Should we impose emissions taxes that firms evade?," Working Paper Series 93967, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Department of Resource Economics.
    3. Inés Macho-Stadler, 2008. "Environmental regulation: choice of instruments under imperfect compliance," Spanish Economic Review, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 10(1), pages 1-21, March.
    4. Ian MacKenzie & Markus Ohndorf, 2012. "Optimal monitoring of credit-based emissions trading under asymmetric information," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 180-203, October.
    5. Villegas, Clara & Coria, Jessica, 2009. "Taxes, Permits and the Adoption of Abatement Technology under Imperfect Compliance," Working Papers in Economics 368, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    6. Jussi Lankoski & Erik Lichtenberg & Markku Ollikainen, 2010. "Agri-Environmental Program Compliance in a Heterogeneous Landscape," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 47(1), pages 1-22, September.
    7. Stranlund, John K. & Moffitt, L. Joe, 2014. "Enforcement and price controls in emissions trading," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 20-38.
    8. Caffera, Marcelo & Chávez, Carlos & Ardente, Analía, 2018. "The deterrence effect of linear versus convex penalties in environmental policy: laboratory evidence," MPRA Paper 90946, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Pauli Lappi, 2017. "Emissions trading, non-compliance and bankable permits," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 24(6), pages 1081-1099, December.
    10. Clara Villegas-Palacio & Jessica Coria, 2010. "On the interaction between imperfect compliance and technology adoption: taxes versus tradable emissions permits," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 38(3), pages 274-291, December.
    11. Marcelo Caffera, 2017. "The deterrence effect of linear versus convex penalties in environmental policy: laboratory evidence," Documentos de Trabajo/Working Papers 1702, Facultad de Ciencias Empresariales y Economia. Universidad de Montevideo..
    12. Arguedas, Carmen & Rousseau, Sandra, 2009. "A note on the complementarity of uniform emission standards and monitoring strategies," Working Papers 2009/12, Hogeschool-Universiteit Brussel, Faculteit Economie en Management.
    13. David M. McEvoy & John K. Stranlund, 2007. "Costly Enforcement of Voluntary Environmental Agreements with Industries," Working Papers 07-15, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
    14. Marcelo Caffera & Carlos Chávez & Analia Ardente, 2013. "Does the structure of the fine matter?," Documentos de Trabajo/Working Papers 1305, Facultad de Ciencias Empresariales y Economia. Universidad de Montevideo..
    15. John Stranlund, 2007. "The regulatory choice of noncompliance in emissions trading programs," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 38(1), pages 99-117, September.
    16. Carol Luengo & Marcelo Caffera & Carlos Chávez, 2020. "Uncertain penalties and compliance: experimental evidence," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 22(2), pages 197-216, April.
    17. Carol Luengo & Marcelo Caffera & Carlos Chávez, 2014. "Uncertain Penalties and Compliance," Documentos de Trabajo/Working Papers 1407, Facultad de Ciencias Empresariales y Economia. Universidad de Montevideo..
    18. Li Xiangfei & Qin Qin & Gao Yang, 2017. "Optimal Implementation Strategy of Carbon Emission Reduction Policy Instruments in Consideration of Cost Efficiency," Journal of Systems Science and Information, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 111-127, April.
    19. Hugo Salgado & Carlos Chávez, 2016. "Using Taxes to Deter Illegal Fishing in ITQ Systems," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 64(4), pages 709-724, August.
    20. Rohling, Moritz & Ohndorf, Markus, 2012. "Prices vs. Quantities with fiscal cushioning," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 169-187.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Emissions Taxes; Pigouvian Taxes; Administrative Costs; Pollution Control;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L51 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy - - - Economics of Regulation
    • 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:

    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:dre:wpaper:2011-3. 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: Eileen Keegan (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/degraus.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.