China Policy Journal Volume 1, Number 1, Fall 2018 | Page 24

Water-Pollutant Discharge-Fee System in China
5. Conclusion and Discussion
This article evaluates the water-pollutant
discharge-fee system
in China, which adopts a
progressive approach to pollution control.
The system has achieved staged
results and undergone reforms in multiple
aspects, including fee-standard
improvement, fee-calculation innovation,
and pollutant-indicator construction.
It is highly contextual and influenced
by economic, social, and political
external factors, as well as by internal
theoretical and operational contexts.
Through the system’s reform in 2013, it
was redefined as a comparatively comprehensive
system with the ability to
face and handle the complex pollution
situation. However, problems arose due
to the limited scope of legal measures
and technical support, and weaknesses
appeared in the system regarding
departmental conflicts of interest, the
contradiction of increasing environmental
pollution versus decreasing fee
collection, and other problems during
the design, implementation, and supervision
of the fee system, which adversely
influenced the system’s efficiency and
the water quality.
With the recognition of these deficiencies,
the pollution fee transitioned
to an environmental tax in 2018. The
levy of environmental tax may enhance
the rigor of law enforcement, avoid administrative
intervention and rent-seeking,
and strengthen the implementation.
Three lessons can be drawn from the fee
system in view of better implementing
the new environmental tax. First, data
collection and management should be
significantly improved. Data are the basis
for the implementation of essentially
any environmental policy, but their deficiencies
plagued the fee system’s implementation.
The pollutant-discharge
monitoring system should be fully
developed according to legal requirements.
Data should be shared among
stakeholders, including polluters, environmental-protection
agencies, and
taxation departments. Second, an effective
linkage needs to be developed
with the pollution-emission permit
system that since recently is being fully
implemented. The permit system could
serve as a key foundation for the levy
of environmental tax. Third, environmental-protection
agencies should coordinate
well with taxation agencies.
Since the pollution fee-to-tax reform,
collection agencies are no longer taxation
agencies instead of environmental-protection
agencies. The collection
procedures and rules for environmental
tax should be made to fit with general
tax-collection principles. The coordination
between the two agencies should
thus focus on both data sharing and
tax-collection procedures/rules.
References
Bai, Y., and X. Qu. 2009. “The Reformation
Trend of Pollutant Discharge Fee
System.” Environment Protection 20: 43-
44.
Barde, J.P. 1994. Economic Instruments
in Environmental Policy: Lessons from
the OECD Experience and Their Rele-
21