With Affordability on Every Consumer’s Mind…
MA Senate Proposes a New 10 Cent Paper Bag Tax
&
a $1.45/gallon Tariff on Every Can of Paint Sold in MA
Yes, you read that correctly. Despite the high cost of living and affordability being today’s top concern – from housing to health care to energy to food and consumer goods – the MA Senate is set to debate a bill TOMORROW to further raise costs on consumers, residents and families.
Given the dramatic consumer spending shifts to online purchasing and delivery, more government red tape – combined with increased consumer costs and fewer choices – will only accelerate that trend, meaning more dark store fronts, fewer jobs, and lower tax revenues.
S.3050, An Act to build resilience for Massachusetts communities, is a $3.64 billion environmental bond bill that includes components of an omnibus plastics ban bill and a hidden paint tax, including:
- A ban on plastic carryout bags – allowable exemptions include bags for pharmacy/prescription medication, bag used to protect items from damage/contamination, unwrapped food, to protect articles of clothing on a hanger, frozen food items, raw meat, uncooked seafood or similar products, etc.
- Only reusable bags or recycled paper bags allowed at carryout
- recycled paper bags subject to a minimum $0.10 charge, with $0.05 being remitted to the state
- “Reusable bag”, a bag that: (i) is made of machine-washable cloth, fabric, hemp or other woven or non-woven fibers; (ii) has handles that are stitched with thread and not heat-fused; and (iii) is designed and manufactured for multiple uses; provided, however, that a “reusable bag” shall not include a bag made of plastic film of any thickness
- Includes an inadequate small business exemption threshold for those not wanting to charge a fee
- Food service ware – only to be provided upon request by the customer
- “Food service ware”, disposable products used for serving or transporting foods or including, but not limited to, plates, bowls, trays, cups, cartons, hinged or lidded containers, straws, stirrers, cup spill plugs, cup sleeves, condiments, containers, utensils, cocktail sticks or picks, toothpicks, film wrap and napkins
Roughly 70% of the MA population lives in a municipality that has already adopted a plastic bag ban, this is really about a $0.10 TAX on the only option left – a paper bag.
AND, the bill proposes a Paint Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) program that is 100% CONSUMER FINANCED, which would add $1.45 TARIFF on every gallon of paint sold in MA. Paint manufacturers are telling lawmakers that retailers support this bill – don’t let them speak for you!
Imposing additional costs on paint and bags, whether you want to call them a fee or a tax, is misguided given today’s consumer affordability challenges.
Email your Senator TODAY to voice your concerns with this legislation before tomorrow’s debate and oppose the bag and paint TAXES!
A handful of amendments that could improve the bill have been offered and you can urge your Senators to support:
- Amendment #24 - Removing the Paper Bag Tax – this eliminates the $0.10 paper bag fee
- Amendment #25 - Amending the Paper Bag Tax – this makes the fee entirely optional
- Amendment #113 - Low Volume Bag User Exemption – this amendment allows a small business using less than 25,000 bags per year to opt out of charging the fee
- Amendment #148 - Protecting consumers from burdening the cost for the paint product stewardship program - eliminates the tax on consumers and puts the responsibility to finance the paint program on the manufacturers who are pushing it
- Amendment #302 - Retail bag provisions – this deletes the plastic bag and food service ware provisions entirely
*******
S.3050 seeks to set up a third party entity to collect and handle leftover paint at its end of life, paid for by adding a fee/tax onto every can of paint purchased in the Commonwealth. The bill is being pushed by the paint manufacturers and the American Coatings Association (ACA), which also owns and operates PaintCare, the third party entity that is set up to handle leftover paint. The paint manufacturers are more than happy to run the program and control ALL of the funds – because the program is 100% CONSUMER FINANCED. Manufacturers pay the fees to PaintCare, on a monthly basis based on sales in the state and pass them through to distributors and retailers who add them to the final purchase price of new paint.
For a consumer who uses the entire gallon of paint, they will have paid the “fee” and yet received no service. Most RAM members and most consumers would argue that this is not a fee at all, but rather a TAX, or a TARIFF!
- Many stores lack the space necessary to take back end of life product. While take back is voluntary in the proposed bill, proponents say that retailers like this bill and will act as collection points. We do not believe retailers in this state would be willing to participate in the collection program in any great numbers. Devoting retail space to collecting old paint cans is not a good strategy to increase your sales.
- And after paint, what’s next? Proponents of this bill have described paint as “the gateway drug to Extended Producer Responsibility.” We have seen legislative proposals in this and past sessions to impose added recovery fees or take back programs on batteries, thermostats, tires, carpet, mattresses, TVs, computers and more. All of these proposals would increase consumer costs and further burden our retailers who are struggling to compete in a very competitive global market. Retailers are not trash collectors.
- Local MA retailers are already at a competitive disadvantage with retailers in New Hampshire and remote, internet sellers, who do not charge sales tax AND would not be charging this new paint tax either.
- Massachusetts consumers could buy their paint for less in New Hampshire, tax free, and if the Bottle Bill is any indication, we’ll be dealing with fraudulent disposal of any leftovers here in Massachusetts. A good, quality gallon of paint that costs $45 in New Hampshire will cost at least $4.26 MORE in Massachusetts after sales and paint taxes!
- Our retailers operate in a very competitive environment and as we see every day along our New Hampshire border, if a consumer can save the current 6.25% sales tax on the purchase of a product, that savings alone is often enough to entice a consumer to buy out of state. An added tax on paint on top of that will only make matters worse for our local paint sellers.
- This proposed paint tax is anti-consumer, anti-local retailer, and disproportionately harms small business.
- SUPPORT Amendment #148 - Protecting consumers from burdening the cost for the paint product stewardship program
- This amendment, offered by Sen. Bruce Tarr, eliminates the tax on consumers and puts the responsibility to finance the paint program on the manufacturers who are pushing for it.
