文章 Articles

姜克隽:中国应尽快征收碳税

能源问题研究员姜克隽在接受孟斯专访时说中国正在考虑征收碳税,他认为此举能推动经济的发展,应尽早推行。

Article image

美国《福布斯》杂志“2009年全球税负痛苦指数排行榜”,中国已名列第二,仅次于法国。但中国发改委能源研究所研究员姜克隽在接受中外对话专访时说,中国仍应尽早开征碳税,这不仅不会增加总体税负,还可能促进GDP增长。

姜克隽和他的同事从2006年开始对能源财税政策的研究,2008年到2009年开展以碳税为主的研究,为政府决策提供参考。

中外对话:有观点说,中国的宏观税负已经很高,再征收新税,会引起公众反感。

姜克隽:宏观税负的确很高,但“税收中性”就解决这个问题,即有增有减,税收总额保持不变。比如假设碳税收入1000亿,可以在其他税赋上减少1000亿,这很容易实现。

我们提出过几种方案。比如减少增值税,还有减少营业税。最初还考虑过减少个人所得税,但后来发现最贫困的人群达不到交税的标准,所以那种方案后来改成了提高最低生活水平补贴标准。假如推出碳税,会同时出台关于其他税赋减少的方案,维持税收中性。

中外对话:碳税的征收会增加消费者的负担?

姜克隽:国家征收的总税款并不增加,只是内部结构的调整。如果非要质疑这个钱用的怎么样,那只能批评现有的国库税收使用体制。这是发展中的问题,要慢慢解决。

中外对话:这个税收上去怎么用?

姜克隽:现在比较可能的是直接进入国库,由政府统一计划。不过由此也可以看到国家对气候变化的重视程度――比如对于扶贫、地震的资金,财政部建立了专款专用办公室,但是没有为气候变化建立专门的办公室和人员搞专款专用,可见目前它的重要性不及扶贫和救灾。

中外对话:税收中性在技术上容易实现,但在监管方面呢?

姜克隽:碳税征收和能源税基本一模一样。我们比较担心的是煤炭,因为天然气和石油的计量都很简单严格,但煤炭方面可能会存在一定的偷税漏税,因为煤炭的生产量不容易确定,有可能导致一些煤矿瞒报产量。但对能源征税的话,这种情况无法避免,就要看整体的监管体制如何做。但随着煤炭企业兼并,变成大矿,这种情况也会好一些。

中外对话:您认为碳税开征后对GDP的影响很小,甚至可能是正向作用。而合理的税收和设立良好的税收体系可能还会使整体物价下降。您认为何谓合理良好的税收体系?

姜克隽:我们认为征收碳税对GDP有正向效益。目前的计算是GDP下降很少,但模型的缺点是,不允许改变它的技术进步参数,要维持在起始年水平。但实际上征税之后,技术进步肯定要增速。

现在国家税务总局已制定了税收改革路线图,“绿色税制”是改革方向之一。我认为这会是比较良好的体系。

现在政府的支出增长已经非常不明显,但财政收入增长过快。就像北京市政府,头疼的是怎么花钱。国库应该有赤字,但我们老是盈余,这不行,所以政府压力也很大。

税收改革的另一个方向就是减负,比如增值税、个人所得税。即便不减,也要把这部分资金花在建设可持续发展和低碳上。现在北京市政府已经在这么做了,比如对公共交通的补贴。税制改革肯定要和新税推出同步,才能消除民众对税收用途的担心。

中外对话:很多官员称,开征碳税可以树立中国对人类负责任的国家形象,在谈判中获得主动权。中国考虑征收碳税,是否受到了国际气候谈判的影响?

