Groundbreaking Bottled Water Tax Raises Dustup in Chicago
In 2007, the image of bottled water in the public consciousness underwent a huge shift. What had been largely seen as a healthy lifestyle choice had, in just a matter of months, become recognized by many consumers as an eco-sin. (Click here for a Green Options post detailing the ways bottled water is costly, wasteful, and bad for public health.) Now, a controversial new eco-sin tax, the first of its kind, has shined an even bigger spotlight on the ubiquitous bottled water.
As the New Year begins, Chicagoans are getting some direct encouragement to forgo buying disposable bottled water and switch to reusable bottles filled with fresh, clean water from the tap. In November, Chicago became the first city in the U.S. to pass a tax on bottled water sold within the city limits. The 5 cents per bottle tax went into effect on Jan. 1, and is expected to raise $10.5 million for the city this year.
In addition to producing revenue that can be used to maintain the city’s water infrastructure, the tax is designed to encourage citizens to shift their hydration habits from bottled to tap water, which is essentially the same thing you get when you buy most bottled water brands. (Filtration with a charcoal filter such as Brita or Pur is a common step taken to remove any chlorine aftertaste, though it I think it tastes fine straight from the faucet.) The tax will also help reduce the number of the plastic containers that wind up in landfills (less than 20% of plastic water bottles in this country are ever recycled) and reduce the greenhouse gas and other pollution created by trucking all that water to retail sites.
Of course, the new tax is meeting some resistance from businesses with an interest in the wasteful status quo. In addition to news reports of grumbling from some consumers who are used to buying their water bottles by the case, the tax now faces a legal challenge from some industry trade groups. Yep, it turns out that a lot of the folks who profit from selling tap water are willing to sue to protect their share of this huge-margin business. Real shocker, right? Actually, the lawsuit isn’t really surprising when you consider the racket that bottled water has become. The fact is, consumers regularly pay more per ounce for bottled water than they do for gasoline—and it’s much easier to manufacture.
The city has responded to the suit by saying it is prepared to defend the tax in court. One argument that the suit makes is that the new tax is unfair because it doesn’t apply to other non-carbonated bottled beverages, such as milk, teas, coffees, and sports drinks. Chicago Law Department spokesman Jenny Hoyle responded by pointing out that, “unlike these other beverages, tap water is a generally available, safe alternative in the city of Chicago.” That’s a crucial difference, and one that makes intuitive sense. In other words, the taxing rules don’t need to be the same for Gatorade and water because the city isn’t already in the business of providing an alternative to Gatorade through its infrastructure. Essentially, the city is taxing consumers for the convenience of the bottle, because the same thing is available in every working faucet in town.
Time will tell if Chicago’s bottled water tax survives this legal challenge, but I sure hope it does. This kind of eco-sin tax seems like a smart way to spread the true economic costs to those who benefit from them. Sure, it’s convenient to buy a chilled bottle of water sometimes, and I’ll gladly pay a nickel extra for those times when I forget to bring my refillable bottle or it’s not immediately convenient to find tap water or I just really want an ice-cold bottle of Evian with my lunch. What’s good about this tax is that it creates a concrete financial incentive to switch your everyday, habitual water consumption to the sustainable model of refillable bottles rather than throwaway plastics. It gets people to take another look at that plastic bottle and assess the relative merits of its convenience versus the real economic price of its disposability.
My guess is that the bottled water tax will be upheld and that after a few months of trying to get around the tax by driving outside the city limits to buy in bulk, many consumers here in Chicago will just make the switch to refillable bottles. In a year, the tax will go unnoticed by most people, just like the most people have no idea how much taxes increase the price of cigarettes. If other communities follow suit with their own bottled water taxes (and it seems this may be a trend), they’ll probably be smart to charge 10 cents a bottle and really send a strong signal that provides the most revenue buck for the taxation bang.
A related side effect of Chicago’s tax on bottled water that I like is that it makes you take a second look at those often-neglected public water fountains (or “bubblers” as we used to call them growing up in Wisconsin). In the light of a law that says essentially, “Hey, you can get this item for free if you just walk over to the faucet,” water fountains don’t appear to be quite such outdated relics of another era. In fact, these underappreciated appliances that tend to remind many of us of elementary school start to take on a more noble appearance as a valued civic service, dispensing life-giving nourishment, free for the asking. In a world in which water resources are becoming more valuable every year, maybe the once-ubiquitous bubbler will make a comback rather than going the way of the all-but-extinct public telephone booth.
More information:
Chicago Tribune - New Year Brings Bottled Water Tax
Chicago Sun-Times - City Sued over Bottled Water Tax
The Daily Green - An Eco-Sin Tax on Bottled Water
Green Options - Daily Tip: Bottle Your Own Water
Green Options - Lighter Footstep: 5 Reasons Not to Drink Bottled Water
Photo credit: Keetsa
Groundbreaking Bottled Water Tax Raises Dustup in Chicago…
This story has been submitted to Stirrdup. Your support can help it become hot….
[...] tax, the first of its kind, has shined an even bigger spotlight on the ubiquitous bottled water.read more | digg [...]
