School of Economics and Resource Management, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, 100875, China.
China Market Economy Research Center, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, 100875, China.
Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2023 Oct;30(48):106198-106213. doi: 10.1007/s11356-023-29898-4. Epub 2023 Sep 19.
The environmental protection tax (EPT) is an important environmental policy in China. However, it remains unclear whether the EPT has reduced environmental pollution effectively since its implementation in 2018. Based on the panel data of 229 prefecture-level cities in China during 2015-2019 and the difference-in-differences (DID) model, this study empirically assesses the causal effect of the EPT on environmental pollution. It is found that the EPT has a significantly negative effect on industrial sulfur dioxide (SO) and industrial soot (dust) emissions but has no significant impact on industrial wastewater emissions. The mechanism analysis reveals that the EPT has the tax enforcement effect and energy efficiency effect, that is, the EPT reduces pollution emissions through increasing actual tax burden and improving the efficiency of energy utilization. However, the innovation effect is weak, which is only effective in reducing industrial SO emissions. Finally, we compare how different types of cities responded to the EPT. The results show that the EPT has limited effect on environmental pollution in large cities and southern China.
环境保护税（EPT）是中国的一项重要环境政策。然而，自 2018 年实施以来，其是否有效降低了环境污染仍不清楚。基于 2015-2019 年中国 229 个地级市的面板数据和双重差分（DID）模型，本研究实证评估了 EPT 对环境污染的因果影响。结果表明，EPT 对工业二氧化硫（SO）和工业烟尘（粉尘）排放有显著的负向影响，但对工业废水排放没有显著影响。机制分析表明，EPT 具有税收执法效应和能源效率效应，即 EPT 通过提高实际税负和提高能源利用效率来减少污染排放。然而，创新效应较弱，仅对减少工业 SO 排放有效。最后，我们比较了不同类型的城市对 EPT 的反应。结果表明，EPT 对大城市和中国南方的环境污染影响有限。
