New law shifts paint recycling costs from Minnesota counties to manufacturers

  • Article by: Dee DePass , Star Tribune
  • Updated: July 23, 2013 - 9:43 PM

Under a new state law taking effect next year, the cost to dispose of old paint will shift from the counties to the manufacturers.

  • 24
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
chastaylorJul. 23, 13 9:35 PM

Put a deposit on paint cans like they used to do with pop bottles and those cans will end up back at the store they were bought from with the left over paint. Then the paint recycling companies could send a route truck out to collect the paint that they process and resell. Doesn't seem to be a complicated issue.

45
7
jarlmnJul. 23, 13 9:54 PM

And so, the counties taxed the citizens for waste paint disposal ... but under this new "progressive" law, the 'greedy-corporate' paint manufacturers will instead be on-the-hook for the disposal ... the cost of which, they will undoubtedly pass-on to the consumer ... and there goes your tax savings ... as-if the counties would actually lower your taxes because of this change anyway. Thanks mush-headed DLF do-gooders!

35
46
nonewtaxesJul. 24, 13 4:57 AM

What if you use the entire can, will you get a refund?

28
6
lorentjdJul. 24, 13 5:29 AM

This article's headline, to be accurate, really should, instead, say the following: "New law shifts paint recycling costs from Minnesota counties to consumers". That said, if the counties reduce taxes to account for the fact that taxpayers will no longer be funding paint recycling, then this fee makes sense to me (paint users pay the fee). But I have more than a sneaking suspicion that county taxes will not change (so, the cost of recycling will be paid twice: by paint buyers AND by county taxpayers). Such is likely the result of this well-intentioned legislation.

36
7
swmnguyJul. 24, 13 6:31 AM

We have a problem with paint getting disposed of properly. We're going to pay for it one way or another. Why not have the paint-making industry figure it out, since they ostensibly know more about paint than county employees?

It isn't about cutting costs, or becoming paint-disposal tycoons. It's about whether or not it makes sense for counties to provide a backdoor subsidy to manufacturers, to socialize the costs of disposal of a privately produced and consumed product. As adults, we understand this would cost money. It already does. Anybody who thinks paint disposal is, or should be, or could be, free of cost must be dumping it down the drain or on the ground.

36
2
sonic5150Jul. 24, 13 6:33 AM

It seems to me that, had the reporter not interviewed someone from the industry, there would have been no mention that the cost will be eventually paid by consumer. I don't have a big issue with this, but please say it like it is. The cost is going to go up on paint (and carpet and batteries, etc.) Everything the government touches these days causes the price to go up.

26
9
mnpls123Jul. 24, 13 6:33 AM

"law, the 'greedy-corporate' paint manufacturers will instead be on-the-hook for the disposal"-----so what you are proposing is we socialize the cost of paint disposal by having everyone pay an equal share? I prefer those that create the problem pay to clean it up.

21
3
RankenFyleJul. 24, 13 6:53 AM

The consumers end up paying for it regardless who the tax is collected from, but that does not ensure consumer participation in the used paint collection. Give us incentive. All paint stores should be collection points and could offer a 20 to 35% percent refund on the next purchase of paint, dependent on the weight/volume of the returned paint. Do the same thing on car tires, electronics, and hazardous wastes like herbicide and petroleum products, and you'll get better consumer participation. Why do I have to pay a recycling fee when those tires can sit on my garage rafters for years?

16
3
la55122Jul. 24, 13 7:33 AM

Another fee, or is it a tax? The cost of latex based paints have outpaced the cost of oil and now they want to surcharge the purchase. So those that only buy what they need will still be paying for those that accumulate excess paint. And apparently, the waste paint becomes liquid gold to the recyclers. That should more than pay for the cost of recycling. Typical MPCA overreach in "protecting" us. Guess I'll order paint on Amazon or buy it out of state. It's not the 75 cents, it's the principle involved.

15
5
pitythefoolsJul. 24, 13 7:37 AM

Best Buy charges me nothing to recycle my computers, tv's, cell phones, light bulbs, batteries and a host of other things. Yet they are the low price leader in consumer electronics. I thought that industry is always more efficient than government so the conservatives should be praising this move. Instead they find ways, as with all topics, to whine about it. So cons, which is it? Is it more efficient to have government manage recycling, or private industry?

17
8

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT