Feasibility analysis of China’s carbon taxation policy responding to the carbon tariff scheme of USA
- 4 Downloads
Aimed at determining whether China’s active carbon emission reduction policy can respond to the threat of carbon tariff of the USA, this study proposed two kinds of carbon tax schemes for the USA and China, same carbon tax policy and a differential carbon tax policy. Four scenarios are set: the USA only charging carbon tax on domestic products; the USA charging carbon tax on domestic products and carbon tariff on imported products from China; the USA and China taking the same carbon tax policy on domestic products; the USA and China taking the differential carbon tax policy on their domestic products. Global Trade Analysis Project Energy model is applied to discuss whether China’s active measure to reduce carbon emissions can be an effective solution to the threat of carbon tariff of the USA. The research results show that China’s active measure of the same carbon tax policy as the USA is not effective to cope with carbon tariff of the USA. However, it is an effective measure to take a differential carbon tax policy. The specific policy implications of the study are discussed in conclusion.
KeywordsCarbon tariff GTAP-E model Active carbon emission reduction Differential carbon policy
This research is supported by the National Natural Science Fund (71572071), the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation funded Project (2015M571708), the Research and Practice Project of Teaching Reform of Graduate Education in Jiangsu Province (JGZZ1_056), the Advanced Talent Project of Jiangsu University (09JDG050 and 14JDG202) and the Postgraduate Research and Practice Innovation Program of Jiangsu Province (KYCX17_1742).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.
- 2.Matthias M (2009) Germany calls carbon tariffs “eco-imperialism”[EB/OL]. http://www.Reuters.com/article/2009/07/24/us-germany-tariffs-idUSTRE56N1RJ20090724
- 3.Bordoff J (2008) The threat to free trade posed by climate change policy. Geneva Trade and Development ForumGoogle Scholar
- 5.Mckibbin WJ, Wilcoxen PJ, Braathen NA, Levinson A (2008) The economic and environmental effects of border tax adjustments for climate policy [with comments]. Brook Trade Forum 2008(2008):1–34Google Scholar
- 8.Dong Y, Whalley J (2011) Carbon motivated regional trade arrangements: analytics and simulations. NBER Work Pap 28(6):2783–2792Google Scholar
- 9.Lee et al (2018) Review of the use of activated biochar for energy and environmental applications. Carbon Lett 26(1):1–10Google Scholar
- 13.Shao JC (2011) The protective nature of carbon tariff and its influence on the exports of developing economies. Econ Surv 04:81–85Google Scholar
- 14.Shen KT, Li G (2010) The impacts of carbon-motivated border tax adjustment to China’ s industrial exports: a CGE based analysis. Finance Trade Econ 01:75–82Google Scholar
- 15.Chen HL, Ji YY (2015) Economic effects of US-imposed carbon tariffs on sino-american trade-an empirical study based on GTAP model. Rev Econ Manag 31(03):53–59Google Scholar
- 16.Yang LQ, Ma M (2011) GTAP simulation analysis of the effect of carbon tariffs on chinese export trade. J Shanghai Univ Finance Econ 2011(5):75–81Google Scholar
- 21.Peterson EB, Schleich J (2007) Economic and environmental effects of border tax adjustments. Work Pap Sustain Innov 68(4):403–420Google Scholar
- 23.Hu GZ, Zhang L (2010) Trade and environmental effects of border carbon adjustment based on partial equilibrium. Int Econ Trade Res 26(11):62–67Google Scholar
- 24.Lin BQ, Li AJ (2010) The effect of carbon tariffs on developing countries. J Financ Res 12:1–15Google Scholar
- 25.Luan H, Yang J (2014) Emission reduction and economic impact of US carbon tariff on China. China Popul Resour Environ 24(01):70–77Google Scholar
- 29.Burniaux JM, Truong TP (2002) GTAP-E: an energy-environmental version of the GTAP model. GTAP technical papersGoogle Scholar