The introduction of a price on carbon dioxide is expected to be more efficient than prescriptive regulation. It also instantiates substantial economic value. Initially programs allocated this value to incumbent firms (grandfathering), but the growing movement toward auctioning or emissions fees makes carbon revenues into a payment for environmental services. This paper asks, to whom should this payment accrue? If the atmosphere resource, as a common property resource, is viewed as the property of government, then the decision of how to use the revenue can be viewed as a fiscal problem, and efficiency considerations dominate. If the atmosphere is viewed as held in common, then the revenue might be considered compensation to owners and delivered as payment to individuals. This decision has efficiency and distributional consequences that affect the political economy and the likelihood and durability of climate policy. We summarize trends among six existing carbon-pricing programs.
Darius Gaskins Senior Fellow
Two World Views on Carbon Revenues
Traditionally, the value created from pricing pollution has been directed to the regulated industry, an approach called “grandfathering.” However, ...
Journal Article — May 21, 2019
Impacts of a Carbon Tax across Us Household Income Groups: What Are the Equity-Efficiency Trade-Offs?
This paper assesses the impacts across US household income groups of carbon taxes of various designs.
Resources Radio: How the Trump Administration's ACE Rule Affects Emissions, with Amelia Keyes