The Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water has stated there is no proposal for a new $30,000 annual registration fee for waste exporters.
The National Waste and Recycling Industry Council (NWRIC) this week called for a realignment of waste export bans to address resource recovery and recycling roadblocks in the face of a proposed new export tax.
Rick Ralph, NWRIC Chief Executive Officer said the Federal Government is proposing to introduce a tax for all recyclables exported after July 1. In addition to charging exporters a new annual registration fee, all glass, used tyres, plastics, paper and cardboard products exported will incur a new government tax of $3.98 per tonne.
However, a department spokesperson said there is no $30,000 annual registration fee proposed, instead, three-year licences at a cost of $19,090 or $6363 a year were mooted in a recent consultation paper, with no need for exporters with an existing licence to pay any fee until they are ready to renew for a further three years.
The spokesperson said the department proposed in January 2021 that it would recover the costs of regulating waste exports through licence application fees and export charges, and that it would consult on any proposed fees and charges.
A consultation paper in November 2022 was published, seeking feedback from industry on how the costs of regulating waste exports should be funded.
The spokesperson refuted claims that NWRIC’s requests to meet with the minister had been ignored, stating that the department and minister’s office met with NWRIC during the consultation period to listen to its concerns.
Ralph said: “Significant shortfalls in Australian infrastructure, coupled with the inhibited growth in markets for locally produced recycled content, have resulted in a critical misalignment between local industry capacity and the government’s regulatory program.”
“In Australia, there has not been enough growth in the market for recycled materials and there are currently no compelling incentives for manufacturers to prioritise locally produced recycled materials over imported virgin materials,” he said.
“Australia is both a net importer and exporter of these materials and we simply do not have the internal capacity to reuse the total quantities of recyclable commodities it recovers. Council members have and continue to invest in new capacity to add value to the commodities recovered, but the reality is for years to come we must export the excess commodities we can’t use locally, or the alternatives are simply to landfill.”
He said, as an example, Australia has an estimated 1.2 million tonnes of recyclable paper and cardboard that is excess to local markets and must be exported. In the lead-up to a ban on paper and cardboard exports to be implemented in 2024, the Council commissioned an independent economic analysis report to quantify why paper and cardboard streams should not be captured within the export regulations.
“Our report confirmed the findings of the government’s own regulatory impact statement which identified in all three business cases, there to be no community benefit for banning paper and cardboard exports,” Ralph said.
A department spokesperson said the Regulatory Impact Statement referred to by NWRIC details the benefits and costs associated with three different options for implementing the Council of AustralianGovernments (COAG) decision on regulating waste exports.
“The option being implemented is the one that identified the greatest net benefit to the community, as well as a net benefit to industry,” the spokesperson said.
NWRIC is advocating the auditor general undertake a formal review of all Recycling Modernisation Fund project funding and establish a baseline of actual local capacity to meet the government regulatory frameworks and recycling targets and to identify critical shortfall areas of our local capability.
“These difficulties demonstrate the roadblocks already in place for recyclers in meeting the capacity challenges of the Australian recycling industry and therefore the risks in investing in that industry,” Ralph said.
“The local recycling industry must be given space to advance, rather than be further burdened with ‘end of pipe’ regulation.”