Why should the carbon tax be floating? A Tobin’s Q model applied to green investment
-
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ee.14(1).2023.08
-
Article InfoVolume 14 2023, Issue #1, pp. 81-90
- Cited by
- 395 Views
-
78 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
The carbon market reform is controversial because the modalities of carbon pricing foreseen risk reducing the performance of companies and negatively affecting the economy. The objective of this paper is to show that the carbon tax can be floating and adapt to the economic situation while maintaining its ecological efficiency. Herein, Tobin’s Q model, which has become a standard in the literature for explaining the investment decision, is applied to the green investment decision. A carbon tax is introduced into the firm’s maximization program to see how carbon pricing changes the outcome of the traditional model. The model shows that green investment depends on the sum of the stock price and the carbon price, which suggests the possibility of modulating this amount according to the upward or downward trend of the stock price to avoid permanently penalizing the competitiveness of firms. The study also demonstrates how the financial market is likely to value green investments and that such investments will likely generate shareholder value through several channels. Indeed, green investments impact the firm’s turnover and the minimum income required by the shareholder. Such a modulation of the carbon tax according to the economic cycle would make reconciling ecological and economic efficiency possible.
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)C02, C61, D21, E22, H20
-
References41
-
Tables0
-
Figures0
-
- Al Amin, Siwar, C., & Hamid, A. (2009). Computable general equilibrium techniques for carbon tax modeling. American Journal of Environmental Sciences, 5(3), 330-340.
- Barker, T., Baylis, S., & Madsen, P. (1993). A UK carbon energy tax: The macroeconomic effects. Energy Policy, 21(3), 296-308.
- Böhringer, C., Garcia-Muros, X., Cazcarro, I., & Arto, I. (2017). The efficiency cost of protective measures in climate policy. Energy Policy, 104, 446-454.
- Boitier, B., Callonnec, G., Douillard, P., Epaulard, A., Ghersi, F., Masson, E., & Mathy, S. (2015). La transition énergétique vue par les modèles macroéconomiques (Working Paper No. 2015-05). France Stratégie. (In French).
- Bolton, P., Chen, H., & Wang, N. (2011). A unified theory of Tobin’s Q, corporate investment, financing, and risk management. The Journal of Finance, 66(5), 1545-1578.
- Bovari, E., Giraud, G., & Isaac, F. (2018). Coping with the collapse: A stock-flow consistent monetary macrodynamics of global warming. Ecological Economics, 147, 383-398.
- Bovenberg, A. L., & de Mooij, R. A. (1994). Environmental levies and distortionary taxation. American Economic Review, 84(4), 1085-1089.
- Bovenberg, A. L., & van der Ploeg, F. (1996). Optimal taxation, public goods and environmental policy with involuntary unemployment. Journal of Public Economics, 62(1-2), 52-83.
- Brunello, G. (1996). Labor market institutions and the double dividend hypothesis. In C. Carraro & D. Siniscalco (Eds.), Environmental Fiscal Reform and Unemployment (pp. 139-170). Springer.
- Burke, M., Hsiang, S., & Miguel, E. (2015). Global non-linear effect of temperature on economic production. Nature, 527, 235-239.
- Chiroleu-Assouline, M. (2001). Le double dividende: Les approches théoriques. Revue Française d’Économie, 16(2), 119-147. (In French).
- Chiroleu-Assouline, M., & Fodha, M. (2011). Verdissement de la fiscalité: À qui profite le double dividende? Revue de l’OFCE, 116, 409-432. (In French).
- Collonnec, G., Reynes, F., & Tamsamani, Y. (2012). Une évaluation macroéconomique et sectorielle de la fiscalité carbone en France. Revue de l’OFCE, 120, 212-154. (In French).
- Crassous, R., Ghersi, F., Combet, E., & Quirion, Ph. (2009). Taxe carbone: Recyclage des recettes et double dividende sous contrainte d’équité (Working Paper). Centre International De Recherche Sur L’environnement Et Le Développement (CIRED). (In French).
- Dafermos, Y., Nikolaidi, M., & Galanis, G. (2017). A stock-flow-fund ecological macroeconomic model. Ecological Economics, 131, 191-207.
- Daumas, L. (2023). Transition risks, asset stranding and financial instability (Working Paper). CIRED.
