Katana VentraIP

Carbon tax

A carbon tax is a tax levied on the carbon emissions from producing goods and services. Carbon taxes are intended to make visible the hidden social costs of carbon emissions. They are designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by essentially increasing the price of fossil fuels. This both decreases demand for goods and services that produce high emissions and incentivizes making them less carbon-intensive.[1] When a fossil fuel such as coal, petroleum, or natural gas is burned, most or all of its carbon is converted to CO2. Greenhouse gas emissions cause climate change. This negative externality can be reduced by taxing carbon content at any point in the product cycle.[2][3][4][5]

In its simplest form, a carbon tax covers only CO2 emissions. It could also cover other greenhouse gases, such as methane or nitrous oxide, by taxing such emissions based on their CO2-equivalent global warming potential.[6] Carbon taxes are a type of Pigovian tax.[7]


Research shows that carbon taxes do reduce emissions.[8] Many economists argue that carbon taxes are the most efficient (lowest cost) way to tackle climate change.[9][10] 77 countries and over 100 cities have committed to achieving net zero emissions by 2050.[11][8] As of 2019, carbon taxes have either been implemented or are scheduled for implementation in 25 countries.[12] 46 countries have put some form of price on carbon, either through carbon taxes or carbon emission trading schemes.[13]


Carbon taxes can negatively affect the welfare of people, especially of poorer people, by making their consumption more expensive. For example, the prices for petrol and electricity can go up.[14] To make carbon taxes fairer, policymakers can try to redistribute the revenue generated from carbon taxes to low-income groups by various fiscal means.[15][16] Such a policy initiative becomes a carbon fee and dividend, rather than a plain tax.[17]


A carbon tax as well as carbon emission trading is used within the carbon price concept. Two common economic alternatives to carbon taxes are tradable permits with carbon credits and subsidies.

Impacts[edit]

Positive impacts[edit]

Research shows that carbon taxes effectively reduce greenhouse gas emissions.[8][50][51] Most economists assert that carbon taxes are the most efficient and effective way to curb climate change, with the least adverse economic effects.[52][53][54][10][55][56]


One study found that Sweden's carbon tax successfully reduced carbon dioxide emissions from transport by 11%.[50] A 2015 British Columbia study found that the taxes reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 5–15% while having negligible overall economic effects.[51] A 2017 British Columbia study found that industries on the whole benefited from the tax and "small but statistically significant 0.74 percent annual increases in employment" but that carbon-intensive and trade-sensitive industries were adversely affected.[57] A 2020 study of carbon taxes in wealthy democracies showed that carbon taxes had not limited economic growth.[58]


Carbon taxes appear to not adversely affect employment or GDP growth in Europe.[59] Their economic impact ranges from zero to modest positive.[59]

Negative impacts and trade-offs[edit]

A number of studies have found that in the absence of an increase in social benefits and tax credits, a carbon tax would hit poor households harder than rich households.[60][61][62][63] Gilbert E. Metcalf disputed that carbon taxes would be regressive in the US.[64]


Carbon taxes can increase electricity prices.[14]


There is a debate about the relation between carbon pricing (like carbon emission trading and carbon tax) and climate justice. Carbon pricing can be adjusted to some principles of climate justice like polluters pay.[65] Many proponents of climate justice object to carbon pricing. To close the gap between the two concepts, carbon pricing could put a cap on emissions, remove pollution from underserved communities, and justly divide revenues.[66]

Possible delays of a decade or more as inefficient vehicles are replaced by newer models and the older models filter through the fleet.

Political pressures that deter policymakers from increasing taxes.

Limited relationship between consumer decisions on fuel economy and fuel prices. Other efforts, such as fuel efficiency standards, or changing income tax rules on taxable benefits, may be more effective.

The historical use of as a source of general revenue, given fuel's low price elasticity, which allows higher rates without reducing fuel volumes. In these circumstances, the policy rational may be unclear.

fuel taxes