|
on Transport Economics |
| By: | Michelle Harding |
| Abstract: | Diesel and gasoline account for around 95% of energy used for road transport in the OECD and for the largest share of revenue from taxes on energy. In 33 out of 34 OECD countries, diesel fuel is taxed at lower rates than gasoline both in terms of energy and carbon content. To assess whether this difference is warranted from an environmental perspective, this paper examines the rationales for taxing both fuels, considering the externalities (including local air pollution, carbon emissions and other social costs related to road transport) associated with the use of each fuel and the fuel efficiency advantage of diesel vehicles. The revenue, distributional and competitiveness consequences of increasing tax rates on diesel are also briefly considered and the revenue effects of the tax treatment of diesel are shown to be significant. We conclude that the externalities associated with each fuel show that the lower tax rates that currently apply to diesel fuel are not justifiable from an environmental perspective. Reduction of the diesel differential is warranted. A gradual approach to removing the differential would allow the adverse distributional and competitiveness impacts to be mitigated during the transitional phase. Avantage fiscal en faveur du gazole : différences de traitement fiscal de l'essence et du gazole à usage routier Le gazole et l’essence représentent environ 95 % de l’énergie consommée pour le transport routier dans la zone OCDE et génèrent l’essentiel des recettes issues des taxes sur l’énergie. Dans 33 des 34 pays de l’OCDE, le gazole est taxé à des taux inférieurs à ceux applicables à l’essence, tant du point de vue du contenu énergétique que de la teneur en carbone. Afin de déterminer si cette différence est justifiée d’un point de vue environnemental, ce document examine les raisons qui sous-tendent l’imposition de ces deux types de carburants, tenant compte des externalités (pollution atmosphérique locale, émissions de carbone et autres coûts sociaux induits par le transport routier, etc.) associées à l’utilisation de chacun de ces carburants et la moindre consommation des véhicules diesel. Les conséquences sur le plan des recettes, de la distribution et de la compétitivité d’un relèvement des taux d’imposition du gazole font également l’objet d’une analyse succincte et les répercussions de la taxation du gazole sur les recettes fiscale s’avèrent significatives. En conclusion, les externalités associées à chacun de ces carburants ne justifient pas, d’un point de vue environnemental, les taux d’imposition plus faibles actuellement réservés au gazole. Une réduction de l’avantage fiscal en faveur du gazole est justifiée. Une réduction progressive de cet avantage permettrait l'atténuation dans la phase transitoire des effets défavorables sur la distribution et la compétitivité. |
| Date: | 2014–07–11 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:oec:ctpaaa:21-en&r=tre |
| By: | Beria, Paolo; Laurino, Antonio |
| Abstract: | In recent years, several peer-to-peer carsharing systems have developed worldwide. They allow car owners to share their vehicles in exchange of a monetary compensation. The paper, starting from an online survey carried out in Milan in 2012, analyzes the potentiality of a possible peer-to-peer carsharing service. It investigates the propensity of users to share their vehicles, as well as the moments of the day in which they are willing to make the car available for sharing and the thresholds of minimum income required to take part to the scheme. The survey shows a moderate interest towards the scheme in general, evidencing also a good attitude towards the sharing of private vehicles, especially if made among a small group of trusted users. The supply function has been built starting from the amount of money requested by car owners and the stated windows of weekly availability to share their cars. The analysis of the supply function allows to discriminate between different types of users and highlights how some moments of the day (early morning) have greater potential in terms of available shared vehicles while others are characterized by higher monetary compensations desired by car owners to share their cars (evening). |
| Keywords: | carsharing, peer-to-peer, sustainable mobility |
| JEL: | L91 R41 |
| Date: | 2014–07 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:57379&r=tre |
| By: | Michelle Harding |
| Abstract: | Company cars form a large proportion of the car fleet in many OECD countries and are also influential in determining the composition of the wider vehicle fleet. When employees provided with a company car use that car for personal purposes, personal income tax rules value the benefit in a number of different ways. How accurate these rules are in valuing the benefit has important implications for tax revenue, the environment and other social impacts such as congestion. This paper outlines the tax treatment of company cars and commuting expenses in 27 OECD countries and one partner country. It compares these tax settings with a stylised “benchmark” tax treatment that estimates the full value of the benefit received by employees with company vehicles. The paper demonstrates that the estimated tax expenditures associated with company car taxation in these countries in 2012 can be quite considerable. Significantly, from an environmental perspective, in most countries employees faced no additional increase in tax payable in response to an increase in the assumption of distance driven. Traitement des véhicules de société et des frais de transport au regard de l'impôt sur le revenu des personnes physiques : Estimation des coûts budgétaires et environnementaux Dans de nombreux pays de l’OCDE, les véhicules de société constituent une grande partie de la flotte automobile, et influent également sur la composition du parc de véhicules au sens large. Lorsque les salariés qui disposent d’un véhicule de société l’utilisent pour leur usage personnel, les dispositions relatives à l’impôt sur le revenu valorisent cet avantage de différentes manières. La capacité de ces dispositions à évaluer correctement cet avantage a d’importantes conséquences en matière de recettes fiscales, d’impact environnemental et d’autres coûts sociaux tels que les embouteillages. Ce document présente le régime fiscal des véhicules de société et des frais de transport dans 27 pays de l’OCDE et dans un pays partenaire. Il compare ce régime fiscal avec un régime « de référence » simplifié qui estime la valeur globale de l’avantage dont bénéficient les salariés disposant de véhicules de société. Ce document montre que les dépenses fiscales estimées qui sont associées à l’imposition des véhicules de société dans ces pays en 2012 peuvent être tout à fait considérables. D’un point de vue environnemental, on constate surtout que dans la plupart des pays, les salariés ne subissent pas de hausse d’impôt suite à une augmentation de l’hypothèse relative à la distance parcourue avec leur véhicule de société. |
| Date: | 2014–07–11 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:oec:ctpaaa:20-en&r=tre |
| By: | Mickaël Beaud; Thierry Blayac; Maïté Stéphan |
| Abstract: | This paper derives new monetary measures of traveler’s willingness to pay to save travel time and to improve its reliability. We develop an intuitive model of transport mode choice in which each alternative is fully characterized by its price and the distribution of its random travel time, assuming expected utility preferences over the latter. Hence, the value of time (VOT) and the value of reliability (VOR) are defined and theirs properties are established. Finally, we use data from a discrete choice experiment in stated preferences to illustrate how our measures can provide behavioral estimations of the VOT and the VOR. |
| Date: | 2014–07 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:lam:wpaper:14-06&r=tre |
| By: | Julian Donaubauer; Birgit Meyer; Peter Nunnenkamp |
| Abstract: | We construct comprehensive and comparable indices on the most relevant components of economic infrastructure. An unobserved components model is employed to cover the largest possible number of developing and developed countries over the period 1990-2010. We map major findings from the new indices of infrastructure and provide country rankings, which we also compare with subjective assessments of infrastructure in the World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Report. Finally, we exemplify possible applications related to trade and FDI. By overcoming several data limitations, our new global index can help assess the links between infrastructure and economic development more systematically |
| Keywords: | infrastructure, transport, ICT, energy, finance, unobserved components method, trade, FDI |
| JEL: | O18 C43 C82 F14 F21 |
| Date: | 2014–06 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:kie:kieliw:1929&r=tre |