PLASTIC EXCISE TAX IN INDONESIA: FISCAL POTENTIAL AND SHORT-RUN ECONOMIC IMPACTS FROM AN INPUT–OUTPUT SIMULATION
Keywords:
plastic excise tax, Input–Output analysis, fiscal policy, environmental taxation, IndonesiaAbstract
Abstract
Indonesia faces persistent marine plastic pollution and has considered a plastic excise tax as a fiscal instrument to control single-use plastic consumption. This study estimates the fiscal potential and short-run economy-wide impacts of plastic excise in Indonesia using an updated 2024 Input–Output framework. The 2016 Indonesian Input–Output table is updated through the RAS technique, while the policy shock is derived from an excise-induced price increase and plastic bag demand elasticity. The results show that, under a static baseline scenario, plastic excise could generate IDR 39.82 trillion in 2024 and IDR 40.69 trillion in 2026. However, after incorporating behavioural response, the IDR 200 tariff is estimated to reduce plastic bag consumption by 47.85%, equivalent to a final demand shock of IDR 38.11 trillion in 2024. The Input–Output simulation indicates a national output decline of IDR 73.47 trillion, a Gross Value Added contraction of IDR 32.23 trillion, and a factor income reduction of IDR 24.71 trillion. These findings suggest that plastic excise requires gradual implementation, revenue recycling, and transitional support for affected sectors to balance fiscal, environmental, and economic objectives in Indonesia.
Abstrak
Indonesia menghadapi persoalan pencemaran plastik laut yang terus berlanjut, sementara pemerintah mempertimbangkan cukai plastik sebagai instrumen fiskal untuk mengendalikan konsumsi plastik sekali pakai. Penelitian ini mengestimasi potensi penerimaan dan dampak ekonomi jangka pendek dari cukai plastik di Indonesia dengan menggunakan kerangka Input–Output 2024 yang diperbarui. Tabel Input–Output Indonesia 2016 diperbarui melalui teknik RAS, sedangkan guncangan kebijakan dihitung dari kenaikan harga akibat cukai dan elastisitas permintaan kantong plastik. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa, dalam skenario statis, cukai plastik berpotensi menghasilkan penerimaan sebesar Rp39,82 triliun pada 2024 dan Rp40,69 triliun pada 2026. Namun, setelah respons perilaku diperhitungkan, tarif Rp200 per kantong diperkirakan menurunkan konsumsi kantong plastik sebesar 47,85%, setara dengan guncangan permintaan akhir sebesar Rp38,11 triliun pada 2024. Simulasi Input–Output menunjukkan penurunan output nasional sebesar Rp73,47 triliun, kontraksi Nilai Tambah Bruto sebesar Rp32,23 triliun, dan penurunan pendapatan faktor produksi sebesar Rp24,71 triliun. Temuan ini menegaskan bahwa cukai plastik memerlukan penerapan bertahap, daur ulang penerimaan, dan dukungan transisi bagi sektor terdampak, khususnya industri plastik, kimia, perdagangan, transportasi, energi, dan layanan pendukung dalam rantai produksi nasional secara adil, terukur, dan berorientasi pada keberlanjutan jangka panjang.
References
Badan Pusat Statistik. (2021, April 30). Tabel Input-Output Indonesia transaksi domestik atas dasar harga produsen (52 industri), 2016 (juta rupiah). Badan Pusat Statistik. https://www.bps.go.id/id/statistics-table/1/MjEyMyMx/tabel-input-output-indonesia-transaksi-domestik-atas-dasar-harga-produsen--52-industri---2016--juta-rupiah-.html
Badan Pusat Statistik. (2025). Laju Pertumbuhan PDB menurut Pengeluaran . bps.go.id.
Baidarus, M., & Siburian, M. T. (2018). Analisis dampak ekstensifikasi barang kena cukai pada kantong plastik terhadap perekonomian Indonesia. Jurnal BPPK, 11(2), 1–11. doi: 10.48108/jurnalbppk.v11i2.341
Convery, F., McDonnell, S., & Ferreira, S. (2007). The most popular tax in Europe? Lessons from the Irish plastic bags levy. Environmental and Resource Economics, 38(1), 1–11. doi: 10.1007/s10640-006-9059-2
Dikgang, J., & Visser, M. (2012). Behavioural response to plastic bag legislation in Botswana. South African Journal of Economics, 80(1), 123–133. doi: 10.1111/j.1813-6982.2011.01289.x
Gautama, B. H., Maretaniandini, S. T., & Purwanto, D. (2023). Trade-off ekstensifikasi cukai atas gula: Analisis dampak perekonomian. Journal of Tax Policy, Economics, and Accounting, 1(2), 108–123. doi: 10.61261/muctj.v1i2.42
Gruber, J. (2016). Public finance and public policy. Worth Publishers.
