当前位置: X-MOL 学术Int. Tax Public Financ. › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
The case for subsidizing harm: constrained and costly Pigouvian taxation with multiple externalities
International Tax and Public Finance ( IF 1.289 ) Pub Date : 2021-06-05 , DOI: 10.1007/s10797-021-09670-5
Daniel Jaqua , Daniel Schaffa

Many activities are subsidized despite generating negative externalities. Examples include needle exchanges and energy production subsidies. We explain this phenomenon by developing a model in which the policymaker faces constraints or costs. We highlight three examples. First, it may be optimal to subsidize a harmful activity if the policymaker cannot set the first-best tax on an externally harmful substitute. Second, it may be optimal to subsidize a harmful production process if the activity mix at lower levels of output uses more harmful activities than the activity mix at higher levels of output. Third, it may be optimal to subsidize a harmful activity if there is a large administrative cost associated with taxing a harmful substitute. We also show how the functional form of the cost of administering a Pigouvian tax affects the optimal tax. When administrative cost is a function of only tax rates, the policymaker should tax each activity. However, an increase in the tax presents a trade-off: lower externality but higher administrative cost. A subsidy may be optimal for some externally harmful activities. When administrative cost is a function of only activity levels, it may not be optimal to tax every activity. If it is optimal to tax each activity, the policymaker should set the tax equal to the externality plus the marginal administrative cost. If it is not optimal to tax every activity, the complementarity between activities comes into play, and it may be optimal to subsidize externally harmful activities.



中文翻译:

补贴损害的理由:具有多重外部性的受约束且代价高昂的庇古税

尽管产生了负外部性,但许多活动仍得到补贴。例子包括针头交换和能源生产补贴。我们通过开发一个决策者面临约束或成本的模型来解释这种现象。我们强调三个例子。首先,如果政策制定者不能对外部有害的替代品设定最佳税收,则补贴有害活动可能是最佳选择。其次,如果较低产出水平的活动组合比较高产出水平的活动组合使用更多有害活动,则补贴有害生产过程可能是最佳的。第三,如果对有害替代品征税会产生大量行政成本,则补贴有害活动可能是最佳选择。我们还展示了管理庇古税的成本的函数形式如何影响最优税收。当行政成本仅是税率的函数时,政策制定者应对每项活动征税。然而,增加税收带来了一种权衡:较低的外部性但较高的管理成本。对于某些外部有害活动,补贴可能是最佳的。当行政成本仅是活动水平的函数时,对每项活动征税可能不是最佳选择。如果对每项活动征税是最优的,决策者应该将税收设置为等于外部性加上边际行政成本。如果不是对每项活动都征税,那么活动之间的互补性就会发挥作用,而补贴外部有害活动可能是最佳选择。较低的外部性但较高的管理成本。对于某些外部有害活动,补贴可能是最佳的。当行政成本仅是活动水平的函数时,对每项活动征税可能不是最佳选择。如果对每项活动征税是最优的,决策者应该将税收设置为等于外部性加上边际行政成本。如果不是对每项活动都征税,那么活动之间的互补性就会发挥作用,而补贴外部有害活动可能是最佳选择。较低的外部性但较高的管理成本。对于某些外部有害活动,补贴可能是最佳的。当行政成本仅是活动水平的函数时,对每项活动征税可能不是最佳选择。如果对每项活动征税是最优的,决策者应该将税收设置为等于外部性加上边际行政成本。如果不是对每项活动都征税,那么活动之间的互补性就会发挥作用,而补贴外部有害活动可能是最佳选择。政策制定者应该将税收设置为等于外部性加上边际行政成本。如果不是对每项活动都征税,那么活动之间的互补性就会发挥作用,而补贴外部有害活动可能是最佳选择。政策制定者应该将税收设置为等于外部性加上边际行政成本。如果不是对每项活动都征税,那么活动之间的互补性就会发挥作用,而补贴外部有害活动可能是最佳选择。

更新日期:2021-06-05
down
wechat
bug