姜克隽:我认为这个因素特别不重要。中国应对气候变化,不应该过多关注国际谈判。中国2030年以后肯定是世界的领导者,想推都推不掉。到那时,中国肯定在技术进步等领域处于强势地位。我们要把中国打造成一个竞争力强的国家,所以碳税,或者有针对性地改变经济结构的税种会非常有效,我们要尽早开征。

改变经济结构,中国已喊了很久,但到目前为止,经济结构越来越恶化。为什么?政府努力了半天,发现行政手段越来越不灵了。“十一五”减排目标基本靠行政手段达到。我们非常希望在“十二五”期间改变这种方式。政府不是节能专家,但现在各种节能的政策都要政府来定。把它变成一种市场行为,由企业自己来决定节能策略,税是非常好的方式。

中外对话:有学者说中国在国内征收碳税,就可以避免出口商品被美国征收碳关税。

姜克隽:这完全是两回事。美国提出的是碳“边境调节税”。美国国务院跟我谈过这个问题。第一,是否征收的标准是中国是否做出了努力。如果没有做出努力,就收这个税。而我们另一个研究表明,中国现在的减排努力是大于美国和欧盟的,排在世界第一位。所以这个理由不成立;第二,他们也承认,如果中国自己征税,他们就不征收。中国现在向56种高耗能产品征收出口税,税率大概在10%左右。这个数字已经超出了碳“边境调节税”的税率。中国现在的做法是把原来的出口退税改成了征收出口碳税,这种“碳税”已经开始征收了。

美国的要求也不是所有商品都得征收碳关税。有些商品减少出口对我们影响也不大,比如焦炭。我们希望美国对中国的高耗能产品收税,但中国产品的碳排放普遍比美国低。

中外对话:没有比美国碳排放高的产品么?

姜克隽:肯定也有。但中国现在节能减排力度很大,我们平均发电效率已经高于美国。比如生产水泥或钢铁,都用电的话,美国比中国更耗能。

但从国家能源结构计算,比如生产同一种产品,美国用天然气,我们用煤,这我们就比不过了,我们国家资源结构就是这样。你不让我用煤炭,那我们要是到国际市场大规模采购天然气,把天然气价格抬高,美国也害怕发生这种情况。所以他们不会轻易对中国搞这样的壁垒,因为对他们没好处。

中外对话:何时开始征收碳税,有时间表吗?

姜克隽:有消息称环境税可能在2013年开始征收,但并没有提到环境税包括的项目,所以现在还不得而知。环境税是一个单独的税种,其设立需要人民代表大会通过,而碳税是环境税的一个单独的税目。我个人主张是2012年开始征收。

我估计碳税开始征收会比较早。比如到2014年“哥本哈根+5”的时候,那时估计全世界会发生比较大的形势变化。

 

孟斯,中外对话北京办公室副主编。

首页图片来自um782
 

发表评论 Post a comment

评论通过管理员审核后翻译成中文或英文。 最大字符 1200。

Comments are translated into either Chinese or English after being moderated. Maximum characters 1200.

评论 comments

Default thumb avatar
gaidee

“卖炭翁”答姜克隽

借伟大的“碳学”开创者1300年前白居士之诗“卖碳翁”,答姜克隽君。也许我们的天空中还飘着那时的“碳”呢。
卖炭翁,伐薪烧炭南山中。

满面尘灰烟火色,两鬓苍苍十指黑。
卖炭得钱何所营?身上衣裳口中食。
可怜身上衣正单,心忧炭贱愿天寒。
夜来城外一尺雪,晓驾炭车辗冰辙。
牛困人饥日已高,市南门外泥中歇。
翩翩两骑来是谁?黄衣使者白衫儿。
手把文书口称敕,回车叱牛牵向北。
一车炭,千余斤,宫使驱将惜不得。
半匹红绡一丈绫,系向牛头充炭直。

Responding to Jiang Kejun with "The Elderly Charcoal Seller"

To respond to Jiang Kejun, I will borrow from the great initiator of "carbon science," Bai Juyi's poem "The Elderly Charcoal Seller." Perhaps our sky still has the "carbon" from that time floating around.

Cutting wood and burning charcoal in the forests of the Southern Mountain.
His face, stained with dust and ashes, has turned to the color of smoke.
The hair on his temples is streaked with gray: his ten fingers are black.
The money he gets by selling charcoal, how far does it go?
It is just enough to clothe his limbs and put food in his mouth.
Although, alas, the coat on his back is a coat without lining,
He hopes for the coming of cold weather, to send up the price of charcoal!
Last night, outside the city, a whole foot of snow;
At dawn he drives the charcoal wagon along the frozen ruts.
Ox was weary; man was hungry; the sun was already high;
Outside the Gate, to the south of the Market, at last they stop in the mud.
Suddenly, a pair of prancing horsemen. Who can be coming?
A public official in a yellow coat and a boy in a white shirt.
In their hands they hold a written warrant: on their tongues, the words of an order;
They turn back the wagon and curse the ox, leading them off to the north.
A whole wagon of charcoal,
More than a thousand catties!
If officials choose to take it away, the charcoal seller may not complain.
Half a piece of red silk and a single yard of damask,
The Courtiers have passed over the ox’s head, as the price of a wagon of charcoal!

