Is carbon pricing regressive? Insights from a recursive-dynamic CGE analysis with heterogeneous households for Austria
通过递归动态CGE模型分析奥地利非ETS部门碳定价的宏观与分配效应，发现无补偿时碳定价是累进的，低收入家庭因公共品供给增加而福利改善，并比较了不同收入使用方案的公平性。
We explore the macroeconomic and distributional impacts of unilateral carbon pricing in Austrian economic sectors, which are not covered by the EU emission trading scheme ETS, under various assumptions of revenue usage. We use a recursive-dynamic computable general equilibrium model with twelve groups of private households, differentiated by income quartile and location of residence. Pricing of non-ETS CO2 emissions without any targeted compensation of households turns out to be progressive (when measured in equivalent variation, or welfare) with households living in the periphery being affected the most. This outcome is explained by the dominating progressive factor income effect, which works against regressive consumer price impacts. Considering the positive contribution to welfare from increased public goods provision, low-income households are even better off than without carbon pricing. We compare the revenue usage options ‘no targeted compensation’ with either unconditional or revenue-neutral ‘eco-bonus per capita payments’ as well as revenue-neutral cuts in either ‘labor tax rates’ or ‘value added tax rates.’ We discuss our results from a Utilitarian, Rawlsian and polarization-averse equity perspective. Applying equal weights to the criteria ‘environmental effectiveness’, ‘cost effectiveness’, ‘public budget’ and ‘welfare’, Rawlsian decision makers would prefer the no targeted compensation option. Otherwise, the revenue usage option of revenue-neutral cuts in labor tax rates balance best investigated multiple criteria.