牛津经济研究院-英国在线零售税的经济影响（英）-2021.11-46页_1mb

Summary of "The Economic Impact of an Online Retail Sales Tax in the UK"

Core Content

This report, commissioned by Amazon UK, presents an independent economic analysis of the potential consequences of introducing an Online Retail Sales Tax (OST) in the UK. The study is based on assumptions and models that simulate the effects of the tax on consumers, suppliers, and government revenue, as well as its distributional and environmental implications.

Main Assumptions

• The OST is assumed to be a flat ad valorem rate of 2%.
• The tax applies to all retail sales (excluding automotive and fuel) and a selection of B2C services: food takeaway, travel, and accommodation.
• The tax is introduced in 2022, after the relaxation of social distancing policies.

Key Findings

1. Economic Impact

• The introduction of a 2% OST is estimated to raise approximately £1.6 billion in government revenue.
• The burden of the tax is shared among consumers, online sales platforms, and upstream businesses.
• Consumers are expected to bear the majority of the burden, losing around £1.3 billion in consumer welfare.
• Suppliers (platforms and upstream businesses) would lose around £500 million in margins.
• The net inefficiencies from the OST are estimated to be £206 million, representing 13% of the revenue raised.

2. Decline in Online Sales

• The OST would lead to a £5.5 billion decline in online sales, or 6.5%, across eight product categories.
• The proportional decline is largest in computers and electronic equipment, due to higher in-store switching elasticity.
• Some products, like transport and accommodation services, are assumed not to switch to in-store options, thus experiencing higher distortionary effects.

3. Distributional Effects

• The OST is regressive, with the lowest income decile suffering the largest relative welfare loss.
• Elderly and disabled individuals, who have increasingly relied on online shopping, would face restrictive effects due to the tax.
• Small businesses may be disproportionately affected, as they rely heavily on online channels to reach customers and compete in the market.

4. Regional Impacts

• Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales, and the North West are expected to experience larger relative losses in both consumer welfare and suppliers' margins.
• London and the South West are likely to be less affected due to their relatively higher economic base and lower reliance on the taxed product categories.
• The Midlands are expected to see the least impact on suppliers' margins due to lower dependence on the OST categories.

5. Employment Losses

• The OST could lead to significant employment losses in warehousing and logistics, which are heavily concentrated in the Midlands, North West, and North East.
• These regions are more vulnerable to the disproportionate impact of the tax on employment due to their reliance on the e-commerce supply chain.

6. Revenue-Equivalent Alternatives

• Several alternative taxes could generate the same revenue as the proposed 2% OST, including:
  • Basic rate Income Tax increased by 0.33–0.35 percentage points
  • Corporation tax increased by 0.65 percentage points
  • VAT increased by 0.23 percentage points
  • Alcohol Duty increased by 17%
  • Fuel Duty increased by 6%

7. Environmental Impact

• The OST may have a negative environmental impact, as it could lead to reduced online shopping, potentially increasing carbon emissions from in-store purchases and transportation.

Assessment Against Tax Principles

• The OST is considered distortive and may restrict SMEs from competing in the retail market.
• It raises questions about fairness, particularly due to its disproportionate impact on lower-income households, economically weaker regions, and vulnerable groups like the elderly and disabled.

Conclusion

• The introduction of a 2% OST would raise government revenue but at the cost of significant consumer welfare and supplier margin losses.
• The net inefficiency of the tax is estimated to be £206 million.
• The distributional and regional effects suggest that the tax would be more harmful to certain groups and areas.
• Alternative taxation strategies could achieve similar revenue without the same economic and social drawbacks.

Key Information

• OST is a proposed tax on online retail sales and selected B2C services.
• The modeling assumes a 2% flat ad valorem rate and a 2022 introduction.
• Consumer welfare is measured as the difference between willingness to pay and actual price.
• Suppliers' margins are reduced due to the tax.
• Regional and income-based disparities are expected to be significant.
• Sensitivity analysis shows that the results are sensitive to assumptions but the conclusion remains consistent.

Figures and Data

• Fig. 1: Impact of introducing a 2% OST in 2022.
• Fig. 2: Nested model structure.
• Fig. 3: Online retail sales, 2015-2020 H1.
• Fig. 4: Online sales, 2022 forecasts.
• Fig. 5: Change in online sales in 2022.
• Fig. 6: Impact of a 2% OST in 2022.
• Fig. 7: Impact of a 2% OST with full pass-through to consumers.
• Fig. 8: Indicative increase in tax rates required.
• Fig. 9: Savings rates by income deciles, 2019.
• Fig. 10: Share of internet expenditure in total expenditure by income quintile, 2019.
• Fig. 11: Consumer welfare per £ of discretionary income.
• Fig. 12: Online purchasing behaviour by age group.
• Fig. 13: Online purchasing behaviour by disability status.
• Fig. 14: Share of business turnover from online channels, 2016–2018.
• Fig. 15: Regional impact on suppliers and consumers.
• Fig. 16: Warehousing and logistics employment share.

Methodology

• The analysis uses a nested demand-supply framework.
• Pass-through estimates are based on economic theory and academic research.
• Consumer switching behavior is modeled using ONS data and survey elasticities.
• Sensitivity analysis is provided in Appendix 2 to explore the impact of varying assumptions.

Final Notes

• The OST is not a neutral tax and may have negative distributional and environmental consequences.
• The government's fiscal options must be evaluated against economic and procedural criteria.
• The report is confidential to Amazon UK and not for public distribution.