Thursday, July 23, 2026
  • Login
CEO North America
  • Home
  • News
    • Business
    • Entrepreneur
    • Industry
    • Innovation
    • Management & Leadership
  • CEO Interviews
  • Opinion
  • Technology
  • Environment
  • CEO Life
    • Art & Culture
    • Food
    • Health
    • Travel
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • News
    • Business
    • Entrepreneur
    • Industry
    • Innovation
    • Management & Leadership
  • CEO Interviews
  • Opinion
  • Technology
  • Environment
  • CEO Life
    • Art & Culture
    • Food
    • Health
    • Travel
No Result
View All Result
CEO North America
No Result
View All Result

CEO NA Magazine > CEO Life > Environment > Emission taxes may undermine corporate investment and do little for the environment

Emission taxes may undermine corporate investment and do little for the environment

in Environment
Emission taxes may undermine corporate investment and do little for the environment
Share on LinkedinShare on WhatsApp

As the search for climate solutions grows more urgent, the World Bank as of mid-2025 registered 43 carbon tax initiatives worldwide, at both national and regional levels. A decade earlier, only a dozen countries, mostly in northern Europe, had them. Even today, neither the U.S. nor China has adopted a carbon tax; in total, only 5.6% of estimated greenhouse gas emissions worldwide are covered by them.

But in deciding to impose taxes on emissions it’s important to consider their consequences for companies, the economy and the environment, as well as to determine whether polluters do actually pay or become greener as a result.

Research by IESE’s Martin Jacob, together with Kira Zerwer of WHU-Otto Beisheim School of Management, indicates emission taxes may unexpectedly undermine capital investment. Companies invested less after the introduction of a tax — not because they wanted to curtail pollution but because of the financial burden of the heavier taxation. Particularly impacted were companies unable to pass the extra tax costs on to consumers or suppliers.

A second piece of research by Jacob and Zerwer, together with Thilo Erbertseder and Hannes Taubenböck, both of the German Aerospace Center, used satellite-based data to measure actual emissions, and found the tax served as a slight nudge in the right direction but failed to have major impact on the targeted greenhouse gases.

“Emission taxes might not have the desired impact,” the first study finds, “suggesting that policy makers may utilize other tools from their regulatory toolbox to tackle polluting firms and make them more efficient actors in climate policy.”

Higher taxes, lower investment 

The research looks at two neighboring provinces in Spain: Alicante and Murcia. The regional government of Alicante, following European Union directives, quickly introduced an emission tax on sulfur oxides (SOx) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) at the start of 2013; neighboring Murcia did not.

The Alicante reform substantially increased corporations’ tax bills — on average, by 7% compared with their Murcia neighbors — and generated additional compliance costs and a surge in demand for advisory services.

So far, that’s according to plan: make polluters pay more. And almost every new environmental regulation is accompanied by an immediate jump in compliance costs and in demand for consultants, as companies scramble to adjust to different rules. A higher tax bill could be a mark of policy success, even if companies don’t like it.

The problem lies in how firms paid the additional taxes. Often, they did so by cutting back on investments in fixed assets. Companies in Alicante scaled back investment by nearly 1% of total assets, relative to those in Murcia, after the introduction of the tax.

High and low polluters respond the same

Additionally, there was no link between industry-level emissions of SOx and NOx and investment response: the investment decline was similar across high- and low-polluting industries alike. That means companies were forced to reduce investment for purely economic reasons, independent of environmental considerations.

In fact, high-emitting industries in which tax costs could be passed on to suppliers or customers could continue investing. This happened at the cost of some low-emitting industries that cut investment because they ultimately needed to shoulder part of the emission tax burden through higher input prices from high-emitting industries.

Turning again to France and Ireland, the research finds that the investment response in those countries was unrelated to the level of CO2 emissions in an industry. Instead, as in Spain, investments of firms operating in more competitive markets, with low pricing power or with low financial flexibility, were the most affected by the CO2 taxes.

