• How can we simulate a carbon tax and using its revenues for other purposes than the default reduction in government debt? Other purposes could include household rebates, lowering other tax rates, and spending on green investments. We welcome any suggested python code and/or specific variables for different approaches as available, as well as a more conceptual understanding on how to implement this in G-Cubed.
• In order to test whether we’re coding our simulations correctly, we tried to replicate as closely as possible a transition simulation that Warwick presented from Climate Policies and Monetary Policies in the Euro Area. It’s in Section 6 of the paper. Warwick used a different model version, so we don’t expect to our results to be the same, but hopefully similar. However, our results based on the linear version of 20C /179, with “Deficit determined endogenously while spending is exogenous”, are quite different from those in the paper. Could someone please review our attached adjustments and python files* for the simulation and let us know if our shocks are the same as Warwick’s? (e.g., are we using the same fiscal closure? Monetary policy?).
• How can we simulate a carbon tax and using its revenues for other purposes than the default reduction in government debt? Other purposes could include household rebates, lowering other tax rates, and spending on green investments. We welcome any suggested python code and/or specific variables for different approaches as available, as well as a more conceptual understanding on how to implement this in G-Cubed. • In order to test whether we’re coding our simulations correctly, we tried to replicate as closely as possible a transition simulation that Warwick presented from Climate Policies and Monetary Policies in the Euro Area. It’s in Section 6 of the paper. Warwick used a different model version, so we don’t expect to our results to be the same, but hopefully similar. However, our results based on the linear version of 20C /179, with “Deficit determined endogenously while spending is exogenous”, are quite different from those in the paper. Could someone please review our attached adjustments and python files* for the simulation and let us know if our shocks are the same as Warwick’s? (e.g., are we using the same fiscal closure? Monetary policy?).
adjustments.csv
'* could not upload python file, so sending this separately.