Congress Said to Skip E-Waste Without Broad Agreement
House E-Waste Working Group members want to introduce a bill this year but are reluctant to impose a solution, according to Hill sources. Ending years of discord between TV and computer makers, the Electronic Industries Alliance (EIA) recently unveiled a compromise that would let TV makers levy a point-of-sale fee to address “legacy” waste, and computer makers to embrace producer responsibility. “The goal is to get all of the stakeholders on board with a proposal before we introduce legislation,” said an aide to Rep. Mike Thompson, D-Calif., a member of the e-waste group.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
Retailers have voiced reservations on EIA’s two-pronged financing approach, and Congress is not inclined to pass a fee on TVs seen by many as a tax, according to sources. Thompson, who sponsored earlier fee-based measures may not yet be at the point of moving a bill without broad stakeholder accord, the aide said, adding that he deems e- waste a “really important” problem and “wants to move forward with legislation in this session of Congress.” That is also the goal of the e-waste group, she added.
The EIA proposal was reviewed at a teleconference last week by the staff of e-waste working group members and Rep. Albert Wynn, D-Md., chairman of the House Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials. Major issues raised there included the extent to which “there’s an appetite” in Congress to legislate a national fee on TVs and the existence of precedents for a federally-mandated fee managed by a private entity, as EIA proposes, said Scott Cassel, executive director of the Products Stewardship Institute, negotiating on behalf of state and local governments. Concerns also arose over mandating fee-based recycling, since at least 6 states have producer responsibility laws and many others are moving that way, he said. There also is concern about how long TV makers need to shift from fees to producer responsibility, Cassel said.
Not only retailers but some environmental groups and recyclers oppose the TV fee, said a retailer source. The CE Retailers Coalition, recyclers and some environmental groups are working collectively on an alternative to the “tuner tax” while remaining within the EIA proposal’s framework, he said. Even if all backed a TV tax, it does not seem to have enough support in Congress, he added. During the teleconference the EIA offered to have Environmental Protection Agency or similar entity administer the TV fee, the source said. “But there was nobody around that table prepared to give the EPA authority to spend billions of dollars,” he said, adding that retailers and allies need an alternative soon: “If we don’t get our act together before the August recess, the chances of getting something through Congress and in this session are probably very low.”
State and local governments would resist a federally- managed TV fee, said Cassel; they want companies to be more involved. A federal bureaucracy cannot operate as efficiently as the private sector, he said: “I would not expect many of the state and local entities would be supportive of a federal agency managing a pot of money.” His institute has heard from 20-plus states on the EIA proposal, and within weeks will offer a state government position, Cassel said, suggesting that recent success with producer responsibility laws colors states’ preference for a national system.