环境保护税能实现“减污”和“增长”么?——基于中国排污费征收标准变迁视角
|
摘要
环境税作为政府采用财政手段调整影响生态环境利益相关者行为的重要工具,研究环境税的环境经济效果对于推进健全中国环境财政制度具有重要理论价值。随着2018年1月1日起《中华人民共和国环境保护税法》开始实施,从"双重红利"视角对中国现行的环境保护税政策进行评价,对后续中国环境保护税改革也具有重要的现实意义。本文通过2006—2014年中国省以下排污费征收标准的改革实践,从地级市层面检验中国环境保护税对地区环境质量和经济增长的影响。结果表明:①提高二氧化硫排污费征收标准对二氧化硫排放产生污染减排效应,但是在工业废水上并没有发现这一政策的溢出效应。②二氧化硫排污费征收标准的提高对经济增长的数量和质量上均存在抑制效应。③中国环境保护税政策未能产生预期的"蓝色红利"的原因在于:在缺乏产能约束政策的背景下,企业在面对环境保护税税收压力时往往通过扩大产能,依靠规模效应以抵消环境保护税税收压力。这使得中国环境保护税税负的提高不仅没有产生"波特效应",反而对地区绿色创新能力的发展产生"负激励"。最终导致中国环境保护税政策不但未能产生"蓝色红利",反而在数量和质量层面抑制了中国经济增长。上述研究结果不仅从排污费征收标准变动视角对中国环境保护税的政策效果进行衡量,而且在实践方面为环境保护税后续改革提供了政策建议。
Environmental tax is an important tool for the government to use fiscal means to adjust the behaviors of agents in ecological environment. Studying environmental and economic effects of environmental tax has important theoretical value for improving China's environmental finance system. With the implementation of the‘Environmental Protection Tax Law of the People's Republic of China'starting from January 1,2018,the evaluation of China's current environmental protection tax policy from the perspective of ‘double dividend'also has important practical significance for the follow-up of China's environmental protection tax reform. This paper examines the impact of China's environmental protection tax on regional environmental quality and economic growth from the prefecture-level level through the reform practice of the sewage charges collection standards in 2006—2014 in China. The results show that: ①Increasing the sulfur dioxide emission fee collection standard has a pollution reduction effect on sulfur dioxide emissions,but the spillover effect of this policy has not been found on industrial waste water. ②The increase in the standard for the collection of sulfur dioxide sewage charges has a restraining effect on the quantity and quality of economic growth. ③ The reason why China's environmental protection tax policy failed to produce the expected ‘blue dividend'is that in the absence of a capacity-constrained policy,enterprises often rely on economies of scale to avoid environmental protection tax pressure by expanding production capacity.Thus the improvement of China's environmental protection tax burden does not produce the ‘Porter effect',but instead creates a‘negative incentive'for the development of regional green innovation capability. Eventually,China's environmental protection tax policy fails to produce a‘blue dividend',which in turn inhibits China's economic growth in terms of quantity and quality. The above research results not only measure the effect of China's environmental protection tax policy from the perspective of changes in the standard of sewage charges,but also provide policy recommendations for the follow-up reform of environmental protection tax.
Environmental tax is an important tool for the government to use fiscal means to adjust the behaviors of agents in ecological environment. Studying environmental and economic effects of environmental tax has important theoretical value for improving China's environmental finance system. With the implementation of the‘Environmental Protection Tax Law of the People's Republic of China'starting from January 1,2018,the evaluation of China's current environmental protection tax policy from the perspective of ‘double dividend'also has important practical significance for the follow-up of China's environmental protection tax reform. This paper examines the impact of China's environmental protection tax on regional environmental quality and economic growth from the prefecture-level level through the reform practice of the sewage charges collection standards in 2006—2014 in China. The results show that: ①Increasing the sulfur dioxide emission fee collection standard has a pollution reduction effect on sulfur dioxide emissions,but the spillover effect of this policy has not been found on industrial waste water. ②The increase in the standard for the collection of sulfur dioxide sewage charges has a restraining effect on the quantity and quality of economic growth. ③ The reason why China's environmental protection tax policy failed to produce the expected ‘blue dividend'is that in the absence of a capacity-constrained policy,enterprises often rely on economies of scale to avoid environmental protection tax pressure by expanding production capacity.Thus the improvement of China's environmental protection tax burden does not produce the ‘Porter effect',but instead creates a‘negative incentive'for the development of regional green innovation capability. Eventually,China's environmental protection tax policy fails to produce a‘blue dividend',which in turn inhibits China's economic growth in terms of quantity and quality. The above research results not only measure the effect of China's environmental protection tax policy from the perspective of changes in the standard of sewage charges,but also provide policy recommendations for the follow-up reform of environmental protection tax.
引文
[1]TULLOCK G. Excess benefit[J]. Water resources research,1967,3(2):643-644.
[2]KNEESE A V,BOWER B T. Managing water quality:economics,technology,institutions[M]. Washington DC:Resources for the Future,1984.
[3]PEARCE D. The role of carbon taxes in adjusting to global warming[J]. Economic journal,1991,101(407):938-948.
[4]GRADUS R,SMULDERS S. The trade-off between environmental care and long-term growth:pollution in three prototype growth models[J]. International economic review,1996,37(4):861-893.
[5]BOVENBERG A L,PLOEG F V D. Green policies and public finance in a small open economy[J]. Scandinavian journal of economics,1994,96(3):343-363.
