Environmental and Resource Economics

, Volume 61, Issue 1, pp 37–70 | Cite as

Carbon Footprint Taxes



We analyze whether a carbon consumption tax is logistically feasible. We consider a carbon footprint tax (CFT), which would be modeled after a credit-method value added tax. The basis for the tax would be a product’s carbon footprint, which includes all of the emissions released during production of the good and its inputs as well as any greenhouse gases latent in the product. Our analysis suggests that a pure CFT, requiring the calculation of the carbon footprint of every individual product, may be prohibitively costly. However a hybrid CFT seems economically feasible. The hybrid CFT would give firms the option to either calculate the carbon footprint of their outputs—and have their products taxed based on those footprints—or use product-class specific default carbon footprints as the tax basis, thereby saving on calculation costs. Because the CFT would be levied on all goods consumed domestically, the CFT would keep domestic firms on an even footing with those producing in countries without active climate policy, protecting competitiveness and reducing leakage.


Carbon footprint tax Climate change World Trade Organization  Default footprints 


  1. Aichele R, Felbermayr G (2012) Kyoto and the carbon footprint of nations. J Environ Econ Manage 63:335–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andrew RM, Peters GP (2013) A multi-region input-output table based on the global trade analysis project database (GTAP-MRIO). Econ Syst Res 25(1):99–121. doi: 10.1080/09535314.2012.761953 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anonymous et al. (2013) The WTO-consistency of carbon footprint taxes. MimeoGoogle Scholar
  4. Atkinson G, Hamilton K, Ruta G, Van Der Mesnbrugghe D (2011) Trade in ‘virtual carbon’: empirical results and implications for policy. Glob Environ Change 21:563–574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Babiker MH (2005) Climate change policy, market structure, and carbon leakage. J Int Econ 65:421–445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bickley JM (2003) Value added tax: concepts, policy issues, and OECD experiences. Novinka Books, Hauppauge, NYGoogle Scholar
  7. Böhringer C, Carbone J, Rutherford T (2013) Embodied carbon tariffs. Working Paper 2013–24, Department of Economics, University of CalgaryGoogle Scholar
  8. Böhringer C, Fischer C, Rosendahl KE (2011) Cost-effective unilateral climate policy design: size matters. Resources for the Future Discussion Paper 11–34Google Scholar
  9. Böhringer C, Rutherford TF (1997) Carbon taxes with exemptions in an open economy: a general equilibrium analysis of the German tax initiative. J Environ Econ Manage 32:189–203. doi: 10.1006/jeem1996.0962 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bovenberg AL, Goulder LH (2002) Environmental taxation and regulation. In: Auerbach A, Feldstein M (eds) Handbook of Public Economics. North Holland, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  11. Brandt AR (2011) Upstream greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from Canadian oil sands as a feedstock for European Refineries. Mimeo. Retrieved 9 Nov 2012 from http://www.nupge.ca/files/publications/Environment/Brandt_EU_oilsands_Final.pdf
  12. Brewer L, Greco M, Pappas A, Schwartz Z (2011) A New Hampshire state carbon tax: an analysis of the economic and social implications. Policy Research Shop Brief. The Nelson A. Rockefeller Center at Dartmouth College, pp 1011–1006. Retrieved 15 Mar 2012 from http://rockefeller.dartmouth.edu/shop/carbon_tax_report_final.pdf
  13. Brinkley A, Less S (2010) Carbon omissions: consumption-based accounting for international carbon emissions. Policy Exchange Research Note. Retrieved 20 Dec 2012 from http://www.policyexchange.org.uk/publications/category/item/carbon-omissions-consumption-based-accounting-for-international-carbon-emissions
  14. Burnham A, Wang M, Wu Y (2006) Development and applications of GREET 2.7–the transportation vehicle-cycle model. Argonne National Laboratory, Report ANL/ESD/06-5Google Scholar
  15. Burniaux J, Lee H (2003) Modelling land use changes in GTAP. Global Trade Analysis Project (GTAP) resource #1297. Retrieved from https://www.gtap.agecon.purdue.edu/resources/res_display.asp?RecordID=1297
