Energy Efficiency Standards Are More Regressive Than Energy Taxes: Theory and Evidence
Energy Efficiency Standards Are More Regressive Than Energy Taxes: Theory and Evidence
复制标题
DOI：
10.1086/701186
复制
发表时间：
2019-03-01
影响因子：
3.6
通讯作者：
Levinson, Arik
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Levinson, Arik
经济学家认为税收是减少污染的一种具有成本效益的手段。但政策制定者对它们的累退性或对贫困家庭造成的不成比例的负担表示担忧，而是更愿意对能源效率进行监管。我首先表明，从理论上讲，能效标准比能源税更具累退性，而不是更少。然后，我使用美国汽车的数据提供一个示例。如果在收入等值基础上比较这两项政策，那么对天然气征税的累退性将小于对汽车燃油经济性的监管。
Economists endorse taxes as a cost-effective means of reducing pollution. But policy makers raise concerns about their regressivity, or disproportional burden on poorer families, preferring instead to regulate energy efficiency. I first show that in theory, energy efficiency standards are more regressive than energy taxes, not less. I then provide an example using data on automobiles in the United States. Taxing gas would be less regressive than regulating the fuel economy of cars if the two policies are compared on a revenue-equivalent basis.