ENVIRONMENTAL TAXATION TRENDS IN

LITHUANIA AND THE EU MICEIKIENĖ Astrida, prof. dr.

ČIULEVIČIENĖ Vida, prof. dr.

DIJOKAITĖ Goda, master student

Aleksandras Stulginskis University, Lithuania

INTRODUCTION

The problem of the research – there are no empirical studies and it is not clear how environmental taxes are significant for environmental improvement.

The object of the research – environmental taxes. The goal of the research - to evaluate the significance of

environmental taxes for the environmental protection and to evaluate their trends in Lithuania and EU.

In order to achieve the goal the following tasks are set: • To examine the importance of the environmental taxes; • To identify environmental taxation trends in Lithuania

and compare with those taxation trends in EU.

2

METHODS (1)

Theoretical research logic consists of analysis and synthesis of environmental tax concept, significance and systemization of scientific literature and legal information.

Analyzing the significance of the environmental taxes, the following research methods are used:

• Systemization of scientific literature;

• Deduction

• Induction

3

METHODS (2)

To evaluate the significance of environmental taxes and their trends in Lithuania and EU, the following methods are used:

• Statistical data analysis; • Clustering; • Comparison; • Deduction and induction; • Visualization The study period: 2009-2012. Data: Eurostat, The Minister of Environmental of

Lithuania

4

Fig. 1. The trends of pollution tax revenue for polluting the environment from stationary sources of pollution and the pollutant emissions into the atmosphere in 2009 - 2012

(Eurostat, The Minister of Environmental of Lithuania, 2014)

• The pollution tax revenue declined steadily in 2009-2012, while the amount of the pollutants emitted into the atmosphere from stationary sources grew unevenly;

• The tax rate for emissions from stationary sources of pollution increased, so the tax income decreased by 25.83 % in period 2009-2012;

• The amount of pollutants emitted into the atmosphere over the same period increased by 0.54 %.

5

Fig. 2. The trends of pollution tax revenue for polluting the environment from stationary sources of pollution and the pollutant emissions into the open water pool in 2009-2012

(Eurostat, The Minister of Environmental of Lithuania, 2014)

• The pollution tax revenue declined in 2009-2011, while the amount of the pollutants emitted into the open water pool from stationary sources increased.

• Tax revenue reduced in 2012, the amount of pollutants emitted into the open water pool also decreased.

• Tax rate and indexation varied unevenly.

6

• GHG emissions increased in industry sector while the GHG emission decreased slightly in energy and other activities sector.

• The pollution tax revenue for polluting from stationary sources of pollution have decreasing trend.

• Since 2010, the tax rate and the indexation factor increased. GHG emissions increased by 62.65 % in the industry sector while the GHG emissions increased in energy and other activities sector by 10.17 % and 0.92 % respectively.

Fig. 3 The trends of pollution tax revenue for polluting the environment from stationary sources of pollution and the GHG emissions into the atmosphere in 2009-2012

(Eurostat, The Minister of Environmental of Lithuania, 2014)

7

• The pollution tax revenue have increasing trend in 2009-2012. Tax revenue increased by 11.74 %.

• GHG emissions into the atmosphere (transport sector) also have increasing trend. Meanwhile the amount of pollutant emitted into the atmosphere in the transport sector have decreasing trend.

• Pollutant emissions into the atmosphere decreased by 23.26 % in 2009-2012 while the GHG emissions increased by 2.67 % in transport sector.

Fig. 4 The trends of pollution tax revenue for polluting the environment from mobile sources of pollution and the pollutants and GHG emissions into atmosphere in 2009-2012

(Eurostat, The Minister of Environmental of Lithuania, 2014)

8

• The pollution tax revenue increased by 1.4 times in 2009-2012.

• The collected amount of waste have the increasing trend (increased by 8.13 %) but the amount of waste at the end of the year also have increasing trend (33.3 %), so it means that the managed amount of the waste decreased.

Fig. 5 The trends of pollution tax revenue for polluting the with taxable product and packaging waste and the amount of waste in 2009-2012 (Eurostat, The Minister of Environmental of Lithuania, 2014)

9

• The revenue from transport taxes increased by 79.9 % in 2009-2012.

• Although the revenue of the transport tax increased but GHG emissions (from transport sector) into the atmosphere also increased by 2.7 %.

• Pollutant emission decreased by 23.42 % in 2009-2012

Fig. 6 The trends of transport taxes revenue and the pollutants and GHG emissions into atmosphere in 2009-2012

(Eurostat, The Minister of Environmental of Lithuania, 2014)

10

• Lithuanian environmental tax revenue compared with EU average are very small.

• Lithuanian environmental tax revenue amounted 543 million EUR while the EU average reached 10.318 billion EUR in 2009.

• Lithuania environmental tax revenue increased by 0.98 % while the EUR average increased by 12.64 % in the period 2009-2012.

• Environmental taxes revenue as a percentage of GDP increased from 2.36 % to 2.4 % in the period 2009-2012 while Lithuanian environmental tax revenue decreased from 2.02 % to 1.65 % in the same period.

Fig. 7 Environmental taxation trends in Lithuania and EU in 2009-2012

(Eurostat, The Minister of Environmental of Lithuania, 2014)

11

CONSLUSION (1) • Environmental taxes are recognized by researches as one of the most

effective and highest potential fiscal measures which helps to use the natural resources rationally and also helps to reduce the negative impact to the environment;

• After the analysis of environmental taxation trends, the following trends were identified: – The pollution tax revenue declined steadily in 2009-2012, while the amount of

the pollutants emitted into the atmosphere from stationary sources grew unevenly; pollutant emissions into the open water pool have decreasing trend, GHG emissions sources grew unevenly;

– The revenue form the pollution tax for polluting with taxable product and packaging waste and the pollutant emissions during the period was opposite: revenues – declined, pollutants – increased;

– The revenue of pollution tax of polluting the environment from mobile sources of pollution increased in the period 2009-2012; GHG emissions (in transport sector) also increased but pollutant emissions into the atmosphere decreased;

– The revenue of transport taxes increased over the period 2009-2012 but the GHG emission into the atmosphere also increased while pollutant emissions decreased.

12

CONCLUSION (2)

• After the comparison of the environmental tax revenue in Lithuania, EU-28 and EU-19 average, it is noted that the revenue from environmental taxes are very small in Lithuania.

• It is necessary to transform the tax system in Lithuania in order to create a win-win eco-efficient tax strategies that contribute to the sustainable development.

13

Thank You for Your attention

14

ENVIRONMENTAL TAXATION TRENDS IN

LITHUANIA AND THE EU MICEIKIENĖ Astrida, prof. dr.

ČIULEVIČIENĖ Vida, prof. dr.

DIJOKAITĖ Goda, master student

Aleksandras Stulginskis University, Lithuania