Blog Post

The European Green Deal must cut hidden fossil fuel subsidies

Brussels should ensure that fossil fuels do not get direct or indirect support from governments

By: Date: March 4, 2020 Topic: Energy & Climate

One of the basic ideas in economics is that you tend to get the best results if people or firms that take decisions have to take account of all the benefits and costs. Climate change and pollution perhaps represent the two most evident examples of situations where that may not happen. Emitters and polluters have no incentive to consider the impact of their emissions and pollution for society as a whole. It is what economics textbooks call an ‘externality’: the adverse effects of greenhouse gas emissions or pollution are ‘external’ to the market, which means there is usually only an ethical – rather than an economic – incentive for firms and consumers to reduce their emissions. That is, when free markets do not maximise society’s welfare, they are said to ‘fail’ and policy intervention may be needed to correct them or, more precisely, to internalise them. The most common way governments and institutions do so is to impose a tax on the producers of a negative externality. This is could be done to encourage a polluter to reduce their emissions. It is interesting to note that this principle is 100-year-old, as Arthur Cecil Pigou – an economist of the University of Cambridge – first introduced the concept of externalities and the idea of correcting them with a tax in 1920.

As the EU develops its European Green Deal, it is important to evaluate whether European countries are successfully internalising the climate externality, or not. To do so, it is crucial to analyse how fossil fuels are currently subsidised. Combustion of fossil fuels is the main cause of climate change, and phasing-out fossil fuels is the primary solution. Consequently, the main climate policy is to ensure that fossil fuels do not get direct or indirect support from governments.

Fossil fuel subsidies can be measured in two different ways. The first is a narrow measure, termed pre-tax subsidies, which simply reflects differences between the amount consumers actually pay for fuel use and the corresponding cost of supplying the fuel. The second is a broader measure, termed post-tax subsidies, which reflects differences between actual consumer fuel prices and how much consumers would pay if prices fully reflected supply costs plus the taxes needed to reflect environmental costs and revenue requirements.

While the international debate tends to focus on the first measure of subsidies, it seems more sensible to focus on the second, broader, measure as this is the only way to unveil the eventual ‘hidden subsidies’ given to fossil fuels simply by not properly internalising (i.e., taxing) their environmental costs including climate change, local air pollution traffic congestion and traffic accidents.

The most accurate estimation of global post-tax subsidies is provided by the International Monetary Fund. According to that, EU post-tax subsidies stood at $261 billion in 2015 – with the top-4 subsidisers being Germany ($72 billion), France ($35 billion), Poland ($29 billion) and Spain ($25 billion) (Table 1).

In the context of the European Green Deal, President von der Leyen proposed a Sustainable Investment Plan to mobilise a “green investment wave” of € 1 trillion over ten years. To put things into perspective, the cumulative amount of current € post-tax subsidies projected over ten years goes well beyond € 2 trillion.

This implies that in the context of the European Green Deal, it will be of paramount importance to push for the full internalisation of fossil fuels’ environmental externalities. Hence, Europe’s current carbon pricing system needs to be substantially scaled up.

Today, only half of European emissions are priced, and carbon prices remain too low to drive significant behavioural changes. So, it is clear that carbon prices should go wider and higher. A meaningful carbon price should be established for all sectors, by reforming and strengthening the EU emissions trading system (ETS) and by pushing EU countries to increase the price for emissions not covered by the ETS through a reform of the Energy Taxation Directive.

These two policy actions should be prioritised in the context of the European Green Deal, as they are the only ones that could contribute to the elimination of the ‘hidden subsidies’ Europe still grants every year to fossil fuels. This is the first real step that should be taken to seriously pursue the 2050 climate neutrality path.

The author is grateful to Ian Parry and Georg Zachmann for useful comments.

 

Table 1. EU post-tax subsidies to fossil fuels, 2015 (USD billions)

Gasoline Diesel Natural gas Coal Total
Austria 0 2 0 1 3
Belgium 1 3 2 1 7
Bulgaria 0 1 0 4 5
Croatia 0 0 0 1 1
Cyprus 0 0 0 0 0
Czech Republic 0 1 1 11 14
Denmark 2 3 0 0 6
Estonia 0 0 0 0 0
Finland 0 1 0 1 2
France 4 24 4 3 35
Germany 5 20 7 39 72
Greece 0 1 0 3 4
Hungary 0 1 1 2 4
Ireland 1 2 1 0 3
Italy 0 3 7 4 14
Latvia 0 0 0 0 0
Lithuania 0 1 0 0 1
Luxembourg 0 2 0 0 2
Malta 0 0 0 0 0
Netherlands 1 3 3 3 10
Poland 1 2 2 24 29
Portugal 0 1 1 1 2
Romania 0 1 1 8 10
Slovak Republic 0 0 1 1 2
Slovenia 0 0 0 1 1
Spain 3 15 3 4 25
Sweden 2 2 0 1 5
TOTAL EU 22 89 37 113 261

Source: Bruegel elaboration on IMF, Energy Subsidies Template, 2019


Republishing and referencing

Bruegel considers itself a public good and takes no institutional standpoint. Anyone is free to republish and/or quote this post without prior consent. Please provide a full reference, clearly stating Bruegel and the relevant author as the source, and include a prominent hyperlink to the original post.