  16. Bushnell JB, Mansur ET (2011) Vertical targeting and leakage in carbon policy. Am Econ Rev 101(3):263–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Bushnell J, Peterman C, Wolfram C (2008) Local solutions to global problems: climate change policies and regulatory jurisdiction. Rev Environ Econ Policy 2(2):175–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. California Public Utilities Commission (2012) Renewable energy credits. Retrieved 22 Oct 2013 from http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUC/energy/Renewables/FAQs/05REcertificates.htm
  19. Commission of the European Communities (1989) A global approach to certification and testing. Quality measures for industrial products. Communication from the Commission to the European CouncilGoogle Scholar
  20. Courchene TJ, Allan JR (2008) Climate change: the case for a carbon tariff/tax. Policy Options 59–64Google Scholar
  21. Dankers C (2003) The WTO and environmental and social standards, certification and labeling in agriculture. FAO Commodity and Trade Policy Research Working Paper No. 2. Retrieved 25 Oct 2013 from http://www.cesca-world.org/downloads/WTO%20Environmental%20and%20Social%20Standards.pdf
  22. de Cendra J (2006) Can emissions trading schemes be coupled with border tax adjustments? An analysis vis-à-vis WTO law. Rev Eur Commun Int Environ Law 15(2):131–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Delucchi M (2005) A multi-country analysis of lifecycle emissions from transportation fuels and motor vehicles. Working paper number UCD-ITS-RR-05-10. Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis. Retrieved from http://escholarship.org/uc/item/1z392071.pdf
  24. Demailly D, Quirion P (2006) \(\text{ CO }_{2}\) abatement, competitiveness and leakage in the European cement industry under the EU ETS: grandfathering versus output-based allocation. Clim Policy 6(1):93–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Demaret P, Stewardson R (1994) Border tax adjustments under GATT and EC law and general implications for environmental taxes. J World Trade 28(4):5–65Google Scholar
  26. Dissou Y, Eyland T (2011) Carbon control policies, competitiveness, and border tax adjustments. Energy Econ 33:556–564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Djomo SN, Ceulemans R (2012) A comparative analysis of the carbon intensity of biofuels caused by land use changes. GCB Bioenergy 4:392–407. doi: 10.1111/j.1757-1707.2012.01176.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. European Commission (2012) Carbon leakage. Retrieved 23 Sept 2012 from http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/ets/leakage/index_en.htm
  29. European Commission (2013) CE marking—basics and FAQ. In Enterprise and Industry. Retrieved 6 Jun 2013 from http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/single-market-goods/cemarking/about-ce-marking/index_en.htm
  30. Feldstein M, Krugman P (1990) International trade effects of value-added taxation. In: Razin A, Slemrod J (eds) Taxation in the global economy. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, ILGoogle Scholar
  31. Financial Post (2012) Oil sands producers could feel squeeze in crowded market. Retrieved 8 Nov 2012 from http://business.financialpost.com/2012/08/16/oil-sands-producers-could-feel-squeeze-in-crowded-market/
  32. Fischer C (2001) Rebating environmental policy revenues: output-based allocations and tradable performance standards. Resources for the Future Discussion Paper 01–22Google Scholar
  33. Fischer C, Fox A (2009) Comparing policies to combat emissions leakage: border carbon adjustments versus rebates. Resources for the Future Discussion Paper 09–02-REVGoogle Scholar
  34. Flannery T, Beale R, Hueston G (2012) The critical decade: international action on climate change. Climate Commission Secretariat, Australian Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency. Retrieved 25 Oct 2013 from http://trid.trb.org/view.aspx?id=1216749
  35. Food and Drug Administration (1991) Regulatory impact analysis of the proposed rules to amend the food labeling regulations. Regulatory impact analysis statement. Fed Regist 56(229):60856–60877Google Scholar
  36. Food and Drug Administration (1998) Guidance for industry: nutritional labeling manual—a guide for developing and using data bases. Retrieved 21 Sept 2012 from http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/GuidanceDocuments/FoodLabelingNutrition/ucm063113.htm
  37. Food and Drug Administration (2011) Food labeling: Nutrition labeling of standard menu items in restaurants and similar retail food establishments notice of proposed rulemaking. Regulatory Impact Analysis. FDA docket no. FDA-2011-F-0172. Retrieved from http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Food/IngredientsPackagingLabeling/UCM249276.pdf
