THE ROLE of BORDER CARBON ADJUSTMENTS in A U.S. CARBON TAX

Warwick J. McKibbin, Adele C. Morris, Peter Wilcoxen, Weifeng Liu

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This paper examines carbon tax design options in the United States using an intertemporal computable general equilibrium model of the world economy called G-Cubed. In this paper, we discuss four policy scenarios that explore two overarching issues: (1) the effects of a carbon tax under alternative assumptions about the use of the resulting revenue, and (2) the effects of a system of import charges on carbon-intensive goods ("border carbon adjustments" or BCAs). Consistent with earlier studies, we find that the carbon tax raises considerable revenue and reduces CO2 emissions significantly relative to baseline, no matter how the revenue is used. Gross annual revenue from the carbon tax with lump sum rebating and no BCA begins at 110 billion in 2020 and rises gradually to 170 billion in 2040. By 2040, annual CO2 emissions fall from 5.5 billion metric tons (BMT) under the baseline to 2.4 BMT, a decline of 3.1 BMT, or 57%. Cumulative emissions over 2020 to 2040 fall by 48 BMT. Also consistent with earlier studies, we find that the carbon tax has very small overall impacts on gross domestic product (GDP), wages, employment, and consumption. Different uses of the revenue from the carbon tax result in slightly different levels and compositions of GDP across consumption, investment and net exports. Overall, using carbon tax revenue to reduce the capital income tax rate results in better macroeconomic outcomes than using the revenue for lump sum transfers. Counter to their purported purpose of protecting U.S. trade strength, for a given revenue policy, BCAs tend to produce lower net exports than the carbon taxes alone. This is generally because the BCAs raise the value of the dollar relative to other currencies, thus lowering exports more than they lower imports. This is consistent with standard results in the international trade literature on the effects of import tariffs and export subsidies on real exchange rates, a result that is often overlooked in the discussion of domestic carbon policy. In a finding new to the literature, our results show that BCAs can have strikingly different effects depending on the use of the revenue. Under a lump sum rebate, BCAs exacerbate the impact of the carbon tax by lowering domestic output further than it would fall under the carbon tax alone. Under a capital tax swap, however, BCAs have a moderating effect: they reduce the impact of the tax on most industries.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number1840011
JournalClimate Change Economics
Volume9
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 1 2018

Fingerprint

pollution tax
import
Gross Domestic Product
carbon
Carbon tax
real exchange rate
computable general equilibrium analysis
Revenue
currency
international trade
macroeconomics
wage
effect

Keywords

  • border carbon adjustment
  • Carbon tax
  • climate policy
  • G-Cubed model

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Global and Planetary Change
  • Economics and Econometrics
  • Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

Cite this

THE ROLE of BORDER CARBON ADJUSTMENTS in A U.S. CARBON TAX. / McKibbin, Warwick J.; Morris, Adele C.; Wilcoxen, Peter; Liu, Weifeng.

In: Climate Change Economics, Vol. 9, No. 1, 1840011, 01.02.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

McKibbin, Warwick J. ; Morris, Adele C. ; Wilcoxen, Peter ; Liu, Weifeng. / THE ROLE of BORDER CARBON ADJUSTMENTS in A U.S. CARBON TAX. In: Climate Change Economics. 2018 ; Vol. 9, No. 1.
@article{e7012f63015d41259b9ea2f9bace2b79,
title = "THE ROLE of BORDER CARBON ADJUSTMENTS in A U.S. CARBON TAX",
abstract = "This paper examines carbon tax design options in the United States using an intertemporal computable general equilibrium model of the world economy called G-Cubed. In this paper, we discuss four policy scenarios that explore two overarching issues: (1) the effects of a carbon tax under alternative assumptions about the use of the resulting revenue, and (2) the effects of a system of import charges on carbon-intensive goods ({"}border carbon adjustments{"} or BCAs). Consistent with earlier studies, we find that the carbon tax raises considerable revenue and reduces CO2 emissions significantly relative to baseline, no matter how the revenue is used. Gross annual revenue from the carbon tax with lump sum rebating and no BCA begins at 110 billion in 2020 and rises gradually to 170 billion in 2040. By 2040, annual CO2 emissions fall from 5.5 billion metric tons (BMT) under the baseline to 2.4 BMT, a decline of 3.1 BMT, or 57{\%}. Cumulative emissions over 2020 to 2040 fall by 48 BMT. Also consistent with earlier studies, we find that the carbon tax has very small overall impacts on gross domestic product (GDP), wages, employment, and consumption. Different uses of the revenue from the carbon tax result in slightly different levels and compositions of GDP across consumption, investment and net exports. Overall, using carbon tax revenue to reduce the capital income tax rate results in better macroeconomic outcomes than using the revenue for lump sum transfers. Counter to their purported purpose of protecting U.S. trade strength, for a given revenue policy, BCAs tend to produce lower net exports than the carbon taxes alone. This is generally because the BCAs raise the value of the dollar relative to other currencies, thus lowering exports more than they lower imports. This is consistent with standard results in the international trade literature on the effects of import tariffs and export subsidies on real exchange rates, a result that is often overlooked in the discussion of domestic carbon policy. In a finding new to the literature, our results show that BCAs can have strikingly different effects depending on the use of the revenue. Under a lump sum rebate, BCAs exacerbate the impact of the carbon tax by lowering domestic output further than it would fall under the carbon tax alone. Under a capital tax swap, however, BCAs have a moderating effect: they reduce the impact of the tax on most industries.",
keywords = "border carbon adjustment, Carbon tax, climate policy, G-Cubed model",
author = "McKibbin, {Warwick J.} and Morris, {Adele C.} and Peter Wilcoxen and Weifeng Liu",
year = "2018",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1142/S2010007818400110",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "9",
journal = "Climate Change Economics",
issn = "2010-0078",
publisher = "World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte Ltd",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - THE ROLE of BORDER CARBON ADJUSTMENTS in A U.S. CARBON TAX

AU - McKibbin, Warwick J.

