America's independent, non-partisan advocate for overburdened taxpayers.

Letter


Don’t Eliminate Shoppers’ Choices: Oppose the Bag Ban and Tax!

August 30, 2010

Dear Senator:

     On behalf of the National Taxpayers Union’s 52,000-plus members in California, I urge you to oppose AB 1998 when the Senate considers it. The bill would prohibit plastic grocery bags outright and allow grocery stores to charge customers for the costs of paper bags, which could result in a $1 billion tax hike on California consumers. In the midst of this recession, a massive tax hike and fewer ways to carry groceries is the last thing Californians need.

     AB 1998 would punish all Californians for simply shopping and would limit their options for carrying groceries home. Worse, it could cost more than 2,300 good jobs in California, where unemployment is above 12 percent. Politicians should not be in the business of making routine personal decisions for consumers, especially by dictating such choices through draconian bans and higher costs on products they deem undesirable. Plastic bags offer consumers an advantage in terms of volume and durability. A typical plastic bag weighs 4-5 grams, but can hold up to 17 pounds. Additionally, both paper and plastic bags are easily recycled and reused. Moreover, paper bags are dual-use products, which provide everything from extra storage in the home to material for elementary school art projects.

     Although currently fashionable among the political elite, grocery bag taxes and bans have dubious value as policies. The Tax Foundation reports that bag taxes, like other “sin taxes,” fail to produce the promised revenues and do little to clean up the environment. A recently enacted grocery bag tax in Washington, D.C. raised only $150,000 after four months of use, even though it was touted as the funding source for what is envisioned as a multi-million-dollar cleanup of the Anacostia River. A study by the Northwest Economic Policy Seminar reported that a bag tax imposed by Seattle has done little to reduce landfill deposits. What the new laws have done is open municipalities to expensive litigation and increase costs for consumers. The fact of the matter is that as the price of a good increases, consumers either buy less of the good or, likelier, seek the good from another, cheaper source. What’s more, the less costly good may be of lower quality and, ironically, may be more damaging to the environment.

     California faces serious fiscal problems, and the state needs to undertake equally serious reforms. The state shouldn’t contribute to an already onerous and complicated tax and regulatory burden by heaping a new burdensome plastic bag ban and tax on Californians that has questionable merit in several respects. Therefore, our members hope you will reject AB 1998.

Sincerely,

John Stephenson
State Government Affairs Manager