The ‘polluter pays’ principle is nothing new. The idea was to make manufacturers aware of the waste that their products generate, directly or indirectly, by making them pay towards reversing the damage.

This has been applied relatively successfully around the world for years, with the support of the OECD and the European Commission. Factories were forced to think about the amount of packaging they generated and the pollution poured into waterways and the air.

The Commission went one step further and introduced the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment directive in 2003, realising that this was a category of waste which was easily quantified – and one which was growing. It basically covers anything that could be plugged into a wall.

All member states were supposed to transpose the WEEE directive into national law by 2004 and actually did so by 2006. Brussels was not happy with the way Malta interpreted it and issued first a formal notice and then a reasoned opinion.

However, Malta had anyway pre-empted WEEE by introducing the eco-contribution in 2004. The government had its heart in the right place but what did it actually achieve? The tariffs did not make sense, bearing no relation to the price of an item (or the way that price has changed over the years) or to its recycling cost. It does not distinguish between environmentally-friendlier versions of goods. It is an administrative burden. And to add insult to injury, the government is bringing in €7.8 million from it – but one has to ask how much of that money is actually being spent on recycling?

There is little wonder that the business community hates the tax. Over the years, its impact became more and more insidious – mostly because it is a ‘Malta-only’ tax. If you as a consumer buy something online, you don’t pay eco-contribution. If you buy that exact same thing from a Maltese agent, who has had absolutely nothing to do with its manufacture, he has to charge it.

If you as a business bring in a container of washing machines via Grimaldi, you (should) go to Ħal Far and pay eco-contribution. If you bring them in an unmarked van and are not stopped as you come off the catamaran, you can get away with not paying.

So we have a tax which defies common sense, does not promote greener purchasing, is a disadvantage to legitimate Maltese traders, and hasn’t translated directly into more recycling or less waste – and if and when the WEEE directive if correctly applied, some products will have both taxes applied to them.

The eco-contribution could be revised to bring it up to date. The tariffs could be tweaked. Enforcement – or market surveillance as it is euphemistically called – could be stepped up. But will that be enough? Doesn’t it make more sense to abolish it completely?

The business community has said over and over again that all it wants is a level playing field, whether it is playing against illegal traders in Malta or overseas online suppliers. Sooner or later, Malta will have to take WEEE seriously and meets its targets.

This was already acknowledged in the Waste Management Plan for the Maltese islands 2014 – 2020, which described the ‘double whammy’. The government promised to do something about it in the last Budget and the Environment Minister said the time has come for government to keep its promise.

A study on the revision of eco-tax was launched at the beginning of this year. There are only 11 days to go till the Budget. Let’s hope that the government takes the bull by the horns and does the right thing.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.