  38. GATT Panel (1987) United States—taxes on petroleum and certain imported substances (US-Superfund). Report of the Panel adopted on 17 June 1987. L/6175, BISD 34S/136Google Scholar
  39. Gielen D, Moriguchi Y (2002) CO2 in the iron and steel industry: an analysis of Japanese emission reduction potentials. Energy Policy 30:849–863CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Golub A, Hertel T, Lee HL, Rose S, Sohngen B (2009) The opportunity cost of land use and the global potential for greenhouse gas mitigation in agriculture and forestry. Res Energy Econ 31(4):299–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Government of Canada (2009) Canada Revenue Agency Snapshot 2008–2009. Retrieved 2 Nov 2012 from http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/gncy/snpsht/2008-2009/snp-sht-web-eng.pdf
  42. Government of Canada (2012) Greenhouse gas emissions. Retrieved 18 October 2013 from http://www.climatechange.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=21654B36-1
  43. Grossman G (1980) Border tax adjustments: do they distort trade? J Int Econ 10:117–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Grubb M, Neuhoff K (2006) Allocation and competitiveness in the EU emissions trading scheme: policy overview. Clim Policy 6(1):7–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. GS1 (2013) GS1 Global Registry Statistics. Global data synchronization network. Retrieved 23 October 2013 from http://www.gs1.org/sites/default/files/docs/gdsn/stats/gdsn_dp_activity.pdf
  46. Health Canada (2011) How to complete the application for a new medical device licence. Health Canada Guidance Document. Retrieved 6 June 2013 from http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/dhp-mps/md-im/applic-demande/guide-ld/md_gd_licapp_im_ld_demhom-eng.php
  47. Hillman J (2013) Changing Climate for Carbon taxes: who’s afraid of the WTO? German Marshall Fund of the United States Climate and Energy Paper SeriesGoogle Scholar
  48. HM Revenue and Customs (2012) When to register for UK VAT. Retrieved 21 September 2012 from http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/vat/start/register/when-to-register.htm
  49. Ho MS, Morgenstern R, Shih J-S (2008) Impact of carbon price policies on U.S. Industry. Resources for the Future Discussion Paper 08–37Google Scholar
  50. Hourcade J-C, Demailly D, Neuhoff K, Sato M (2007) Differentiation and dynamics of EU ETS industrial competitiveness impacts. Climate, Strategies 2007Google Scholar
  51. Houser T, Bradley R, Childs B, Werksman J, Heilmayr R (2008) Leveling the carbon playing field: international competition and US climate policy design. Peterson Institute for International Economics, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  52. Howse R, Eliason A (2009) Domestic and international strategies to address climate change: an overview of the WTO legal issues. In: Bigdeli SZ, Cottier T, Nartova O (eds) International trade regulation and the mitigation of climate change. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  53. Hufbauer G, Charnovitz S, Kim J (2009) Global warming and the world trading system. Peterson Institute for International Economics, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  54. IEA (2010) \(\text{ CO }_{2}\) Emissions from fossil fuel combustion—highlights. Paris: International Energy Agency. Accessed 18 Oct 2013 from http://www.iea.org/co2highlights/co2highlights.pdf
  55. IFOAM (2012) Criticisms and frequent misconceptions about organic agriculture: the counter-arguments. Retrieved 2 Nov 2012 from http://www.ifoam.org/growing_organic/1_arguments_for_oa/criticisms_misconceptions/misconceptions_no21.html
  56. Jakob M, Marschinski R, Hübler M (2013) Between a rock and a hard place: a trade-theory analysis of leakage under production and consumption-based policies. Environ Res Econ 56:47–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Jorgenson DW, Wilcoxen PJ (1993) Reducing US carbon dioxide emissions: an assessment of different instruments. J Policy Model 15(5&6):491–520. doi: 10.1016/0161-8938(93)90003-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Julin A (1999) ISO 9000 and the European Union. ISO 9000 + ISO 14000 News 5:8–16. Retrieved from www.iso.org/iso/livelinkgetfile-isocs?nodeId=15054515
