The "Bag Tax" Revisited
---
Since I vacation alone, I tend not to eat out much, especially for dinner. Sitting alone in a fancy restaurant, especially one where you don't speak the language, can be rather lonely boring. Instead I tend to seek out a supermarket, loot buy some basic foodstuffs and just survive on cold cut sandwiches, chips crisps, ice cream and such. And beer.
The first couple of times I did this, I kept succumbing to a slight oversight: in many countries they simply don't have grocery bags -- you're expected to bring your own.
Is this "no free bags" practice the result of market forces or government interventionism? Turns out that in one country, the answer is "both" --
I'm surprised these "Baptists" didn't turn right around and demand that retailers be prohibited from giving away free totes (or, more likely, demand that the government provide totes for every household, much as U.S. cities have to do when they commence recycling programs).
As with any tax or regulation on business, some firms will be able to comply and some will not. But those who are driven out of the market never seem to figure into the taxation-regulatory calculus.
In any case, when government makes business more expensive, inevitably the customers suffer (as do the workers and investors -- i.e., everyone).
Somehow this is a good thing?
The first couple of times I did this, I kept succumbing to a slight oversight: in many countries they simply don't have grocery bags -- you're expected to bring your own.
Is this "no free bags" practice the result of market forces or government interventionism? Turns out that in one country, the answer is "both" --
In March 2002, Ireland enacted a nationwide tax of nine pence (15 cents) on the use of plastic grocery bags, to be collected by retailers. Predictably, in just five months the tax cut plastic bag use by 90 percent.So the eco-radicals wound up helping the big greedy European equivalents of Wal-Mart. Go figure.
The public face in support of the tax -- the "Baptists" -- were largely Irish environmental activists, who argued that the tax was necessary to discourage plastic bag littering.
So who were ... the vested economic interests who tacitly collude[d] with the "Baptists" to push for the tax? Interestingly it appears to have been large grocery retailers, who benefited from a large increase in sales of branded "re-usable" grocery bags, something that likely gave them a competitive edge over smaller retailers unable to afford such complimentary items.
I'm surprised these "Baptists" didn't turn right around and demand that retailers be prohibited from giving away free totes (or, more likely, demand that the government provide totes for every household, much as U.S. cities have to do when they commence recycling programs).
As with any tax or regulation on business, some firms will be able to comply and some will not. But those who are driven out of the market never seem to figure into the taxation-regulatory calculus.
In any case, when government makes business more expensive, inevitably the customers suffer (as do the workers and investors -- i.e., everyone).
Somehow this is a good thing?
Posted by KipEsquire on
1 September 2005
To comment on this post, please visit the new blogsite.