[6]刘凤良,吕志华.经济增长框架下的最优环境税及其配套政策研究———基于中国数据的模拟运算[J].管理世界,2009(6):40-51.
[7]陈诗一.边际减排成本与中国环境税改革[J].中国社会科学,2011(3):85-100.
[8]司言武.环境税经济效应研究:一个趋于全面分析框架的尝试[J].财贸经济,2010(10):51-57.
[9]王金南,葛察忠,高树婷,等.中国独立型环境税方案设计研究[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2009,19(2):69-72.
[10]叶金珍,安虎森.开征环保税能有效治理空气污染吗[J].中国工业经济,2017(5):54-74.
[11]李建军,刘元生.中国有关环境税费的污染减排效应实证研究[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2015,25(8):84-91.
[12]卢洪友,朱耘婵.我国环境税费政策效应分析———基于“三重红利”假设的检验[J].中国地质大学学报(社会科学版),2017(4):9-26.
[13]王军,李萍.绿色税收政策对经济增长的数量与质量效应[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2018,28(5):17-26.
[14]祁毓,卢洪友,张宁川.环境规制能实现“降污”和“增效”的双赢吗———来自环保重点城市“达标”与“非达标”准实验的证据[J].财贸经济,2016,37(9):126-143.
[15]KUSMANEN T,BIJSTERBOSCH N,DELINK R. Environmental cost-benefit analysis of alternative timing strategies in greenhouse gas abatement:a data envelopment analysis approach[J]. Ecological economics,2009,68(6):1633-1642.
[16]席鹏辉,梁若冰,谢贞发.税收分成调整、财政压力与工业污染[J].世界经济,2017,40(10):170-192.
[17]谢贞发,席鹏辉,黄思明.中国式税收分成激励的产业效应———基于省以下增值税、营业税分成改革实践的研究[J].财贸经济,2016,37(6):18-34.
[18]侯孟阳,姚顺波.中国城市生态效率测定及其时空动态演变[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2018(3):13-21.
[19]环境保护部环境监察局.中国排污收费制度30年回顾及经验启示[J].环境保护,2009(20):15-18.
[20]李金保,冷俊峰.社会公众在环境保护中发挥作用的条件与对策研究[J].经济与管理评论,2018(2):62-68.
[21]贾军,张伟.绿色技术创新中路径依赖及环境规制影响分析[J].科学学与科学技术管理,2014(5):44-52.
[2]KNEESE A V,BOWER B T. Managing water quality:economics,technology,institutions[M]. Washington DC:Resources for the Future,1984.
[3]PEARCE D. The role of carbon taxes in adjusting to global warming[J]. Economic journal,1991,101(407):938-948.
[4]GRADUS R,SMULDERS S. The trade-off between environmental care and long-term growth:pollution in three prototype growth models[J]. International economic review,1996,37(4):861-893.
[5]BOVENBERG A L,PLOEG F V D. Green policies and public finance in a small open economy[J]. Scandinavian journal of economics,1994,96(3):343-363.
[6]刘凤良,吕志华.经济增长框架下的最优环境税及其配套政策研究———基于中国数据的模拟运算[J].管理世界,2009(6):40-51.
[7]陈诗一.边际减排成本与中国环境税改革[J].中国社会科学,2011(3):85-100.
[8]司言武.环境税经济效应研究:一个趋于全面分析框架的尝试[J].财贸经济,2010(10):51-57.
[9]王金南,葛察忠,高树婷,等.中国独立型环境税方案设计研究[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2009,19(2):69-72.
[10]叶金珍,安虎森.开征环保税能有效治理空气污染吗[J].中国工业经济,2017(5):54-74.
[11]李建军,刘元生.中国有关环境税费的污染减排效应实证研究[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2015,25(8):84-91.
[12]卢洪友,朱耘婵.我国环境税费政策效应分析———基于“三重红利”假设的检验[J].中国地质大学学报(社会科学版),2017(4):9-26.
[13]王军,李萍.绿色税收政策对经济增长的数量与质量效应[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2018,28(5):17-26.
[14]祁毓,卢洪友,张宁川.环境规制能实现“降污”和“增效”的双赢吗———来自环保重点城市“达标”与“非达标”准实验的证据[J].财贸经济,2016,37(9):126-143.
[15]KUSMANEN T,BIJSTERBOSCH N,DELINK R. Environmental cost-benefit analysis of alternative timing strategies in greenhouse gas abatement:a data envelopment analysis approach[J]. Ecological economics,2009,68(6):1633-1642.
[16]席鹏辉,梁若冰,谢贞发.税收分成调整、财政压力与工业污染[J].世界经济,2017,40(10):170-192.
[17]谢贞发,席鹏辉,黄思明.中国式税收分成激励的产业效应———基于省以下增值税、营业税分成改革实践的研究[J].财贸经济,2016,37(6):18-34.
[18]侯孟阳,姚顺波.中国城市生态效率测定及其时空动态演变[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2018(3):13-21.
[19]环境保护部环境监察局.中国排污收费制度30年回顾及经验启示[J].环境保护,2009(20):15-18.
[20]李金保,冷俊峰.社会公众在环境保护中发挥作用的条件与对策研究[J].经济与管理评论,2018(2):62-68.
[21]贾军,张伟.绿色技术创新中路径依赖及环境规制影响分析[J].科学学与科学技术管理,2014(5):44-52.