  59. Khanna M, Crago C (2012) Measuring indirect land use change with biofuels: implications for policy. Ann Rev Resour Econ 4:161–184. doi: 10.1146/annurev-resource-110811-114523 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Kim H, Kim S, Dale BE (2009) Biofuels, land use change, and greenhouse gas emissions: some unexplored variables. Environ Sci Technol 43(3):961–967. doi: 10.1021/es802681k CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. KPMG (2006) Administrative Burdens—HMRC Measurement Project. Retrieved from http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/better-regulation/kpmg1.pdf
  62. KPMG (2012a) Denmark: country VAT/GST essentials. Retrieved 2 November 2012 from http://www.kpmg.com/global/en/services/tax/globalindirecttax/pages/country-news-vat-gst-essentials.aspx
  63. KPMG (2012b) Norway: country VAT/GST essentials. Retrieved 2 Nov 2012 from http://www.kpmg.com/global/en/services/tax/globalindirecttax/pages/country-news-vat-gst-essentials.aspx
  64. Kuik O, Hofkes M (2010) Border adjustment for European emissions trading: competitiveness and carbon leakage. Energy Policy 38:1741–1748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Larson ED (2006) A review of life-cycle analysis studies on liquid biofuel systems for the transport sector. Energy Sustain Dev 10(2):109–126. doi: 10.1016/S0973-0826(08)60536-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Lenzen M, Kanemoto K, Geschke A, Moran D, Muñoz P, Ugon J, Wood R, Yu T (2010) A global multi-region input-output time series at high country and sector detail. In: Proceedings of the 18th international input–output conference of the International Input–Output Association (IIOA), 20–25 June 2010, Sydney, Australia http://www.iioa.org/files/conference-1/37_20100617021_Lenen&al_GlobalMRIO_18thIOConf2010.pdf
  67. Lockwood B, De Meza D, Myles G (1994) When are origin and destination regimes equivalent? Int Tax Public Financ 1(1):5–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Lockwood B, Whalley J (2008) Carbon-motivated border tax adjustments: old wine in green bottles? World Econ 33(6):810–819CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Low P, Marceau G, Reinaud J (2011) The interface between the trade and climate change regimes: scoping the issues. WTO Economic Research and Statistics Division, Staff Working Paper 2011–2012Google Scholar
  70. Mathiesen L, Mæstad O (2004) Climate policy and the steel industry: achieving global emission reductions by an incomplete climate agreement. Energy J 25(4):91–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Mattoo A, Subramanian A, van der Mensbrugghe D, He J (2009) Reconciling climate change and trade policy. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 5123Google Scholar
  72. McLure Jr, CE (2010) The carbon-added tax: a cat that won’t hunt. Policy Options, pp 62–66Google Scholar
  73. McLure CE Jr (2012) Could VAT techniques Be used to implement border carbon adjustments? Bull Int Tax 66(8):436–445Google Scholar
  74. Menichetti E, Otto M (2000) Energy balance and greenhouse gas emissions of biofuels from a life-cycle perspective. In Howarth R, Bringezu S (eds) Biofuels: environmental consequences and interactions with changing land use, pp 81–109. Retrieved from http://new.unep.org/bioenergy/Portals/48107/publications/LCAStudy.pdf
  75. Metcalf GE (2009) Designing a carbon tax to reduce US greenhouse gas emissions. Rev Environ Econ Policy 3(1):63–83. doi: 10.1093/reep/ren015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Metcalf GE, Weisbach D (2009) The design of a carbon tax. Harvard Environ Law Rev 33:499–556Google Scholar
  77. Michetti M, Rosa R (2012) Afforestation and timber management compliance strategies in climate policy. A computable general equilibrium analysis. Ecol Econ 77:139–148. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.02.020 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Monjon S, Quirion P (2011) Addressing leakage in the EU ETS: border adjustment or output-based allocation? Ecol Econ 70:1957–1971CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Morgenstern RD, Aldy JE, Herrnstadt EM, Ho M, Pizer WA (2007) Competitiveness impacts of carbon dioxide pricing policies on manufacturing. Resources for the Future Issue Brief 7Google Scholar
  80. Narayanan B, Walmsley TL (2008) Global trade, assistance, and production: the GTAP 7 data base. Center for Global Trade Analysis Purdue University, West Lafayette, INGoogle Scholar
  81. Nutridata (2012) Price schedule. Retrieved 2 November 2012 from http://www.nutridata.com/feeschedule.asp
  82. Ohio (2011) The Ohio motor vehicle industry—February 2011. Ohio Department of Development—Policy Research and Strategic Planning Office report. Retrieved 22 October 2013 from http://jobs-ohio.com/images/auto_industry_report_2011.pdf