You can keep you fluoridated and chlorinated poison tap water. Ever here of fluorosis of the teeth and how the Nazis used fluoride, it is slow poisoning of the masses plain and simple.
My municipal water system had so many “don’t drink” warnings I have lost count. All from E. Coli contamination. Because I have ulcers my immunosystem is compromised to contaminated food and drink, What gives anyone else minor indigestion can incapacitate me for a week. I never drink tap water and never will. Due to pollution, overcrowding, flood plain destruction and a deteriorating infrastructure America’s above ground water system has become a vector for disease and poisoning. Suggesting that wisely health conscious Americans who choose safer below ground water supplies (spring water) should instead put their trust in big brother to safeguard both our health and the environment is a very bad idea.
Groundbreaking Bottled Water Tax Raises Dustup in Chicago…
In 2007, the image of bottled water in the public consciousness underwent a huge shift. What had been largely seen as a healthy lifestyle choice had, in just a matter of months, become recognized by many consumers as an eco-sin….
Some readers have made some points worth responding to, so in no particular order my responses:
1. Health Risks of Tap Water
Not every community boasts municipal tap water that meets the same standards of taste and safety of Chicago’s, but carbon filters can do a pretty good job of removing chlorine aftertaste. A bigger problem is waterborne bacteria that can sometimes make it into the water supply. Without getting into conspiracy theories about flouride (great urban legend, but it doesn’t hold up) in the U.S. there are many safeguards against bugs in the tap water. As Green Options reported in June (see last link in article above) bottled water doesn’t have a clear-cut health benefit over tap water:
“In theory, bottled water in the United States falls under the regulatory authority of the Food and Drug Administration. In practice, about 70 percent of bottled water never crosses state lines for sale, making it exempt from FDA oversight.
“On the other hand, water systems in the developed world are well-regulated. In the U.S., for instance, municipal water falls under the purview of the Environmental Protection Agency, and is regularly inspected for bacteria and toxic chemicals. Want to know how your community scores? Check out the Environmental Working Group’s National Tap Water Database.
“While public safety groups correctly point out that many municipal water systems are aging and there remain hundreds of chemical contaminants for which no standards have been established, there’s very little empirical evidence which suggests bottled water is any cleaner or better for you than its tap equivalent.”
2. Effective Curb on Consumption or Revenue Boondoggle?
Some readers make the case that dinging people 5 cents per bottle won’t be enough to change any consumer behavior. The reasoning is that because bottled water is a luxury good with inelastic demand, the laws of economics dictate that a small price increase will not produce a decrease in demand.
This reading of the situation may turn out to be true, but I don’t think that’s a reason not to try assigning a real cost to a real environmental problem. It’s my understanding that Mayor Daley originally wanted a 10 cent per bottle tax, which may have been a more realistic target for changing consumer behavior. It’s likely the level of the tax was negotiated down by the City Council.
I’m not convinced that this tax isn’t just a revenue making scheme cleverly disguised as environmental policy. It all depends on how the new revenue is spent (uh, Mayor, how about using that $10 mil to improve the city’s infamous recycling program?). But as I said, this is sin tax, and like taxes on cigarettes and booze, it’s a way for the government to make money on consumer choices that have ill effects on all of us, and that we all wind up paying in the end. I’ve got no problem with that.
There are lots of good water filter systems you can buy and install on your on own faucets and refill a bottle over and over to your hearts content. When everyone does that and we STOP buying plastic throw-aways, things will change. If no one buys a certain product they GO OUT OF BUSINESS.If we’re too stupid to do the right thing, then we should be taxed to reduce our own waste. At least someone is doing something, are you?
[...] to discourage harmful behavior while raising money to support improvements in the infrastructure. read more | digg [...]
This is asinine, and just another reason to NOT buy anything in Chicago. I used to work in the City, and never, ever bought anything there. No food, no soda, nothing. Taxes are completely ridiculous, and when they taxed soda and take out containers in the City, I’d had enough…
I have bottled water - keep it around “in case” for emergency situations or water main breaks (which seem to happen every winter around here in the northern Chicago ‘burbs). And I have a Pur filter on the faucet… While Chicago (and the surrounding burbs) have good tasting water - I do not like the taste of chlorine, and since I’ve begun filtering that crap out - I’ve felt much better and drink much more water… I recycle *everything* - the foodstuffs that can’t be recycled go into the garbage disposal - as a result, I don’t have to pay for garbage pickup (recyclables are picked up free) and I don’t have a raccoon attacking my garbage cans for dinner either…
I have some refillable containers that I fill w/the Pur too…
What this boils down to is that Chicago’s just pissed that they have less people buying their water than the bottled water… This means that their sales volume has dropped, and their costs have stayed the same or increased because of the age of the infrastructure… Their back is up against a wall because some people in the City can’t afford bottled water, and solely rely on the City infrastructure - those fucks will whine to high holy hell if there’s a problem and it’s not fixed immediately (as well they should) and the City knows it… So they’re freeking out and trying to blame their lack of preventative maintenance over all these years on the evil bottled water demon… *sigh*…
[...] the environment, and a thoughtless waste of money to boot. That doesn’t stop Chicago’s Bottled Water Tax from stirring up [...]