Proposed Changes to Bag Tax

The bag tax has been in effect for over a year, and it has generated far more revenue than expected. While the effort to change behavior in grocery stores, drug stores and general stores shows some promising results, I continue to hear from residents that applying the tax to other types of stores, like those that sell clothing, is a bridge too far. In these cases, the tax is creating more resentment than incentive. I opposed the bag tax when it initially came before the Council, but now that it is in effect, I want to make sure it is reasonable for our residents.

That's why I, along with Councilmembers Craig Rice and Roger Berliner, introduced a bill to modify the carryout bag tax law. Bill 10-13 would limit the tax to bags distributed at food stores. It also would repeal the tax on plastic food take-out bags. The bill defines food stores as any retail store where food consists of more than two percent of gross sales by dollar value. The tax would continue to cover non-food items purchased at stores that meet the definition of a food store.

A public hearing is tentatively scheduled for June 18. Call 240-777-7803 to sign up to speak. You can also let us know your views by e-mailing county.council@montgomerycountymd.gov.

 

Flu Outbreak Traced to Grocery Bag

I’ve been saying this for awhile--make sure you wash your reusable grocery bags. According to an article in yesterday’s Washington Post, an Oregon outbreak of norovirus has been traced to a reusable grocery bag. See the full article.

Council Approves Bag Tax

We approved Bill 8-11 that will create a five-cent charge on each paper or plastic bag provided by a retail establishment to a customer at point of sale, pickup or delivery. The bill is intended to inspire consumers to use more reusable bags, which proponents say could lead to fewer bags littering the environment. I opposed the legislation.

The tax will not apply to bags provided by a pharmacy containing prescription drugs; a newspaper bag or bag intended for initial use as a garbage, pet waste or yard waste; a bag provided at a seasonal event, such as a farmers market; or a paper bag that a restaurant gives a customer to take prepared food or drinks from the restaurant. The tax also will not apply if the bag is used to package a bulk item (such as small items at a food or hardware store) or to wrap perishable items (such as fresh or frozen food or flowers).

Retail establishments will retain one-cent of each five-cent tax to cover administration fees of collection. The establishment would be required to indicate on a transaction receipt the number of bags provided.

The law will take effect January 1, 2012.

Op-ed Piece on Bag Tax

Check out my op-ed piece on the proposed bag tax in Sunday's Washington Post. For your convenience, I've included the text below:

A nickel-and-dime distraction from Montgomery’s real problems
By Nancy Floreen, Friday, March 18, 7:09 PM

If I believed taxing carryout bags in Montgomery County would improve local water quality and protect our waterways, I would be the first to sign on. But the five-cent tax on both paper and plastic bags proposed by County Executive Ike Leggett won’t save the Chesapeake Bay. What’s worse, it would have unintended consequences — some silly, some serious.

And if the tax wouldn’t save our streams, then it better save our equally stressed budget. But it wouldn’t do that, either. It would give Montgomery County residents nothing while leaving them, well, holding the bag.

A study by the Alice Ferguson Foundation, an environmental and education group working to clean up the Potomac River, showed a drop in bag use after the District’s bag tax went into effect last year, but it’s important to note that the effect on city waters has not yet been quantified; a reduction in bags does not necessarily mean a reduction in litter.

As a dog owner, I put my old grocery bags to good use a second time, and that makes me one of the 90 percent of consumers who reuse their grocery bags at least once. Taxing people who already exercise good judgment isn’t going to change the attitudes of rogue litterbugs.

My larger concern, though, is that this tax — which will come up for a public hearing on March 31 — is regressive, placing the heaviest burden on those with the lowest incomes. The added expense of paying the tax or buying reusable bags may not be much of a problem for the wealthy; not so for families already having a hard time making ends meet. I foresee scenes in which residents, perhaps senior citizens, overload their shopping bags to save money, only to spill groceries all over the sidewalk on the walk home. That’s not saving anybody’s environment.

And speaking of environments: The one inside a reusable bag is perfect for growing bacteria and cross-contaminating food, so if you opt against paying for disposable bags, you had better remember to wash your reusable ones. Do you really want to carry home unwashed chicken or seafood in a bag you might be carrying apples in later?

But most important, this proposal is a distraction from the fiscal crisis we must face right now. To literally nickel-and-dime residents this way might bring in $1.5 million in revenue under the best-case scenario, but that’s a drop in the bucket compared with the huge shortfall Montgomery County is confronting.

Don’t get me wrong. I have real concerns about the environment, and I agree we should look at viable solutions to our pollution problems. That might mean reexamining the Water Quality Protection Charge that residents already pay as a part of their property tax bill and which has a proven track record of success.

Right now, though, we need to focus our time and attention on how we can maintain needed services, treat employees fairly and invest in our future, all while slashing spending. That’s our real mandate.

I say, bag this tax.