環保關稅

维基百科,自由的百科全书
跳转至: 导航搜索

環保關稅Environmental tariff),亦作綠色關稅green tariff)或生態關稅eco-tariff),是一種對國際貿易中有污染行為的保護[1]。透過對從輸入國入口或送輸出往出口國的貨物所徵收的關稅或稅款,作為對貨物未能達到關稅要求的環境污染控制的補償,以防止「環境方面的惡性競爭」("environmental races to the bottom")及「廢物傾倒」("eco-dumping")[2]

現時,美國歐盟均有環保關稅,而中華人民共和國亦有學者提倡透過開徵環保關稅,「以完善环保税收制度」[3]

概說[编辑]

環保關稅立論於世界銀行在1991年所發表的一份名為《世界稅制改革的經驗》的報告。報告內建議發展中國家“針對環境的破壞徵收環境稅”[1],而並非讓已發展國家以之作為建立貿易壁壘的武器。

環保關稅與其他環保稅項的最主要分別,在於環保關稅有時被視為一種貿易壁壘式的關稅,假借「環保」之名而限制其他國家產品的入口,以保護徵稅國當地的經濟[4]。因此,現時有言論就國際貿易是否令污染變得日益嚴重仍有所爭議,因為有些人堅持認為:國際貿易的上升令污染加劇,並導致當地環境惡化及環球公地悲劇(Tragedy of the Commons)的出現是密不可分的。不過,亦有人認為:當民眾的經濟環境變得更為充裕,他們亦會更熱心於倡導更清潔的環境。根據世界銀行另一分於1999年發表的報告裡指出[5][6]

Since freer trade raises income, it directly contributes to increasing pollution levels via the scale effect. However, it thereby induces the composition (and) technique effects of increased income, both of which tend to reduce pollution levels

(翻譯)

由於更自由的貿易令收入增加,會透過規模效應直接令污染水平增加。然而,收入的增加亦同時會誘導組成技術的影響,使污染程度得以降低。

現時的環保關稅可以分為出口稅和進口稅兩方面[3]

  1. 出口税:对国内资源(原材料、初级产品及半成品)征收;
  2. 进口税:对一些污染环境、影响生态环境的进口产品课以进口附加税,或者限制、禁止,甚至对其进行贸易制裁。

早期關稅實施建議[编辑]

雖然美國一直被指在實施更嚴苛的反污染措施舉步不前,但其實最早透過立法訂立環保關稅的國家,正是美國。雖則美國被指為透過立法來建立貿易壁壘,對抗意圖以較寬鬆的環保條例及低廉的生產成本取得往美國出口優勢的國家。有關建議透過在1991年訂立,並於同年4月提交美國參議院的「國際污染威懾法」實現[7]

建議的「國際污染控制指標」[编辑]

在美國原先建議的「國際污染威懾法」裡,其中一項為人所注意的內容,是第五節所提及的「國際污染控制指標」,內容如下[8]

"INTERNATIONAL POLLUTION CONTROL INDEX
Section 8002 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6982) is amended by adding the following new subsections at the end thereof:
`(t) The Administrator shall prepare, within one hundred and twenty days of the enactment of this section and yearly thereafter, a pollution control index for each of the top fifty countries identified by the Office of Trade and Investment of the Department of Commerce based on the value of exports to the United States from that country's attainment of pollution control standards in the areas of air, water, hazardous waste and solid waste as compared to the United States. The purpose of this index is to measure the level of compliance within each country with standards comparable to or greater than those in the United States. The Administrator shall analyze, in particular, the level of technology employed and actual costs incurred for pollution control in the major export sectors of each country in formulating the index'."[8]

{翻譯)

"國際污染控制指標
現予修訂固體廢物處置法(美國國會參考:42/6982)第8002段,予結束時加入以下新的小節:
`(t) 署長應在本條頒布後的120天開始,並於每年重覆,準備一份「國際污染控制指標」,詳列根據美國商務部貿易及投資辦事處按其往美國輸出物品價值金額最高的50個國家的污染控制指標。這個指標包括了當地對於空氣、水質、危險廢物和固體廢物四個領域的污染控制標準與美國的標準相比較。這個指標設立的目的,是要衡量各國對各個領域的指標的遵守水平,並與美國相比較,是否與美國的標準相若,又或更嚴謹。署長在制訂指數之時,應特別分析在各個國家的主要輸出部份中,所應用的技術水平和用於污染控制的實際開銷。

對抗環境關稅的運動[编辑]

環境關稅在過往未有實施,部分原因是因為當時的多邊貿易制度,如世界貿易組織(WTO)並不認可環保關稅的設立。而環保關稅不被認可的原因,又是因為他們認為環保關稅並非關貿總協定(GATT)所函蓋的範圍之內。因此,有相當的批評及對WTO及GATT作出改革的要求,希望納入環保關稅。[2]


Additionally, many newly industrialized countries and underdeveloped countries saw the attempts to impose pollution controls on them as suspicious...

