The imminent imposition of a "recycling tax" on waste exports is set to be axed in the forthcoming federal budget, addressing concerns from the waste industry that the proposed levy of $4 per tonne could inadvertently divert recyclable materials to landfills. Originally legislated by the Morrison government in 2020, this levy aimed to regulate waste exports following China's decision to cease accepting Australian waste. However, with the finalization of the export ban left to the Albanese government, the exact levy remained undetermined until now.

In anticipation of the budget, the National Waste and Recycling Industry Council raised alarms, denouncing the levy as a burdensome "tax on the recycling industry," which would inevitably burden local councils and consumers. Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek confirmed the government's intention to reverse the legislated levy, highlighting Labor's responsiveness to industry concerns and commitment to fostering increased recycling rates while curbing landfill disposal.

Australia's pursuit of reduced reliance on overseas recycling dates back to 2017, when China's "Operation National Sword" policy disrupted the waste export landscape. Despite significant reductions in regulated glass, plastic, and tyre waste exports since 2021, substantial quantities of paper and cardboard continue to be shipped abroad, primarily to Indonesia, India, and Malaysia. To address this, the government allocated $1 billion to the "Recycling Modernisation Fund," aimed at enhancing local recycling facilities to meet stringent contamination standards.

As the final phase of export regulations loomed, recyclers faced the prospect of a $4 per tonne charge, pending confirmation in the upcoming budget. However, after consultations with industry stakeholders, the government recognized the potential unintended consequences of such a levy, acknowledging the risk of increased waste storage or landfilling should it prove more economical than recycling.

Suzanne Toumbourou, chief executive of the Australian Council of Recycling, emphasized the inherent logic in refraining from taxing recycling exports. "What we really look forward to is a fuller review of the Recycling and Waste Reduction Act," Toumbourou stated, underlining the need to incentivize the production of recycled products tailored for various markets, whether domestic or international. She argued that taxing the trade of recycled products would contradict the government's investment of $1 billion in upgrading recycling facilities, highlighting the importance of aligning policy with broader objectives of enhancing recycling capabilities.

The decision to scrap the waste export levy aligns with the government's broader agenda of promoting domestic recycling, with forthcoming mandatory recycled content targets for major waste generators such as supermarkets expected to bolster this effort starting in 2025. However, concerns persist within the industry regarding the imposition of licence fees for waste exporters, potentially offsetting any gains made through the removal of the export levy.

Gayle Sloan, chief executive of the Waste Management and Resource Recovery Association, expressed disappointment over the additional costs imposed on recyclers and their customers, particularly councils, due to the export licence fees. Sloan warned that such charges could exacerbate the fragility of the recycling system, adding undue financial strain.

As a Senate inquiry into waste policy commenced hearings, Shadow Environment Minister Jonno Duniam highlighted criticisms of the government's handling of recycling, citing delays in capacity improvements funded by the Recycling Modernisation Fund. Duniam cautioned that simply scrapping the waste export levy without addressing licensing fees would fail to address underlying disincentives for recycling within the industry. He urged for more substantial action from Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek, cautioning against burdensome costs that could hinder honest businesses in the recycling sector.

Suzanne Toumbourou, chief executive of the Australian Council of Recycling, emphasized the inherent logic in refraining from taxing recycling exports. "What we really look forward to is a fuller review of the Recycling and Waste Reduction Act," Toumbourou stated, underlining the need to incentivize the production of recycled products tailored for various markets, whether domestic or international. She argued that taxing the trade of recycled products would contradict the government's investment of $1 billion in upgrading recycling facilities, highlighting the importance of aligning policy with broader objectives of enhancing recycling capabilities.

The decision to scrap the waste export levy aligns with the government's broader agenda of promoting domestic recycling, with forthcoming mandatory recycled content targets for major waste generators such as supermarkets expected to bolster this effort starting in 2025. However, concerns persist within the industry regarding the imposition of licence fees for waste exporters, potentially offsetting any gains made through the removal of the export levy.

Gayle Sloan, chief executive of the Waste Management and Resource Recovery Association, expressed disappointment over the additional costs imposed on recyclers and their customers, particularly councils, due to the export licence fees. Sloan warned that such charges could exacerbate the fragility of the recycling system, adding undue financial strain.

As a Senate inquiry into waste policy commenced hearings, Shadow Environment Minister Jonno Duniam highlighted criticisms of the government's handling of recycling, citing delays in capacity improvements funded by the Recycling Modernisation Fund. Duniam cautioned that simply scrapping the waste export levy without addressing licensing fees would fail to address underlying disincentives for recycling within the industry. He urged for more substantial action from Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek, cautioning against burdensome costs that could hinder honest businesses in the recycling sector.