本文旨在探討租稅政策與總體經濟變數對台灣電動車市場之影響，並進一步分析價格因素、替代效果、遞延效果及不同總體環境下政策效果之差異。隨著全球淨零排放與運輸部門低碳轉型趨勢加速，電動車已成為各國推動能源轉型與減碳政策之重要工具。台灣政府長期透過租稅優惠推動電動車普及，其中貨物稅減免為降低電動車購置成本之核心政策工具。惟其政策效果是否能有效轉化為市場需求，仍有待實證檢驗。
本文以 2013 年 1 月至 2025 年 12 月之月資料為研究樣本，以台灣純電動小客車新領牌照數之自然對數作為應變數，並納入租稅政策虛擬變數、景氣循環指標、消費者物價指數、95 無鉛汽油價格、重貼現率、價格變數與替代性車種變數進行分析。考量消費者物價指數與工業生產指數於樣本期間具有較高相關性，本文主模型以消費者物價指數作為主要總體需求背景變數，並另以工業生產指數作為替代總體控制變數進行比較。研究方法上，本文採用時間序列普通最小平方法，並使用穩健標準誤（robust standard errors）進行估計；另進一步建構時間趨勢模型、價格效果模型、替代效果模型、遞延效果模型及交互項模型，並透過 Johansen 共整合檢定與 Granger 因果關係檢定，補充分析不同動力車種市場間之長期均衡與動態關係。
實證結果顯示，2017 年貨物稅制度調整對台灣電動車掛牌數具有顯著正向影響，表示貨物稅減免確實有助於降低消費者購車成本，進而推動電動車市場發展。其次，利率於多數模型中呈現顯著負向影響，顯示電動車作為高單價耐久財，對融資成本變動具有高度敏感性。95 無鉛汽油價格則於部分模型中呈現負向效果，顯示在台灣樣本期間內，燃油價格上升所帶來之所得效果可能大於燃油車轉向電動車之替代效果。
價格效果模型結果顯示，非 Tesla 入門電動車價格對電動車掛牌數具有顯著負向影響，說明價格門檻仍是影響台灣電動車普及之重要因素。值得注意的是，當模型納入非 Tesla 入門電動車價格後，租稅政策變數之獨立效果轉為不顯著，顯示租稅政策效果可能部分透過降低購車成本與價格門檻而發揮作用。相較之下，Tesla Model 3 價格效果未呈現顯著結果，顯示其市場影響可能不僅來自價格本身，亦可能包含品牌效果、指標性車款導入、交車時點集中與充電網絡布局等因素。替代效果模型則顯示，燃油車掛牌數與電動車掛牌數呈現正向關聯，反映兩者可能共同受到整體車市需求擴張影響，而非單純呈現同期排擠關係；油電混合車掛牌數則呈現弱負向關聯，顯示油電車與純電車之間可能存在一定競爭或替代關係，但其效果仍須保守解釋。惟共整合與 Granger 因果關係分析顯示，電動車與燃油車、油電混合車之間仍存在長期均衡與動態連動關係，說明不同動力車種市場之關係不宜僅以同期替代效果判斷。
進一步而言，遞延效果模型顯示，總體經濟變數對電動車需求具有一定時滯性，且租稅政策效果在控制落後一期總經變數後仍維持顯著正向。交互項模型則顯示，租稅政策效果具有條件性，其中燃油價格與利率環境會影響政策效果之強弱。整體而言，本文研究結果顯示，租稅優惠政策確實是推動台灣電動車市場成長之重要制度基礎，但其效果仍會受到價格門檻、融資成本、燃油價格環境與市場結構變化等因素影響。未來政策若欲進一步促進電動車普及，除延續租稅優惠外，亦應搭配中低價位車款導入、綠色融資配套、充電基礎設施完善與長期市場結構評估，以提升政策之整體成效。

This study examines the relationship between tax incentives, macroeconomic variables, and Taiwan’s electric vehicle market. It further analyzes the roles of vehicle prices, substitution effects, lagged macroeconomic impacts, and the conditional effects of tax policy under different macroeconomic environments. As electric vehicles have become an important policy instrument for transportation decarbonization, Taiwan has long promoted electric vehicle adoption through tax incentives, with commodity tax exemptions serving as a key tool for reducing purchase costs. However, whether such incentives can effectively translate into market demand remains an empirical question.
This study uses monthly data from January 2013 to December 2025. The dependent variable is the natural logarithm of new registrations of battery electric passenger vehicles in Taiwan. The explanatory variables include a tax policy dummy variable, business cycle indicators, the consumer price index, 95-octane unleaded gasoline prices, the rediscount rate, price variables, and substitute vehicle variables. Considering the relatively high correlation between the consumer price index and the industrial production index, the main model uses the consumer price index as the primary macroeconomic demand-side variable, while the industrial production index is used as an alternative control variable for comparison. Methodologically, this study adopts time-series ordinary least squares estimation with robust standard errors, and further applies time trend, price effect, substitution effect, lagged effect, and interaction models. Johansen cointegration tests and Granger causality tests are also conducted to examine dynamic relationships among different vehicle markets.
The empirical results show that the 2017 commodity tax reform is significantly and positively associated with electric vehicle registrations in Taiwan, suggesting that commodity tax exemptions remain an important institutional factor in market development. The rediscount rate has a consistently negative and significant effect in most model specifications, indicating that electric vehicles, as high-value durable goods, are highly sensitive to financing costs. The 95-octane unleaded gasoline price shows a negative effect in some models, suggesting that the income effect associated with higher fuel prices may have outweighed the substitution effect from gasoline vehicles to electric vehicles during the sample period.