此外,許多新興工業化國家和未發展國家認為,對他們強加污染控制的企圖相當可疑[9]

...seeing it as a threat to their growth and fearing that developed countries would attempt to export their preferences for pollution control or to place 'environmental' tariffs on imports from countries with lower standards.

(翻譯)

……認為這威脅到新興工業化國家和未發展國家的成長,並擔心發達國家會試圖把他們的在污染控制方面的偏好強加於新興工業化國家和未發展國家,又或對從污染控制標準較低的國家入口的產品實施環保關稅。

參看[编辑]

參考資料[编辑]

  1. ^ 1.0 1.1 賴瓊玲、董健. 西部大開發中環境保護稅收制度淺探. 天津商学院学报. 2004.11, 24 (6). 
  2. ^ 2.0 2.1 Kraus, Christiane (2000), Import Tariffs as Environmental Policy Instruments, Springer, ISBN 0792363183, 9780792363187
  3. ^ 3.0 3.1 陳力. 完善我国环保税收制度的思考. 2009-07-16 [2009-08-13]. 
  4. ^ 张怡、李靖. 出口退税上调是企业的救命稻草:提高出口退税率的政策效应分析与建议. 湖南有色金屬技術信息網:期货日报. 2009-06-03. 
  5. ^ Trade, Global Policy, and the Environment, Pg. 56, Fredriksson, World Bank, World Bank Publications, 1999, ISBN 0821344587, 9780821344583
  6. ^ Dean, Judith M & Lovely, Mary E (2008), Trade Growth, Production Fragmentation, and China's Environment, Pgs. 3 & 5, National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 13860, Cambridge, MA [1]
  7. ^ International Trade and Climate Change: Economic, Legal, and Institutional Perspectives Pg. 36, World Bank Publications, 2007, ISBN 0821372254, 9780821372258
  8. ^ 8.0 8.1 S 984 IS: International Pollution Deterrence Act of 1991 (Introduced in Senate) U.S. Congress Thomas online database, 102nd Congress, 1st session, 25 April 1991. Retrieved 2009-06-07
  9. ^ Leonard, Jeffrey H., 1988, Pollution and the Struggle for the World Product: Multinational Corporations, Environment, and International Comparative Advantage Pg. 69, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 052134042X, 9780521340427

延伸閱讀[编辑]

  • International Trade and Climate Change: Economic, Legal, and Institutional Perspectives, World Bank Publications, 2007, ISBN 0821372254, 9780821372258, [2];
  • Mani, Muthukumara S., 1966, Environmental Tariffs on Polluting Imports: An Empirical Study, , Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, Volume 7 Issue 4 (June 1996), Pgs. 391-411;
  • Jean-Marie, Grether & Mathys, Nicole A. & Jaime, de Melo, 2006, Unraveling the World-Wide Pollution Haven Effect, Universite de Lausanne, Ecole des HEC, DEEP - Cahiers de Recherches Economiques du Departement d'Econometrie et d'Economie politique (DEEP);
  • Robison, David H., 1988, Industrial Pollution Abatement: The Impact on Balance of Trad, Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, Vol. 21, Pgs. 187-99, February;
  • Ghosh, S. & Yamarik, Steven 2006, Do Regional Trading Arrangements Harm the Environment?: An Analysis of 162 Countries in 1990, Applied Econometric and International Development, 2006 Vol. 6;
  • Naghavi, Alireza, Can R&D-Inducing Green Tariffs Replace International Environmental Regulations?; Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei, 2006-92;
  • Tobey, James A, 1990, The Effects of Domestic Environmental Policies on Patterns of World Trade: An Empirical Test, Kyklos, Blackwell Publishing, Vol. 43(2), Pgs. 191-209;
  • Baldwin, R E & Murray, Tracy, 1977, MFN Tariff Reductions and Developing Country Trade Benefits under the GSP, Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, Vol. 87 (345), pages 30-46, March 1977
  • Hazilla, Michael & Kopp, Raymond J, 1990, Social Cost of Environmental Quality Regulations: A General Equilibrium Analysis, Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, Vol. 98(4), Pgs. 853-73, August 1990;