Read about event More on this topic
 

Past Event

Past Event

An EU budget for Europe's future with Johannes Hahn

How do we make the EU fit for future?

Speakers: Zsolt Darvas, Johannes Hahn and Mehreen Khan Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: July 7, 2020
Read article Download PDF
 

External Publication

European Parliament

A Just Transition Fund – How the EU budget can help with the transition

On 14 January 2020, the European Commission published its proposal for a Just Transition Mechanism, intended to provide support to territories facing serious socioeconomic challenges related to the transition towards climate neutrality. This report provides a comprehensive analysis of how the EU can best ensure a ‘just transition’ in all its territories and for all its citizens with the tools at its disposal. It provides an overview and a critical assessment of the Commission's proposal, and suggests possible amendments based on best practices from other just-transition initiatives.

By: Aliénor Cameron, Grégory Claeys, Catarina Midões and Simone Tagliapietra Topic: Energy & Climate, European Macroeconomics & Governance, European Parliament Date: May 26, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

Building a Post-Pandemic World Will Not Be Easy

Both the COVID-19 crisis and the climate crisis highlight the limits of humanity’s power over nature. But while both remind us that the Anthropocene epoch may jeopardize our continued existence, and that benign everyday behavior can result in catastrophic outcomes, such similarities must not obscure crucial differences.

By: Jean Pisani-Ferry Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: April 30, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Blog Post

A green recovery

Government policy faces various challenges. Before the COVID-19 outbreak, the European Union set ambitious targets to reduce carbon emissions. Now in the midst of the pandemic, the EU has temporarily lifted state-aid rules allowing governments to steer companies through the crisis and to minimise job losses using public money. This column suggests combining these policies by attaching green conditions to state aid. In that way, we can aim for a green recovery.

By: Dirk Schoenmaker Topic: Energy & Climate Date: April 6, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Podcast

Podcast

The European Green Deal rules

When it comes to global carbon emission is a tax the best form of defence? To make the European Green Deal work, the EU is considering a levy on carbon-intensive goods manufactured beyond its borders. But will a carbon border tax spawn a massive bureaucracy and lead to accusations of protectionism? To find out, Nicholas Barrett talked to Georg Zachmann and Ben McWilliams from Bruegel and Gabriel Felbermayr, President of the Kiel Institute for the World Economy.

By: The Sound of Economics Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: March 9, 2020
Read about event More on this topic
 

Past Event

Past Event

On gains, losses, and trade-offs: the case of Border Carbon Adjustment

How will the border carbon adjustment be implemented and what will be the implications?

Speakers: Gabriel Felbermayr, André Sapir and Georg Zachmann Topic: Energy & Climate Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: March 5, 2020
Read article Download PDF
 

Policy Contribution

A European carbon border tax: much pain, little gain

The European Commission should not make the implementation of a carbon border adjustment mechanism into a must-have element of its climate policy. There is little in the way of strong empirical evidence that would justify a carbon-adjustment measure. Moreover, significant logistical, legal and political challenges will arise during the design. The EU should instead focus upon the implementation of measures to trigger the development of a competitive low-carbon industry in Europe.

By: Ben McWilliams and Georg Zachmann Topic: Energy & Climate, European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: March 5, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Podcast

Podcast

Can the European Green Deal kill the single market?

The European Green Deal is one of the landmarks of Ursula von der Leyen's Commission. But, without an ambitious investment behind it, what could be its potential implications for the EU? Could it go as far as to threaten the EU's single market? This week, Renew Europe's vice-president, MEP Luis Garicano, joins Guntram Wolff and Maria Demertzis to discuss not only the European Green Deal but also the EU Budget and the Banking Union. Disclaimer: this episode was recorded on the 20th of February, before Bruegel hosted the event "The Ressurection of the European Banking Union".

By: The Sound of Economics Topic: Energy & Climate Date: February 25, 2020
Read article More on this topic
 

Opinion

Europe’s Green Deal must reach beyond its borders

A European Climate and Sustainable Development Bank could become the external investment arm of the European Green Deal.

By: Simone Tagliapietra and Georg Zachmann Topic: Energy & Climate Date: February 4, 2020
Read article More on this topic
 

Opinion

Berlin will make or break the European Green Deal

€1 trillion isn't enough for the European Green Deal and the EU's fiscal framework is constraining public investment. "Mrs Merkel, tear down this rule".

By: Grégory Claeys and Simone Tagliapietra Topic: Energy & Climate Date: February 3, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Podcast

Podcast

Paying for the European Green Deal

The European Commission has presented its Just Transition Fund to help regions still dependent on fossil fuel as they move towards green energy. But where does the money come from and is it enough to make Europe carbon neutral by 2050? Should the EU re-write its fiscal rules to encourage sustainable investment? And should environmentalists be optimistic? Nicholas Barrett asked Simone Tagliapietra and Grégory Claeys.

By: The Sound of Economics Topic: Energy & Climate Date: January 16, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Blog Post

European green finance is expanding, a discount on bank capital would discredit it

If EU banks are to mobilise a greater share of loans for sustainable projects they will need a reliable policy framework, clear internal performance targets and the relevant skills. A discount on bank capital underlying such assets is neither justified nor likely effective. A comprehensive review of how climate risks are reflected in prudential regulation is nevertheless in order

By: Alexander Lehmann Topic: Energy & Climate Date: January 15, 2020
Load more posts