The price effect model indicates that the entry-level price of non-Tesla electric vehicles has a significantly negative effect on electric vehicle registrations, implying that price barriers remain an important constraint on electric vehicle adoption. After controlling for this price variable, the independent effect of the tax policy variable becomes statistically insignificant, suggesting that tax incentives may partly operate through reducing purchase costs and lowering price barriers. In contrast, the price effect of the Tesla Model 3 is not statistically significant, indicating that Tesla’s market influence may not be fully captured by price changes alone.
The substitution effect model shows that gasoline vehicle registrations are positively associated with electric vehicle registrations, which may reflect overall vehicle market expansion rather than a direct crowding-out relationship. Hybrid vehicle registrations show a weakly negative association with electric vehicle registrations, suggesting a possible degree of competition or substitution. The cointegration and Granger causality results further indicate that electric vehicles, gasoline vehicles, and hybrid vehicles are linked through long-run equilibrium relationships and dynamic interactions.
Furthermore, the lagged effect model shows that macroeconomic variables may affect electric vehicle demand with a time lag, while the tax policy variable remains significantly positive. The interaction models reveal that the effect of tax incentives is conditional on the macroeconomic environment, with fuel price and interest rate conditions showing relatively clear moderating effects. Overall, this study finds that tax incentives are an important institutional driver of Taiwan’s electric vehicle market growth, but their effectiveness is also influenced by price barriers, financing costs, fuel price conditions, and market structure. Future policy should therefore combine tax incentives with affordable vehicle models, green financing measures, charging infrastructure improvements, and long-term evaluation of market structural changes.

中文資料
交通部公路局統計查詢網。（n.d.）。新車領牌數。交通部公路局。檢索日期：2026年4月24日。
交通部公路局統計查詢網。（n.d.）。車輛概況。交通部公路局。檢索日期：2026年4月24日。
行政院。（2025）。政院通過「貨物稅條例」第12條之3及「使用牌照稅法」第5條修正草案。行政院。
財政部北區國稅局。（2026）。電動車減免貨物稅再延長到119年底。財政部。
張旭。（2025）。2024年度臺灣汽車市場銷售報告：電動車Top 10。U-CAR。
張旭。（2026）。2025年度臺灣汽車市場銷售報告：電動車Top 10。U-CAR。
英文文獻
Bernanke, B. S., & Gertler, M. (1995). Inside the black box: The credit channel of monetary policy transmission. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9(4), 27–48.
Copeland, A., Hall, G., & Maccini, L. (2015). Interest rates and the market for new light vehicles (Federal Reserve Bank of New York Staff Report No. 741). Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
D’Acunto, F., Hoang, D., & Weber, M. (2015). Inflation expectations and consumption expenditure [Working paper].
Dargay, J., & Gately, D. (1999). Income’s effect on car and vehicle ownership, worldwide: 1960–2015. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 33(2), 101–138.
DeShazo, J. R., Sheldon, T. L., & Carson, R. T. (2017). Designing policy incentives for cleaner technologies: Lessons from California’s plug-in electric vehicle rebate program. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 84, 18–43.
Gallagher, K. S., & Muehlegger, E. (2011). Giving green to get green? Incentives and consumer adoption of hybrid vehicle technology. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 61(1), 1–15.
Hamilton, J. D. (2009). Causes and consequences of the oil shock of 2007–08. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 2009(1), 215–283.
International Energy Agency. (2024). Global EV Outlook 2024: Moving towards increased affordability. International Energy Agency.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2022). Climate change 2022: Mitigation of climate change. Cambridge University Press.
International Labour Office, International Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Statistical Office of the European Communities, United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, & World Bank. (2004). Consumer price index manual: Theory and practice. International Labour Office.
Jenn, A., Springel, K., & Gopal, A. R. (2018). Effectiveness of electric vehicle incentives in the United States. Energy Policy, 119, 349–356.
Li, S., Tong, L., Xing, J., & Zhou, Y. (2017). The market for electric vehicles: Indirect network effects and policy design. Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, 4(1), 89–133.
Li, S., Zhu, X., Ma, Y., Zhang, F., & Zhou, H. (2022). The role of government in the market for electric vehicles: Evidence from China. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 41(2), 450–485.
Mian, A., Sufi, A., & Verner, E. (2017). Household debt and business cycles worldwide. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 132(4), 1755–1817.
Rapson, D. S., & Muehlegger, E. (2023). The economics of electric vehicles. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 17(2), 274–294.
Sierzchula, W., Bakker, S., Maat, K., & van Wee, B. (2014). The influence of financial incentives and other socio-economic factors on electric vehicle adoption. Energy Policy, 68, 183–194.
Sommer, S., & Vance, C. (2021). Do more chargers mean more electric cars? Environmental Research Letters, 16(6), Article 064092.
Springel, K. (2021). Network externality and subsidy structure in two-sided markets: Evidence from electric vehicle incentives. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 13(4), 393–432.
Zhang, T., Burke, P. J., & Wang, Q. (2024). Effectiveness of electric vehicle subsidies in China: A three-dimensional panel study. Resource and Energy Economics, 76, Article 101424.