Hasson, R., Leiman, A., & Visser, M. (2007). The economics of plastic bag legislation in South Africa. South African Journal of Economics, 75(1), 66–83. doi: 10.1111/j.1813-6982.2007.00101.x
He, H. (2012). Effects of environmental policy on consumption: Lessons from the Chinese plastic bag regulation. Environment and Development Economics, 17(4), 407–431. doi: 10.1017/S1355770X1200006X
Jambeck, J. R., Geyer, R., Wilcox, C., Siegler, T. R., Perryman, M., Andrady, A., Narayan, R., & Law, K. L. (2015). Plastic waste inputs from land into the ocean. Science, 347(6223), 768–771. doi: 10.1126/science.1260352
Kementerian Kelautan dan Perikanan Republik Indonesia. (2024). Kelautan dan perikanan dalam angka 2024. Kementerian Kelautan dan Perikanan Republik Indonesia.
Kementerian Keuangan Republik Indonesia. (2017). Nota keuangan beserta RAPBN tahun anggaran 2018. Kementerian Keuangan Republik Indonesia.
Kementerian Keuangan Republik Indonesia. (2024). Nota keuangan beserta RAPBN tahun anggaran 2025. Kementerian Keuangan Republik Indonesia.
Leontief, W. (1986). Input-output economics (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Lorosae, R. E. J., & Setyawan, B. (2022). Kajian ekstensifikasi cukai jasa telekomunikasi. Jurnal Perspektif Bea dan Cukai, 6(1), 168–185. doi: 10.31092/jpbc.v6i1.1569
Making Oceans Plastic Free. (2017, November 12). The hidden cost of plastic bag use and pollution in Indonesia. Making Oceans Plastic Free.
Mardanugraha, E. (2017). Economic impact of imposing excise tax on plastic bottles of drinks. Economics and Finance in Indonesia, 63(1), 38–52.
Miller, R. E., & Blair, P. D. (2009). Input-output analysis: Foundations and extensions (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Indonesia. (2020). Proposed plastic excise tariff policy. Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Indonesia.
Musgrave, R. A., & Musgrave, P. B. (1989). Public finance in theory and practice (5th ed.). McGraw-Hill.
PEFA Secretariat. (2016). PEFA framework for assessing public financial management. PEFA Secretariat.
Pigou, A. C. (1920). The economics of welfare. Macmillan.
Rahmi, N., & Selvi, S. (2021). Pemungutan cukai plastik sebagai upaya pengurangan sampah plastik. Jurnal Pajak Vokasi (JUPASI), 2(2), 66–69. doi: 10.31334/jupasi.v2i2.1430
Rivers, N., Shenstone-Harris, S., & Young, N. (2017). Using nudges to reduce waste? The case of Toronto’s plastic bag levy. Journal of Environmental Management, 188, 153–162. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.12.009
Saputra, A. I., Tambunan, S. C. H., & Yulianto, I. (2023). Plastic tax and circular economy incentives to tackle climate change: Indonesian context. Jurnal BPPK, 16(1), 86–98. doi: 10.48108/jurnalbppk.v16i1.818
Sari, M. M., Andarani, P., Notodarmojo, S., Harryes, R. K., Nguyen, M. N., Yokota, K., & Inoue, T. (2022). Plastic pollution in the surface water in Jakarta, Indonesia. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 182, Article 114023. doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2022.114023
Serra, F. A. R., Martins, F., & da Cunha, J. A. C. (2018). Secondary data in research: Uses and opportunities. Revista Ibero-Americana de Estratégia, 17(4), 1–4. doi: 10.5585/ijsm.v17i4.2729
Subiyantoro, H. (2004). Kebijakan fiskal: Pemikiran, konsep, dan implementasi. PT Kompas Media Nusantara.
Wati, E. (2025). Indonesia’s role in protecting high seas biodiversity: Challenges and opportunities in light of the Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Treaty. Jurnal Hukum IUS QUIA IUSTUM, 32(1), 239–262. doi: 10.20885/iustum.vol32.iss1.art10
World Bank. (2021). Plastic waste discharges from rivers and coastlines in Indonesia. World Bank.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Rheza Auliya Rahman

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
TAXPEDIA: Journal of Tax Policy, Economics, and Accounting have CC-BY-SA or an equivalent license as the optimal license for the publication, distribution, use, and reuse of scholarly work.
In developing strategy and setting priorities, TAXPEDIA: Journal of Tax Policy, Economics, and Accounting recognize that free access is better than priced access, libre access is better than free access, and libre under CC-BY-SA or the equivalent is better than libre under more restrictive open licenses. We should achieve what we can when we can. We should not delay achieving free in order to achieve libre, and we should not stop with free when we can achieve libre.
TAXPEDIA: Journal of Tax Policy, Economics, and Accounting is licensed under aCreative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
You are free to:
- Share ” copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt ” remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