Default thumb avatar
yangfy

碳税和碳贸易并行

碳税和碳贸易都应该受到重视,但在碳贸易不可能近期实施的情况下,启动碳税,应该是可行的。但问题关键是,如何使用好碳税。碳税是应该为气候变化服务的。如果征收了碳税,税收是需要切实用到气候变化领域的。

Carbon tax and carbon trading

Carbon tax and carbon trading should be taken seriously, but under the circumstance that carbon trading cannot be implemented in the short-term, initiating carbon tax should be feasible. However, the key problem is how to issue carbon tax in a good way. Carbon tax should be there to help climate change. If carbon tax is imposed, the tax needs to be used effectively in the area of climate change.

Default thumb avatar Reply arrow
gaidee

碳税和碳贸易

实质区别何在?盼复。

Carbon tax and carbon trade

Where's the difference in essence? Awaiting a response....

Default thumb avatar Reply arrow
yangfy

碳税和碳贸易

碳税是财政政策,而碳贸易是利用市场机制。两者不完全相同。

Carbon tax and carbon trading

Carbon tax is a fiscal policy, but carbon trading is used in market mechanisms. The two are not entirely the same.

Thumb original dscf0479 1
scullymeng

中国特色的税收更受争议

征碳税的合理性甚至税收中性的实现,在技术上都行得通,但对于实际中的税收制度,很多公众是不信任的,问题的关键不是碳税还是什么别的税的问题,而是一个“税”字本身就引起公众的很多不满。税收的制定、听证存在太多不透明,必须先有税制的全面改革和成果的产生,否则民意将很难接纳新的税种。

Tax with Chinese characteristics is more controversial

The legitimacy of levying a carbon tax and even the achievement of tax neutrality is technically feasible, but many people do not trust the tax system in practice. The crux of the problem is not about carbon tax or any other tax, but the word "tax" itself arouses the public's discontent. With the establishment of taxes and the numerous non-transparencies that exist at hearings, there first needs to be a complete reform of the tax system while producing results, otherwise it will be difficult for the public to accept new kinds of taxes.

Default thumb avatar Reply arrow
smart

征税何用?

前不久,采访姜老师的一个同事,他说,我们已经征了那么税了,哪些税用来计划解决的问题,根本没有解决。国家又不缺钱,缺的只是正确花钱的方式,因此反对征收碳税。一说到征税,大家就兴奋。

这是当时未曾发表的一段文字

我们必须考虑,为什么要征,征来做什么?现在我们连这个问题都没考虑清楚。因为资源税、环境税、碳税问题很复杂,好多媒体只是研究一点问题就大做文章。其实每个国家的税制是不同的。比如燃油税,好多人把它作为资源税的一种,其实不全面。比如美国的燃油税很低,但是国家不负责公共交通,公共交通设施很落后,家庭轿车很普及。欧盟、日本的燃油税很高,国家花了大把的钱扶持公共交通,在欧盟大多数国家和日本,公共交通很便利,私人汽车的使用量就少一些,其实国外的尤其是欧盟高额的燃油税大部分是花在高速公路、铁路、城铁等公共交通建设了。而不仅仅是为了节能减排。我们也要好好讨论这个问题。比如开征的资源税可不可以用在改善公共交通设施上,比如城铁建设、地铁建设。其实这些也是节能减排的措施。
财政部门一提起征税就兴奋,征税的问题必须慎重。环境税和碳税难以成为节能减排的手段,像征了燃油税,人们少开车了么?没有完善的公共交通设施,燃油税再高,也很难改变私人轿车增长的趋势。因此征税要和一些环境的改善措施相配套才能真正发挥作用。

How to use taxes?

