环保“费改税”会影响企业债务融资成本吗？ ——基于《环境保护税法》的准自然实验

Does “Environmental Protection Fees Replaced with Environmental Protection Taxes” Affect the Cost of Debt Financing? ——A Quasi-natural Experiment Based on the Implementation of the Environmental Protection Tax Law

中文关键词:  环保“费改税”  债务融资成本  双重差分法  重污染企业  环境信息披露质量

英文关键词:Environmental Protection Fee-to-Tax  the cost of debt financing  Difference-in-Difference  heavy polluting enterprise  environmental information disclosure

中文摘要:

      本文基于2018年1月1日开始实施的《环境保护税法》的准自然实验，探究环保“费改税”政策对税负提升地区企业债务融资成本的影响及作用机理。研究发现，环保“费改税”政策增加了税负提升地区企业的债务融资成本，且这种促进作用主要是通过风险暴露机制和成本约束机制两条路径实现。进一步研究发现，环保“费改税”政策对企业债务融资成本的正向作用在重污染企业和环境信息披露质量低的企业中更加显著。因此，政府部门和金融机构需协调环保税制度与企业债务融资成本之间的关系，保证环保“费改税”政策对企业发展的正向促进作用。

英文摘要:

      The conflict between environmental protection and economic development has intensified, becoming a global concern. To balance economic and environmental benefits, the Chinese government is constantly adjusting its environmental policies. It is both urgent and practically significant to evaluate the consequences and effects of China's existing environmental protection policies, providing a reference for enterprises to adapt to these policies. Based on the quasi-natural experiment of China's Environmental Protection Tax Law implemented on January 1, 2018, this paper examines the impact and mechanism of the Environmental Protection Fee-to-Tax policy on the debt financing cost of enterprises with increased tax burdens, using data from A-share listed companies in Shanghai and Shenzhen from 2013 to 2020. The results show that the Environmental Protection Fee-to-Tax policy overall increases the tax burden and debt financing cost of regional enterprises. The mechanism analysis reveals that the policy primarily affects the tax burden and debt financing cost of regional enterprises through two channels: the risk exposure mechanism and the cost constraint mechanism. Further heterogeneity tests indicate that the policy has a more pronounced effect on the debt financing cost of heavy polluting enterprises and those with low environmental information disclosure quality. This suggests that government departments and financial institutions need to coordinate the relationship between the environmental tax system and corporate debt financing cost, ensuring that the Environmental Protection Fee-to-Tax policy positively promotes enterprise development while achieving environmental protection goals. Furthermore, heavy polluting enterprises, compared to non-heavy polluting enterprises, need to pay more attention to the constraints and impacts of the Environmental Protection Fee-to-Tax policy on debt financing. Additionally, to mitigate the negative impact of the Environmental Protection Fee-to-Tax policy on corporate debt financing, all enterprises should focus on improving the quality of their environmental information disclosure. Proactively disclosing environmental information can enhance enterprises' adaptability to the policy, thereby promoting the coordinated development of the economy and the environment.