I don’t think that word means what you think it means.With todays recycling efforts and ease of recycling, we could eliminate the can redemption tax
I don’t think that word means what you think it means.With todays recycling efforts and ease of recycling, we could eliminate the can redemption tax
You seen how much crap ends up in county ditches? Still a bunch.Seems like a tax to me. May not meet the definition....
It isn't a tax if you don't drink pop. Suck it up Butter cup.Seems like a tax to me. May not meet the definition....
You seen how much crap ends up in county ditches? Still a bunch.
You spend hours in line returning those cans. To get money back that you were charged for when purchasing. I believe we would all hate to see how many aluminum cans and bottles are not redeemed for the 5 cent refund and end up in the landfill anyway. There is no county redemption center in my county. No one cares. There are many counties with only one. Our legislature thinks this is too hard of a problem to solve. It is not a partisan issue. This is a consumer issue created by antiquated legislation. Consumers are paying a Nickle for each can or bottle. I think the only reason the law is left in place is to keep roadsides a bit cleaner. Other than that I dont think it is saving our landfills.
It is certainly complicated and I can see both sides of the issue.Iowa PBS did a special on this issue with a re-cycle company exec, a person who runs a center in Pella, a rep from the grocers assoc, and a beer distributor and half want the deposit to go up and one wants it either gone or the law enforced (if you sell you must redeem).
This is a hot topic for me. Around here most stores no longer will take the cans back for deposit. They state we are to go to the a redemption center (CanShed), out of concerns for cleanliness of the store. Which I thought was against the law, if you sell a beverage with a deposit, you have to be able to return that deposit, but it seems the lawmakers are just looking the other way.
The CanShed is paying you by weight, not the nickels per can you paid. Their weight formula insures they make a profit, so you're only getting back 60-75% of what you paid in deposit. What a racket!
Just get rid of the deposit, the .05 isn't worth it to most anyway. I think most will get recycled.
As someone mentioned, the state is making money they wont part with, whether its bad for its citizens or not.
Where am I supposed to recycle dead batteries?
It isn't a tax if you don't drink pop. Suck it up Butter cup.
Not much but the grocer, or whoever takes the cans, gets 6 cents for the cans when they hand them back to the distributor. The biggest push has been to have the grocer give back 4 cents per can and get 6 cents. So it would double the payback and each side takes a small hit in the scheme.It is certainly complicated and I can see both sides of the issue.
Intent of the deposit law is in the right place, it's just the intended consequences turned it into a tax. It would make sense to say, if you sell you must redeem, but that doesn't protect the business from people hoarding cans/bottles that they didn't purchase at that store and redeeming them at said location.
I think the law was intended to be a zero sum game. I pay 5 cents a can/bottle and the seller gets that money. Then I bring my cans back to the seller and get my money back for the next purchase. Zero sum for the seller and the consumer. Problem is that now the seller has the cans/bottles and has to pay somebody to sort, clean, package, etc. them for pick up. In small town Iowa, sellers have just said they won't take cans back because of the handling cost and it makes sense. Sellers gambled on the expectation that only a fraction of cans they sell will come back to them. What about Pop machines? Who gets the deposit money for those and who has to pay the consumer when they redeem them? What about a guy who stores cans for 3 months instead of taking them in piecemeal because it wasn't worth the time for 60 cents? Casey's with 2 employees at most working at the time can't handle that.
Just get rid of the tax and it all goes away.
It's not up to the Legislator to force them to comply. They make the laws, they don't enforce them. Really, it's something that Tom Miller should be enforcing.The law didn‘t change. Donor money just talks louder in the Statehouse.
HyVee and the other big grocers have always hated having to take back cans and bottles, complaining it was unsanitary to have dirty/cigarette-butt & bug filled containers hauled into their stores. Admittedly, they have a point there. So many of them put in the sorting machines with a separate entrance, so they didn’t have to be brought inside the store.
Problem solved, right? Well, HyVee used the pandemic as a health excuse to stop taking back cans and bottles completely, as a “temporary” health measure that has turned permanent. Now that it’s clear COVID isn’t spread by surface contaminates, these grocery stores are just ignoring the law requiring they take back the recyclables … and the state legislature isn’t interested in forcing them to comply.
It's not up to the Legislator to force them to comply. They make the laws, they don't enforce them. Really, it's something that Tom Miller should be enforcing.
Where am I supposed to recycle dead batteries?
Everyone should be doing their best to recycle batteries. I know they don't necessarily make it easy. As electric vehicles take up more and more of the market share lithium supplies and lithium mining is going to become much more of a problem. Virtually all lithium mines are ecological disasters. We need to recapture what we already have in the system.Depends on the type of battery. Home Depot has a drop box for old tool batteries and such. Otherwise the hazardous waste facility should take it.