AU - Morris, Adele C.

AU - Wilcoxen, Peter

AU - Liu, Weifeng

PY - 2018/2/1

Y1 - 2018/2/1

N2 - This paper examines carbon tax design options in the United States using an intertemporal computable general equilibrium model of the world economy called G-Cubed. In this paper, we discuss four policy scenarios that explore two overarching issues: (1) the effects of a carbon tax under alternative assumptions about the use of the resulting revenue, and (2) the effects of a system of import charges on carbon-intensive goods ("border carbon adjustments" or BCAs). Consistent with earlier studies, we find that the carbon tax raises considerable revenue and reduces CO2 emissions significantly relative to baseline, no matter how the revenue is used. Gross annual revenue from the carbon tax with lump sum rebating and no BCA begins at 110 billion in 2020 and rises gradually to 170 billion in 2040. By 2040, annual CO2 emissions fall from 5.5 billion metric tons (BMT) under the baseline to 2.4 BMT, a decline of 3.1 BMT, or 57%. Cumulative emissions over 2020 to 2040 fall by 48 BMT. Also consistent with earlier studies, we find that the carbon tax has very small overall impacts on gross domestic product (GDP), wages, employment, and consumption. Different uses of the revenue from the carbon tax result in slightly different levels and compositions of GDP across consumption, investment and net exports. Overall, using carbon tax revenue to reduce the capital income tax rate results in better macroeconomic outcomes than using the revenue for lump sum transfers. Counter to their purported purpose of protecting U.S. trade strength, for a given revenue policy, BCAs tend to produce lower net exports than the carbon taxes alone. This is generally because the BCAs raise the value of the dollar relative to other currencies, thus lowering exports more than they lower imports. This is consistent with standard results in the international trade literature on the effects of import tariffs and export subsidies on real exchange rates, a result that is often overlooked in the discussion of domestic carbon policy. In a finding new to the literature, our results show that BCAs can have strikingly different effects depending on the use of the revenue. Under a lump sum rebate, BCAs exacerbate the impact of the carbon tax by lowering domestic output further than it would fall under the carbon tax alone. Under a capital tax swap, however, BCAs have a moderating effect: they reduce the impact of the tax on most industries.

AB - This paper examines carbon tax design options in the United States using an intertemporal computable general equilibrium model of the world economy called G-Cubed. In this paper, we discuss four policy scenarios that explore two overarching issues: (1) the effects of a carbon tax under alternative assumptions about the use of the resulting revenue, and (2) the effects of a system of import charges on carbon-intensive goods ("border carbon adjustments" or BCAs). Consistent with earlier studies, we find that the carbon tax raises considerable revenue and reduces CO2 emissions significantly relative to baseline, no matter how the revenue is used. Gross annual revenue from the carbon tax with lump sum rebating and no BCA begins at 110 billion in 2020 and rises gradually to 170 billion in 2040. By 2040, annual CO2 emissions fall from 5.5 billion metric tons (BMT) under the baseline to 2.4 BMT, a decline of 3.1 BMT, or 57%. Cumulative emissions over 2020 to 2040 fall by 48 BMT. Also consistent with earlier studies, we find that the carbon tax has very small overall impacts on gross domestic product (GDP), wages, employment, and consumption. Different uses of the revenue from the carbon tax result in slightly different levels and compositions of GDP across consumption, investment and net exports. Overall, using carbon tax revenue to reduce the capital income tax rate results in better macroeconomic outcomes than using the revenue for lump sum transfers. Counter to their purported purpose of protecting U.S. trade strength, for a given revenue policy, BCAs tend to produce lower net exports than the carbon taxes alone. This is generally because the BCAs raise the value of the dollar relative to other currencies, thus lowering exports more than they lower imports. This is consistent with standard results in the international trade literature on the effects of import tariffs and export subsidies on real exchange rates, a result that is often overlooked in the discussion of domestic carbon policy. In a finding new to the literature, our results show that BCAs can have strikingly different effects depending on the use of the revenue. Under a lump sum rebate, BCAs exacerbate the impact of the carbon tax by lowering domestic output further than it would fall under the carbon tax alone. Under a capital tax swap, however, BCAs have a moderating effect: they reduce the impact of the tax on most industries.

KW - border carbon adjustment

KW - Carbon tax

KW - climate policy

KW - G-Cubed model

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85044333357&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85044333357&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1142/S2010007818400110

DO - 10.1142/S2010007818400110

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85044333357

VL - 9

JO - Climate Change Economics

JF - Climate Change Economics

SN - 2010-0078

IS - 1

M1 - 1840011

ER -