Not long ago, a collegue that interviewed Jiang said, we have been taxed so much, the taxes planned to be used for solving problems have not been solved at all. The country is not lacking in money, just lacking in a proper way to spend it, therefore, I am against the carbon tax. When it comes to taxes, everyone gets excited.

This is text that has not been published

We must think about why these taxes are being imposed and what are they used for? We haven't even thought about these questions thoroughly. Because resource tax, environmental tax and carbon tax issues are complicated, many medias only research a small problem and then write a big article about it. In fact, each country's tax system is different. For example, many people consider fuel tax to be a kind of resource tax, but that is incomplete. For example, fuel tax in the United States is very low, but the country is not responsible for public transportation. The public transportation facilities are outdated while family cars are very common. In the EU and Japan, fuel tax is very high and these countries have spent a lot of money to support public tranportation. Public transportation in most of the countries in the EU and Japan is very convenient and the use of personal cars is fewer. In fact, in foreign countries, especially the EU, the high fuel tax is mostly spent on the construction of highways, railways, city rails, etc. It is not only to save energy and reduce emissions. We need to have a good discussion on this issue. For example, can the resource tax be used on improving public transportation facilities like building city rails, and subways. These are also energy saving emission reducing measures.
A mention of taxes and the finance department gets excited but needs to be cautious about the issue. It will be difficult for environmental tax and carbon tax to become an energy saving, emission reduction measure, like fuel tax, did people drive less? Without good public transportation facilities, even if the fuel tax was higher, it would be very hard to change the increasing trend of buying personal cars. Therefore, for the taxes to really work, it must go along with environmental-improving measures.

Default thumb avatar
gaidee

别忘了“科学发展观”

中国还真离不开“科学发展观”。中国人还真要好好学学。

Don't forget "the concept of scientific development"

China really cannot do without "the concept of scientific development." Chinese people really must learn it well.

Default thumb avatar Reply arrow
gaidee

“科学发展观”

官方英文为Outlook on scientific development。特此,祝好。

Outlook on scientific development

The official English is outlook on scientific development. Best wishes.

Default thumb avatar
gaidee

姜老师和同事

姜老师的同事和姜老师的意见不一致,很正常。不知道smart同学为什么大惊小怪。奇怪的倒是,为什么当时这段文字没有发表,而是现在发表。这个说明姜老师的同事没有姜老师的份量。

Jiang and his colleagues

It is normal for Jiang to have a different opinion from his colleagues. Why has Smart made such a much fuss? What is really strange is, why this text wasn't published until now. This indicates that Jiang's colleagues don't have as much weight as him.

Default thumb avatar
meleze

对法国碳税的失望

你的文章在以下网址已经被译为法文:http://www.meleze-formation.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=140&Itemid=2
希望你的计划不会被法国碳税的失败而左右。

Disapointement on Carbontax in France

Your article has been translated in French language there http://www.meleze-formation.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=140&Itemid=2
Let's hope that your plan will not be diverted by the french failure.

Default thumb avatar
smart

回复 gaidee

不知道smart同学为什么大惊小怪。奇怪的倒是,为什么当时这段文字没有发表,而是现在发表。这个说明姜老师的同事没有姜老师的份量。——我没有大惊小怪,现在发表有什么奇怪呢?何以见得,姜老师的更有分量呢?无稽之谈,都不过是一家之言而已。

respond to gaidee

I don't know why friend smart notes much fuss about nothing. the strange thing is why these words are published now instead of before. This shows that the professor Jiang's collegue doesn't have the same power as Jiang.
I don't wanto to make a fuss about this.Why is it strange to publish now? Why Jiang si more powerful? These are nonsense. It's just his own comment.

Default thumb avatar Reply arrow
gaidee

“都是一家人”

你姜老师长,姜老师短的,不就是他有份量嘛。否则,你怎么不把他的那个和他一样“重”的同事的名字也说出来呢?宣传嘛,要全面,你现在马后炮,显示什么呢?你报道的时效性呢?公正性呢?客观性呢?

“We are one family"

You keep saying Prof. Jiang this, Prof. Jiang that, because he has influence. Otherwise, why don't you tell us the name of this colleague that is just as "important" as him? Publicity needs to be thorough, while you are too late. What does this indicate? Where is the timeliness of your reports? The impartiality? The objectivity?