  83. Parry IWH (2003) Fiscal interactions and the case for carbon taxes over grandfathered carbon permits. Oxf Rev Econ Policy 19(3):385–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Pauwelyn J (2013) Carbon leakage measures and border tax adjustments under WTO law. In: Van Calsster G, Prévost D (eds) Research handbook on environment, health and the WTO. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 448–506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Peters GP, Minx JC, Weber CL, Edenhofer O (2011) Growth in emission transfers via international trade from 1990 to 2008. Proc Nat Acad Sci 108(21):8903–8908CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Plevin RJ, O’Hare M, Jones AD, Torn MS, Gibbs HK (2010) Greenhouse gas emissions from biofuels’ indirect land use change are uncertain but may be much greater than previously estimated. Environ Sci Technol 44(21):8015–8021. doi: 10.1021/es101946t CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Price Waterhouse Coopers (2011) Paying taxes 2012: the global picture. Retrieved 2 Nov 2012 from http://www.pwc.com/gx/en/paying-taxes/download-order.jhtml
  88. QMI-SAI Global (2013) CMDCAS Canadian medical devices conformity assessment system. In certification services. Retrieved 4 June 2013 from http://www.qmi.com/registration/cmdcas/Default.asp?language=english
  89. SCM Network (2005) International comparison of measurements of administrative burdens related to VAT in the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. Retrieved from http://www.administrative-burdens.com/default.asp?page=142
  90. Searchinger T, Heimlich R, Houghton RA, Dong F, Fabiosa J, Tokgoz S, Hayes D, Yu T-H (2008) Use of U.S. croplands for biofuels increases greenhouse gases through emissions from land-use change. Science 319:1238–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Stiglitz JE (2009) Sharing the burden of saving the planet—global social justice for sustainable development. Mimeo, Initiative for Policy Dialogue. Retrieved from http://policydialogue.org/publications/working_papers/sharing_the_burden_of_saving_the_planet/
  92. Stolze M, Hartmann M, Moschitz H (2012) Report on total costs of three organic certification systems in six European countries with particular focus on organic supply chains (report D21, Part B). Research Institute of Organic Agriculture, Frick. Retrieved from http://www.certcost.org/Lib/CERTCOST/Deliverable/D21_B.pdf
  93. Sweetware (2012) Nutrition analysis services. Retrieved 2 Nov 2012 from http://www.sweetware.com/nutrpage.shtml
  94. Tukker A, Poliakov E, Heijungs R, Hawkins T, Neuwahl F, Rueda-Cantuche JM, Bouwmeester M (2009) Towards a global multi-regional environmentally extended input-output database. Ecol Econ 68(7):1928–1937. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.11.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. United States Environmental Protection Agency (2013) Inventory of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions and sinks: 1990–2011. United States EPA, Washington, DC. Retrieved 18 Oct 2013 from http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/Downloads/ghgemissions/US-GHG-Inventory-2013-Main-Text.pdf
  96. Van der Werf E, Peterson S (2009) Modeling linkages between climate policy and land use: an overview. Agric Econ 40(5):507–517. doi: 10.1111/j.1574-0862.2009.00394.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Whalley J (1979) Uniform domestic tax rate, trade distortions and economic integration. J Public Econ 11:213–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Wiedmann T, Wilting HC, Lenzen M, Lutter S, Palm V (2011) Quo Vadis MRIO? Methodological, data and institutional requirements for multi-region input-output analysis. Ecol Econ 70(11):1937–1945. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.06.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Winchester N, Paltsev S, Reilly JM (2011) Will border carbon adjustments work? BE J Econ Anal Policy Top 11(1) Article 7Google Scholar
  100. Wooders P, Reinaud J, Cosbey A (2009) Options for policy-makers: addressing competitiveness, leakage, and climate change. International Institute for Sustainable Development ReportGoogle Scholar
  101. Zee HH (1995) Value-added tax. In: Shome P (ed) Tax policy handbook. Tax Policy Division Fiscal Affairs Department, International Monetary Fund, Washington, DC, pp 86–99Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Land and Food SystemsUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada
  2. 2.Vancouver School of EconomicsUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada

Personalised recommendations