According to a study, the federal government's economic stimulus package is partially damaging the economy in the fight against the corona crisis. As a study by the Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW) shows, over 40 billion euros of the planned subsidies should be viewed critically.
According to the IfW, around EUR 4.4 billion or 2.6 percent of the total package is even detrimental to the economy as a whole and should be deleted without replacement. This included, for example, the promotion of electromobility by increasing the purchase premium from 4,000 to 6,000 euros, the fleet exchange program and the bonus program for future investments by vehicle manufacturers and suppliers.
"With the one-sided and massive funding of electromobility, the state disadvantages alternative drive concepts that may later prove to be more advantageous," said IFW expert Claus-Friedrich Laaser about the economic stimulus package. "The bonus program only subsidizes the auto industry and its suppliers, other important economic sectors do not benefit," he said.
Design of climate protection measures "problematic"
14.7 billion euros or subsidies and thus around 8.8 percent of the total package are quantified as contradicting and thus inefficient. This includes the IfW lowering the EEG surcharge to promote green electricity, financial aid for the preservation of the forests and for the conversion of the aircraft fleets to the latest machines, as well as the CO2 building renovation program IfW expert Laaser. "The promotion of individual technologies or behaviors is inefficient. A uniform CO2 price across all sectors would be much more effective and cost-effective."
The study authors consider subsidies of 21.3 billion euros (12.7 percent of the total package) to be controversial, as arguments for and against the measures could be found or they could be made more cost-effective. This affects the national hydrogen strategy of seven billion euros. "It is critical that the subsidies are only tailored to a specific technology, however, this weakens the previously unilateral support for electromobility," said Laaser. "From a macroeconomic point of view, however, funding that is completely open to technology would be preferable."