報告書番号

Y03020

タイトル（和文）

税制による二酸化炭素排出削減の影響分析

タイトル（英文）

The Impacts of Decreasing CO2 Emission by Changing Tax System in Japan

概要 （図表や脚注は「報告書全文」に掲載しております）

当所の長期経済予測システムを用いて、炭素税の導入に併せて既存のエネルギー税制を改正した場合の影響について分析した。既存のエネルギー税を変更せず、所得税減税で税収を還流する場合、2010年に炭素1トン当たり8,400円、2025年に同42,000円の税率が必要となる。炭素税の導入と共に既存のエネルギー税を減免／廃止する場合、必要な税率は高くなるが、既存のエネルギー税と炭素税の税収合計は減免／廃止しない場合より少なく、税収の面では炭素税に一本化する方が効率的である。実質GDPは、炭素税を導入しない場合より2010年で0.1～0.6％、2025年で0.7～1.2％減少する。ケース別の減少幅は、税収を消費税減税で還流する場合が最も小さく、逆に道路特定財源のエネルギー税を減免して炭素税を導入する場合が最も大きい。前者では消費税減税による消費回復効果が大きく、後者では公共投資の減少が影響している。

概要 （英文）

This study quantitatively analyzes the economic impacts of imposing environment tax on Japanese economy and energy demand by using the long-term economic forecasting system of CRIEPI. Four cases are set according to the differences in imposing method of environment tax and returning method of tax revenue, and the impacts of environment tax in each case are analyzed. The results of the analyses are as follows: (1) In the Basic Carbon Tax Case where the reduction of income tax is assumed, the tax rates of 8,400 yen per t-C and 42,000 yen per t-C become necessary in 2010 and 2025, respectively. These are quite smaller than those of previous study (CRIEPI Report Y01007, in 2001), because the CO2 emission in the Reference Case where the carbon tax is not imposed has decreased greatly on account of low economic growth and the effects of various measures for CO2 emission mitigation taken recently.(2) Necessary carbon tax levels become higher if the rates of existing energy taxes are exempted or abolished. On the other hand, the total revenue of energy taxes and a carbon tax is smaller than that of the Basic Carbon Tax Case where the rates of existing energy taxes are not changed. It can be said that exempting or abolishing the existing energy taxes and unifying them to the carbon tax is efficient in the viewpoint of the tax revenue.(3) In the viewpoint of the finance balance of the government, the remainder of a national debt is the smallest (868.7 trillion yen in 2025) in the case where the tax rates of gasoline and diesel oil are exempted. This is because they are an objective tax and exempting them decreases the public investment in roads automatically.(4) The decrease in Real GDP from the Reference Case is the smallest in the case where the carbon tax revenue is returned mainly through the lowering the rate of consumption tax. They are -0.09% and -0.66% in 2010 and 2025, respectively. This is because private final consumption expenditure increases than the Reference Case. On the other hand, real GDP is the smallest in the case where the public investment in roads is decreased shown before.

報告者

キーワード