Let us now turn to the decisions that the governments would make if they were inde- pendently choosing whether to impose a tax or not. In the US, firms using the clean technology emit a total of 0 tonnes of CO2 emissions, while firms using the polluting technology emit a total of 900 tonnes of CO2 emissions. In Fiji, firms using the clean technology emit 0 tonnes of CO2 emissions, while firms using the polluting technology emit 100 tonnes of CO2 emissions. The governments of each country care about three things: (1) how much net profits their representative firm makes, (2) how many total CO2 emissions are emitted in the world, and (3) how much tax income they receive. In particular, let πi (qi) denote the profits of the representative firm in country i when it chooses technology qi and E(qu, qF) = Eu (qu)+EF (qF) the total CO2 emissions in the world. Then each country's payoffs are given by: - Uu (qu, qF, E) = 1000 × [TU (qu) — TU] — E(qu, qF) + 1000 × TU UF (qu,qF, E) = πF (qF) — TF – 100 × E(qu,qF) + TF Suppose that each country can choose between a lump-sum tax of T₁ = 2 and no tax Ti = 0. Countries can only impose taxes on their own firms, not on the firms of the other countries. No-Tax Tax (10000,-99989) (10100,-89990) (9900, -9989) (10000,10) 1. Explain carefully the intuition behind this result. What can we learn from this model about the difficulty of reducing CO2 emissions globally? Is there an outcome that both countries would prefer? Is there an outcome that one country would prefer? USA/Fiji No-Tax Tax
Let us now turn to the decisions that the governments would make if they were inde- pendently choosing whether to impose a tax or not. In the US, firms using the clean technology emit a total of 0 tonnes of CO2 emissions, while firms using the polluting technology emit a total of 900 tonnes of CO2 emissions. In Fiji, firms using the clean technology emit 0 tonnes of CO2 emissions, while firms using the polluting technology emit 100 tonnes of CO2 emissions. The governments of each country care about three things: (1) how much net profits their representative firm makes, (2) how many total CO2 emissions are emitted in the world, and (3) how much tax income they receive. In particular, let πi (qi) denote the profits of the representative firm in country i when it chooses technology qi and E(qu, qF) = Eu (qu)+EF (qF) the total CO2 emissions in the world. Then each country's payoffs are given by: - Uu (qu, qF, E) = 1000 × [TU (qu) — TU] — E(qu, qF) + 1000 × TU UF (qu,qF, E) = πF (qF) — TF – 100 × E(qu,qF) + TF Suppose that each country can choose between a lump-sum tax of T₁ = 2 and no tax Ti = 0. Countries can only impose taxes on their own firms, not on the firms of the other countries. No-Tax Tax (10000,-99989) (10100,-89990) (9900, -9989) (10000,10) 1. Explain carefully the intuition behind this result. What can we learn from this model about the difficulty of reducing CO2 emissions globally? Is there an outcome that both countries would prefer? Is there an outcome that one country would prefer? USA/Fiji No-Tax Tax
Chapter1: Making Economics Decisions
Section: Chapter Questions
Problem 1QTC
Related questions
Question
![Let us now turn to the decisions that the governments would make if they were inde-
pendently choosing whether to impose a tax or not. In the US, firms using the clean
technology emit a total of 0 tonnes of CO2 emissions, while firms using the polluting
technology emit a total of 900 tonnes of CO2 emissions. In Fiji, firms using the clean
technology emit 0 tonnes of CO2 emissions, while firms using the polluting technology
emit 100 tonnes of CO2 emissions.
The governments of each country care about three things: (1) how much net profits
their representative firm makes, (2) how many total CO2 emissions are emitted in the
world, and (3) how much tax income they receive. In particular, let πi (qi) denote
the profits of the representative firm in country i when it chooses technology qi and
E(qu, qF) = Eu (qu)+EF (qF) the total CO2 emissions in the world. Then each country's
payoffs are given by:
-
Uu (qu, qF, E) = 1000 × [TU (qu) — TU] — E(qu, qF) + 1000 × TU
UF (qu,qF, E) = πF (qF) — TF – 100 × E(qu,qF) + TF
Suppose that each country can choose between a lump-sum tax of T₁ = 2 and no tax
Ti = 0. Countries can only impose taxes on their own firms, not on the firms of the other
countries.