And what about actual emissions? In some senses, “pollution level” is the metric that matters most. The second piece of research examined the same region for indications of whether NOx levels dropped following the tax. Using satellite-based data, the researchers found the tax achieved a modest 1.2% decline in NO2 levels annually, equivalent to approximately 728 tons of NOx emissions. There were stronger reductions in industrial areas and among innovative firms and larger companies, emphasizing the role of technological capacity in climate adaptation.

All of the findings underline that, unfortunately, there’s no single, easy way to convince companies to go green. A simple tax on emissions may not be the answer.

Policymakers must develop a more complex toolkit, including measures such as tax incentives for dirty firms to invest in green technology, and a binding and effective cap on the volume of emissions.

Read the full article by Martin Jacob / IESE

Related Posts

The role of the Chief AI Officer (CAIO)
Environment

Flexible data centers can reduce costs — if not emissions

Big Tech purchases of carbon credits explode amid AI race, with Microsoft leading the way
Environment

How to build a sustainable business

Environment

Why climate and energy entrepreneurs need their own playbook

Trump promised to cut electric bills in half. His energy policy is doing the opposite, new analysis finds
Environment

Trump promised to cut electric bills in half. His energy policy is doing the opposite, new analysis finds

What Google’s quantum computing breakthrough Willow means for the future of bitcoin and other cryptos
Environment

Google backs nuclear fusion startup targeting Europe’s first commercial power plant

Why New Jersey’s balcony solar bill is a huge deal for renters
Environment

Why New Jersey’s balcony solar bill is a huge deal for renters

How Limitless Green Energy Would Change the World
Environment

The Importance of Sustainability Strategy in Business: Driving Environmental Change

Extreme heat is miserable and dangerous. It’s also making us age faster
Environment

Should you go to work during a heat wave? Your productivity suffers, and GDP tanks when it’s hot

Trump pledges rapid U.S. response for Venezuela after historic earthquakes kill dozens
Environment

Trump pledges rapid U.S. response for Venezuela after historic earthquakes kill dozens

Chevron to fuel massive Microsoft data center in Texas with natural gas
Environment

Chevron to fuel massive Microsoft data center in Texas with natural gas

No Result
View All Result

Recent Posts

  • Hyundai reports a 21% decrease in Q2 operating profit
  • Uber Cuts 10% of Customer Service staff in ‘Adoption’ of AI
  • Putting CEO Candidates to the Test
  • Flexible data centers can reduce costs — if not emissions
  • Nestle CEO reports Q2 organic sales growth and deal with Platinum Equity

Archives

Categories

  • Art & Culture
  • Business
  • CEO Interviews
  • CEO Life
  • Editor´s Choice
  • Entrepreneur
  • Environment
  • Food
  • Health
  • Highlights
  • Industry
  • Innovation
  • Issues
  • Management & Leadership
  • News
  • Opinion
  • PrimeZone
  • Printed Version
  • Technology
  • Travel
  • Uncategorized

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

  • CONTACT
  • GENERAL ENQUIRIES
  • ADVERTISING
  • MEDIA KIT
  • DIRECTORY
  • TERMS AND CONDITIONS

Advertising –
advertising@ceo-na.com

110 Wall St.,
3rd Floor
New York, NY.
10005
USA
+1 212 432 5800

Avenida Chapultepec 480,
Floor 11
Mexico City
06700
MEXICO

  • News
  • CEO Interviews
  • Opinion
  • Technology
  • Environment
  • CEO Life

  • CONTACT
  • GENERAL ENQUIRIES
  • ADVERTISING
  • MEDIA KIT
  • DIRECTORY
  • TERMS AND CONDITIONS

Advertising –
advertising@ceo-na.com

110 Wall St.,
3rd Floor
New York, NY.
10005
USA
+1 212 432 5800

Avenida Chapultepec 480,
Floor 11
Mexico City
06700
MEXICO

CEO North America © 2024 - Sitemap

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password?

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • News
    • Business
    • Entrepreneur
    • Industry
    • Innovation
    • Management & Leadership
  • CEO Interviews
  • Opinion
  • Technology
  • Environment
  • CEO Life
    • Art & Culture
    • Food
    • Health
    • Travel

© 2026 JNews - Premium WordPress news & magazine theme by Jegtheme.