Simon Black, Ian W.H. Parry, Sunalika Singh, and Nate Vernon-Lin
The need to decarbonize international aviation and maritime has long been overlooked. The two sectors account for a small but rapidly growing share of global CO2 emissions, and could rise to as much as 15 to 40 percent by 2040. Pricing these emissions could help global climate policy in two ways. First, it could accelerate technological development while incentivizing efficiency, kick-starting the sectors’ transition to net zero while addressing the sectors’ hitherto favorable tax treatment. Second, pricing could raise up to $200 billion a year in revenues by 2035, which could be allocated to climate finance or other uses. There are significant political obstacles, however, notably reaching consensus on revenue allocation and managing price impacts, which are substantive for flight tickets but less so for shipped goods. Pricing variants, like ‘fee and rebate’ schemes (feebates), have lower price impacts but raise fewer revenues. This paper discusses these policies, using a new model to quantify impacts on fuel use, emissions, revenues, production and economic costs, and on vulnerable states.
This paper examines the case for internationally coordinated indirect taxes on aviation (as a source of general revenue-not (necessarily) as a source of development finance). The case for such taxes is strong: the tax burden on international aviation is currently limited, yet it contributes significantly to border-crossing environmental damage. A tax on aviation fuel would address the key border-crossing externalities most directly; a ticket tax could raise more revenue; departure taxes face the least legal obstacles. Optimal policy requires deploying both fuel and ticket taxes. A fuel tax of 20 U.S. cents per gallon (10 percent, at today's fuel prices, corresponding to assessed environmental damage), or alternatively ticket taxes of 2.5 percent, would raise about US$10 billion if imposed worldwide, and US$3 billion if applied only in Europe.