面對歐盟碳邊境調整機制（Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, CBAM）實施，台灣碳費政策除具有減碳功能外，亦影響出口競爭力與供應鏈調整。本文評估在此情境下，碳費對台灣實質所得、貿易條件、實質工資、產業產出、碳排放及綜合所得之影響。利用多國多產業量化貿易模型和 2020 年 OECD 跨國投入產出表、產業溫室氣體排放、關稅及碳定價資料進行反事實模擬，結果顯示，台灣在 CBAM 已實施下徵收現行約每公噸二氧化碳當量 10 美元碳費，實質所得增加 0.047%，排放量下降 2.091%，但貿易條件與實質工資仍小幅下降，總體所得改善部分主要來自碳費收入。納入環境所得後，綜合所得增加 0.05%，其中環境所得增加 0.003%。高碳密集產業如化學品、電力與基本金屬承受較大產出壓力，部分服務業與中下游製造業則受益於相對成本重分配。進一步模擬發現，台灣綜合所得最大化的碳費約為每公噸二氧化碳當量 38 美元。

With the implementation of the European Union’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), Taiwan’s carbon fee policy not only serves as an emissions-reduction instrument but also affects export competitiveness and supply-chain adjustment. This study evaluates how the carbon fee affects Taiwan’s real income, terms of trade, real wages, sectoral output, carbon emissions, and comprehensive income under this policy environment. A multi-country, multi-sector quantitative trade model is developed using the 2020 OECD Inter-Country Input-Output Table, sectoral emissions data, tariff data, and carbon pricing data. Under CBAM, Taiwan’s current carbon fee of approximately USD 10 per ton of CO2e raises real income by 0.047% and reduces emissions by 2.091%, although terms of trade and real wages decline slightly. The improvement in real income is mainly attributable to carbon-fee revenue. Comprehensive income increases by 0.05%, including a 0.003% increase in environmental income. Carbon-intensive sectors, such as chemicals, electricity, and basic metals, experience larger output reductions, while some services and downstream manufacturing sectors benefit from cost reallocation. The comprehensive-income-maximizing fee is estimated at USD 38 per ton of CO2e.

Burke, J., Taschini, L., Doda, B., Ortiz, V., & Steinlein, A. (2024). Policy measures to respond to carbon fee impacts on industry in Taiwan. Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment; adelphi.
Burke, J., Taschini, L., Evans, S., Gulrajani, K., & Tam, A. (2020). Carbon pricing options for Taiwan. Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment; Vivid Economics.
Caliendo, L., & Parro, F. (2015). Estimates of the Trade and Welfare Effects of NAFTA. The Review of Economic Studies, 82(1), 1–44. https://doi.org/10.1093/restud/rdu035
Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S). (2025). Global climate highlights 2024. European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts. https://climate.copernicus.eu/
Dekle, R., Eaton, J., & Kortum, S. (2007). Unbalanced Trade. The American Economic Review, 97(2), 351–355. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.97.2.351
Dy, K. B., & Yang, H. (2025). Global emissions and international trade: Quantifying the impact of carbon border adjustments. Energy Economics, 145, Article 108373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2025.108373
Eaton, J., & Kortum, S. (2002). Technology, Geography, and Trade. Econometrica, 70(5), 1741–1779. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0262.00352
Eppinger, P., Felbermayr, G., Krebs, O., & Kukharskyy, B. (2021). Decoupling global value chains. CESifo Working Paper. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3848341
Flórez Mendoza, J., Reiter, O., & Stehrer, R. (2024). EU carbon border tax: General equilibrium effects on income and emissions (wiiw Working Paper No. 254). The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies.
Fontagné, L., Guimbard, H., & Orefice, G. (2022). Tariff-based product-level trade elasticities. Journal of International Economics, 137, Article 103593. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinteco.2022.103593
Freeman, R., Larch, M., Theodorakopoulos, A., & Yotov, Y. V. (2021). Unlocking new methods to estimate country-specific trade costs and trade elasticities. CESifo Working Paper. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3971989
Korpar, N., Larch, M., & Stöllinger, R. (2023). The European carbon border adjustment mechanism: a small step in the right direction. International Economics and Economic Policy, 20(1), 95–138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10368-022-00550-9
Kurz, A., & Rubínová, S. (2024). Trade effects of carbon pricing policies (WTO Staff Working Paper ERSD-2024-08). World Trade Organization, Economic Research and Statistics Division. https://www.wto.org
Mortha, A., Arimura, T. H., Takeda, S., Steubing, B. R. P., & Chesnokova, T. (2025). Industrial relocation or shorter shipping routes? Examining the impact of the EU’s carbon border adjustment mechanism on global emissions using structural gravity. Economic Analysis and Policy, 87, 1708–1741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eap.2025.07.019
Ossa, R. (2016). Quantitative Models of Commercial Policy. NBER Working Paper Series, 22062. https://doi.org/10.3386/w22062
Ricke, K., Drouet, L., Caldeira, K., & Tavoni, M. (2018). Country-level social cost of carbon. Nature Climate Change, 8(10), 895–900. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0282-y
Takeda, S., & Arimura, T. H. (2024). A computable general equilibrium analysis of the EU CBAM for the Japanese economy. Japan and the World Economy, 70, Article 101242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.japwor.2024.101242
World Bank. (2020). World Integrated Trade Solution (WITS): Tariff data. https://wits.worldbank.org
World Bank. (2025). State and trends of carbon pricing 2025. World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-2255-1
Yamano, N., Alsamawi, A., Webb, C., Cimper, A., Zürcher, C., & Pechansky, R. C. (2023). Development of the OECD Inter Country Input-Output Database 2023. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers, 2023(08). https://doi.org/10.1787/5a5d0665-en.
Yamano, N., Lioussis, M., & Cimper, A. (2024). Measuring greenhouse gas footprints in global production networks: New perspectives on emissions embodied in production chains and final demand patterns. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers, 2024(12). https://doi.org/10.1787/fc426ab9-en.
李金全、楊宗翰（2024）。碳邊境稅之引力－台灣是否應課徵碳稅以應對歐盟 CBAM ？。經濟論文，52(4)，319-358。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=1018161x-N202501110024-00001
蕭代基、黃琝琇、林師模、傅俞瑄（2022）。國際碳邊境調整機制對臺灣減碳與經濟的影響。臺灣能源期刊，9(2)，1-24。
環境部（2025）。碳費專區。 https://www.cca.gov.tw/affairs/carbon-fee-fund/2301.html