| 摘要 | ABSTRACT
1. Research Purpose
Although taxes are levied on bituminous coal for power generation, the current energy taxes fail to adequately incorporate social costs, including environmental pollution and climate change, and the criteria of taxation by energy source are inconsistent, leading to distortions in supply and demand in the environment and energy industries. In theory, energy prices that apply external costs appropriately are considered acceptable, but there are some concerns regarding price hikes caused by energy tax reform. It is therefore necessary to take external costs incurred through the use of energy into consideration when coming up with ways to change energy policies with the aim of minimizing economic losses. In this regard, the following study seeks ways of revising energy tax policies to mitigate the impact of changes in economic conditions while also improving air quality, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and stabilizing the supply and demand of energy. Furthermore, the study carefully examines the impacts of energy tax system reforms on the GDP and industrial competitiveness and suggests policy directions.
2. Major Content
In this study, scenarios where chosen in which the relative sizes of bituminous coal are overhauled based on LNG as a means of reforming the tax policy for fuels. First, an increase in the tax on fuels for power generation leads to an increase in electricity bills. In consideration of prices and industrial competitiveness, it is crucial that the relative rates between the two energy sources be revised. Second, in the power generation sector, the tradable emission permit system is being implemented to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Therefore, tax levels for fuels should be subject to direct regulation and the tradable emission permit system, among others. The proper level of environmental tax does not necessarily need to be that of a Pigovian tax.
According to the estimation of environmental losses incurred due to the use of fuels for power generation, the external cost per kilogram of bituminous coal is approximately 80% that of LNG. Scenarios 1 and 2 thus set the tax on bituminous coal at about 80% that of LNG, based on individual consumption tax and individual consumption tax + income contribution, respectively. Scenarios 3 and 4 use the estimates from which carbon monoxide has been excluded from the environmental degradation costs of fuels for power generation. These two scenarios therefore set the tax imposed on bituminous coal at around 88% that of LNG, based on individual consumption tax and individual consumption tax + income contribution, respectively.
The experiments that were conducted produced some significant findings. First, it was found that a tax hike on bituminous coal causes the GDP to decrease, but prices to increase. As the tax on bituminous coal increases, the GDP declines further while costs increase. Scenario 1, which imposes an additional KRW 17 per kilogram on the individual consumption tax levied on bituminous coal, sees the GDP fall by 0.08%; whereas in Scenario 4, which imposes an additional KRW 44 per kilogram on the individual consumption tax levied on bituminous coal, the GDP appears to decline by 0.21%. This shows that Scenario 4 seems to place an enormous economic burden on the power generation sector.
Second, the revision of the tax on bituminous coal for power generation is related to the tradable emission permit system and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. The declining demand for electricity due to the tax hike on bituminous coal for power generation serves to reduce the consumption of fuels for power generation, resulting in lower greenhouse gas emissions. Concerning the reduction of greenhouse gases, Scenarios 1 and 4 achieved reductions of 1.3% and 3.3%, respectively, demonstrating that tax reforms for bituminous coal for power generation can reduce air pollutants and cut greenhouse gas emissions. As observed in Scenario 1, the minimum increase in the tax on bituminous coal can reduce a country��s total greenhouse gas emissions by around 1%. The revision of the tax on bituminous coal for power generation is therefore expected to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in conjunction with the tradable emission permit system.
Third, the impact of tax reforms on industrial activities does not seem remarkable. As shown by the changes in the production volume of industries in tandem with the increase in tax on bituminous coal for power generation, production volume appears to decline in all sectors. However, excluding the energy industry, changes in industrial production capacity are estimated to be less than 0.5%, showing no significant impact on industrial activities as a whole.
Fourth, the tax hike on bituminous coal is anticipated to promote the efficiency of the energy industry by internalizing external costs. Also, increasing the tax on bituminous coal for power generation may decrease demand for coal and electricity. According to Scenario 4, demand for coal and electricity could fall by 5.1% and 2.5%, respectively. The diminishing demand for electricity may lead to reductions in demand for fuels for power generation and LNG. Therefore, the tax increase is expected to internalize the external costs of bituminous coal and increase the effectiveness of resource allocation, thus preventing excessive investment in the energy industry.
All in all, energy tax reforms in the power generation sector raise the effectiveness of resource allocation, improve air quality, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Furthermore, revenues generated through the revision can be used to build eco-friendly facilities and increase energy welfare. As a result, investment in environmental services and infrastructure is expected to decline significantly. The revision will also help to increase economic efficiency and drive environmental improvements.
3. Policy Implications
The following proposals are made with respect to energy tax reforms: first, the investment plan for bituminous coal-fired power plants is of the greatest importance when it comes to energy tax reforms for power generation. Air pollutant emissions vary significantly depending on the performance of environmental facilities at power plants. As described in Chapter 3, the amount of air pollutants emitted by emission source differs considerably. The tax levels regarding fuels for power generation are determined per unit of contaminant emitted by power plants; thus, the appropriate levels of taxes levied on fuels change according to the capacities of power plants to install and operate eco-friendly facilities. In addition, the Korean government, as part of its measures to address the issue of fine dust, announced a plan to shut down aging coal-fired power plants and invest in eco-friendly facilities. Therefore, when setting the standard of assessment for bituminous coal-fired power generation, that plan should be taken into consideration. Furthermore, a tax refund needs to be considered in relation to the installation of eco-friendly facilities by bituminous coal-fired power plants.
Second, it is vital to implement a range of policies, including direct regulations on air pollution and major accident risk factors. Considering the policies that affect pollutant emissions, such as the tradable emission permit system, policy on investments in bituminous coal-fired plants, and restrictions on diesel cars, an appropriate tax level should be determined.
Third, it may be a good idea to set up an ��external cost appraisal committee�� in relation to reforming the taxes imposed on fuels for power generation. External costs may serve as a basis for determining appropriate taxes on energy sources. As external costs can differ depending on assumptions and estimation methods, it is important to organize the committee in such a way as to ensure its objectivity and transparency.
Fourth, it is desirable to use revenues generated from energy tax reforms to supply renewable energy or build eco-friendly infrastructure. The primary purpose of environmental tax reforms (ETRs) in European countries is to improve the environment through energy taxes and correct the distortions in the economic structure caused by the existing tax structure. In this way, these countries aim to promote financial efficiency by reducing income taxes and consolidate political power through tax reforms based on neutrality. In Korea��s case, however, the purposes of energy tax reform were to remedy the distorted supply and demand of energy and improve air quality. In this sense, it seems reasonable for the Korean government to supply renewable energy and build eco-friendly facilities using energy tax revenue instead of considering tax-neutral reform plans. However, it is imperative to secure transparency and efficiency in fiscal spending regarding the supply of renewable energy.
BAS1806e.pdf |
