JAPAN-ENVIRONMENT: Proposed Pollution Tax Delayed by Divisions

By Suvendrini Kakuchi Reprint | | Print |

Suvendrini Kakuchi

TOKYO, Jun 13 1996 (IPS) - From the official level, to the business community and the public at large, advocates pushing for new laws to clean up the environment in Japan are locked in battle with the powerful industrial lobby over a proposed environment tax.

The wide divisions are delaying the introduction of the tax which proponents say is necessary to curb rising pollution in a country that has been identified as the No.2 culprit after the United States, in the release of ozone depleting substances into the atmosphere.

“Plans for setting-up an environmental tax that covers air, water and waste pollution has been bandied about for many years now. But it is still difficult to get started,” explained Masanori Shoji of the government’s Environment Agency.

His agency is crossing swords with the Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI), which along with the business community question what effect, if any, would the introduction of the tax have on curbing pollution.

Moreover, Japanese companies stress that the tax would hamper economic growth and reduce their competitiveness in the international market, and suggest that in the end it is the Japanese consumer who will pay the price for the technology that may have to be bought to meet any new standards.

“They have a strong argument,” acknowledges Shoji. “There is no accepted standard in the world, yet, when it comes to the pollution control effectiveness of an environmental tax.”

The MITI says industrialists too are concerned about the environment and should be encouraged to make voluntary decisions on pollution reduction.

The Keidanren, Japan’s largest official business conglomeration says pollution reduction targets set by the Environment Agency are simply too tough to meet and claimed that Japan’s efforts to tackle global warming are already among the world’s most extensive.

“Nikkei Weekly”, Japan’s largest financial newspaper, rapped Keidanren for its stance. In an April editorial the paper supported the carbon tax explaining that without it, Japan’s commitment to curbing greenhouses gases to the 1990 level by the year 2000, will not be achieved.

“Our analysis has found that a carbon tax could have positive effects on economic activity if paired with corporate-tax cuts,” the newspaper points out in its editorial.

It goes on to call on Keidanren to change its “shortsighted” stance of emphasising economic growth above all else.

According to Shoji, the Environment Agency official, an environment tax, once accepted, would have implications for both individual polluters and industry.

While he says that no concrete tax figures have been planned yet, there have been reports that the government is thinking of imposing a 30,000 yen (3,000 dollar) tax on every ton of carbon dioxide. Individual polluters could face fines of about 300 dollars.

According to official statistics, Japan’s total carbon dioxide emissions are above 30 million tonnes per year. Industries, including the transport and energy sector, account for more than 80 per cent of the share, reports the Environment Agency which projects that at current rates, carbon dioxide emissions would rise by 2.3 per cent rise by next year.

In a report released earlier this year, international environmental group Greenpeace, said that Japanese industry and household energy consumption are responsible for 13 per cent of ozone depleting substances that include chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs).

This is more than any other country except the United States which accounts for 30 per cent of global production of ozone- depleting substances.

CFCs — a combination of chlorine, fluorine and carbon — can be used as propellants for aerosols, as cooling agents and in the manufacture of polystyrene foam that cause irreparable damage to the thin layer of ozone that surrounds the planet.

Prof Takehisa Awaji, who teaches Environmental Law at Tokyo University, hopes that it will not be long before the official and private industrial lobby accepts responsibility just how much damage is being done to the environment and to the health of the Japanese population by excessive pollution rates.

“Then there is bound to be some move towards a new environmental tax. However we must make sure it will be effective enough,” Awaji says.

Already, citizens groups are agitating for urgent steps to be taken to curb pollution.

Last week, a group of ailing Tokyo residents filed a lawsuit against the government, seven Japanese auto-makers and the Metropolitan Expressway Public Corp, for compensation totalling 2.6 billion yen (about 26 million dollars) for the damage caused to their health as a consequence of air-pollution.

The Environment Agency’s white paper published earlier this year, stresses the need for the government, private enterprises and citizens groups to work together in an equal partnership to solve Japan’s environmental problems.

The paper says close consultation between the various interest groups is essential for developing new environmental standards and encourages a departure from the traditional confrontational stances that have marked the relationship before.