No-Tax
Tax
(10000,-99989) (10100,-89990)
(9900, -9989) (10000,10)
1. Explain carefully the intuition behind this result. What can we learn from
this model about the difficulty of reducing CO2 emissions globally? Is
there an outcome that both countries would prefer? Is there an outcome
that one country would prefer?
USA/Fiji
No-Tax
Tax](/v2/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcontent.bartleby.com%2Fqna-images%2Fquestion%2F7d713ce5-0208-49a4-adc0-3bc535dafc50%2F6020bb7d-5ce1-40ce-803d-e5bdbcc79356%2Fum389j9_processed.png&w=3840&q=75)
Transcribed Image Text:Let us now turn to the decisions that the governments would make if they were inde-
pendently choosing whether to impose a tax or not. In the US, firms using the clean
technology emit a total of 0 tonnes of CO2 emissions, while firms using the polluting
technology emit a total of 900 tonnes of CO2 emissions. In Fiji, firms using the clean
technology emit 0 tonnes of CO2 emissions, while firms using the polluting technology
emit 100 tonnes of CO2 emissions.
The governments of each country care about three things: (1) how much net profits
their representative firm makes, (2) how many total CO2 emissions are emitted in the
world, and (3) how much tax income they receive. In particular, let πi (qi) denote
the profits of the representative firm in country i when it chooses technology qi and
E(qu, qF) = Eu (qu)+EF (qF) the total CO2 emissions in the world. Then each country's
payoffs are given by:
-
Uu (qu, qF, E) = 1000 × [TU (qu) — TU] — E(qu, qF) + 1000 × TU
UF (qu,qF, E) = πF (qF) — TF – 100 × E(qu,qF) + TF
Suppose that each country can choose between a lump-sum tax of T₁ = 2 and no tax
Ti = 0. Countries can only impose taxes on their own firms, not on the firms of the other
countries.
No-Tax
Tax
(10000,-99989) (10100,-89990)
(9900, -9989) (10000,10)
1. Explain carefully the intuition behind this result. What can we learn from
this model about the difficulty of reducing CO2 emissions globally? Is
there an outcome that both countries would prefer? Is there an outcome
that one country would prefer?
USA/Fiji
No-Tax
Tax
Expert Solution
This question has been solved!
Explore an expertly crafted, step-by-step solution for a thorough understanding of key concepts.
Step by step
Solved in 2 steps
Knowledge Booster
Learn more about
Need a deep-dive on the concept behind this application? Look no further. Learn more about this topic, economics and related others by exploring similar questions and additional content below.Recommended textbooks for you
Principles of Economics (12th Edition)
Economics
ISBN:
9780134078779
Author:
Karl E. Case, Ray C. Fair, Sharon E. Oster
Publisher:
PEARSON
Engineering Economy (17th Edition)
Economics
ISBN:
9780134870069
Author:
William G. Sullivan, Elin M. Wicks, C. Patrick Koelling
Publisher:
PEARSON
Principles of Economics (12th Edition)
Economics
ISBN:
9780134078779
Author:
Karl E. Case, Ray C. Fair, Sharon E. Oster
Publisher:
PEARSON
Engineering Economy (17th Edition)
Economics
ISBN:
9780134870069
Author:
William G. Sullivan, Elin M. Wicks, C. Patrick Koelling
Publisher:
PEARSON
Principles of Economics (MindTap Course List)
Economics
ISBN:
9781305585126
Author:
N. Gregory Mankiw
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving Approach
Economics
ISBN:
9781337106665
Author:
Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike Shor
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
Managerial Economics & Business Strategy (Mcgraw-…
Economics
ISBN:
9781259290619
Author:
Michael Baye, Jeff Prince
Publisher:
McGraw-Hill Education