- DGII-CEC. (1992). The economics of limiting CO2 emissions. Special Edition of European economy, Commission of the European Communities, Office for Official Publications, Luxembourg.
- Dietz, S., & Stern, N. (2015). Endogenous growth, convexity of damage and climate risk: How Nordhaus’ framework supports deep cuts in carbon emissions. The Economic Journal, 125(583), 574-620.
- Ekins, P. (1997). On the dividends from environmental taxation. In T. Riordan (Ed.), Ecotaxation (pp. 50-67). Earthscan Publications.
- Epaulard, A. (1993). L’apport du Q de Tobin à la modélisation de l’investissement en France [The contribution of Tobin’s Q to the modelling of France investment]. Economie et Prévisions – Economy and Forecasts, 109(1), 1-12. (In French).
- Fagnard, J.-F., & Germain, M. (2014). Macroéconomie du court terme et politique climatique: Quelques leçons d’un modèle d’offre et demande globales. Recherches Économiques de Louvain, 80(1), 31-60. (In French).
- Fullerton, D. (1997). Environmental levies and distortionary taxation: Comment. American Economic Review, 87(1), 245-251.
- Godard, O., & Beaumais, O. (1994). Economie, croissance et environnement, de nouvelles stratégies pour de nouvelles relations. Revue Economique, 44, 143-176. (In French).
- Goulder, L. H. (1994). Environmental taxation and the “double dividend:” A reader’s guide (Working Paper No. 4896). NBER.
- Goulder, L. H. (1995). Effects of carbon taxes in an economy with prior tax distortions: An intertemporal general equilibrium analysis. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 29(3), 271-297.
- Holmlund, B., & Kolm, A. S. (2000). Environmental tax reform in a small open economy with structural unemployment. International Tax and Public Finance, 7, 315-333.
- Hourcade, J. C., & Ghersi, F. (2000). Le rôle du changement technique dans le double dividende d’écotaxes. Economie et Prévision, 143-144, 47-68. (In French).
- Jackson, T., & Victor, P. (2019). Low grow SFC: A stock-flow consistent ecological macroeconomic model for Canada (CUSP Working Paper No. 16). Guildford: University of Surrey.
- Kaltenrieder, G. (2005). Double dividende et mobilité du capital: Un modèle d’équilibre général appliqué à la Suisse (Working Paper). Université de Fribourg, Suisse. (In French).
- Keynes, J. M. (1936). The general theory of employment, interest, and money. Cambridge University Press.
- Lagoarde-Segot, T., KEDGE BS, & SDSN France. (2023). Ecological finance theory: Insight from post-Keynesian economics (Working Paper 05/2023). Kedge Business School.
- Lin, B., & Jia, Z. (2018). The energy, environmental and economic impacts of carbon tax rate and taxation industry: A CGE-based study in China. Energy, 159, 558-568.
- Lin, X., Wang, C., Wang, N., & Yang, J. (2018). Investment, Tobin’s Q and interest rates. Journal of Financial Economics, 130(3), 620-640.
- Marsiliani, L., & Renström, T. (2000). Imperfect competition, labour market distortions and the double dividend hypothesis (Working Paper No. 11). Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM), Milano.
- Naqvi, A. (2015). Modeling growth, distribution, and the environment in a stock-flow consistent framework (Policy Paper No. 18). Vienna: WWWforEurope.
- Parry, I. W. H. (1995). Pollution taxes and revenue recycling. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 29(3), S64-S77.
- Piluso, N., & Le Heron, E. (2022). The macroeconomic effect of climatic policy: A Keynesian point of view. Environmental Economics, 13(1), 16-27.
- Reiffers, V. (1995). A perspective on the determinants of investment: The role of Tobin’s Q over the period 1972–1991. Economic Review, 46(4), 1167-1187.
- Reynès, F., Yeddir-Tamsamani, Y., & Callonnec, G. (2011). Presentation of three-ME: Multi-sector macroeconomic model for the evaluation of environmental and energy policy (Working Paper No. 2011-10). Observatoire Francais des Conjonctures Economiques (OFCE).
- Schneider, K. (1997). Involuntary unemployment and environmental policy: The double dividend hypothesis. The Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 99(1), 45-59.
- Tobin, J. (1969). A general equilibrium approach to monetary theory. Journal of Money Credit and Banking 1(1), 15-29.