sou · H8B372 · 2020-12-09 00:00:00 — EPR will be introduced for clothes, household and interior textiles, bags and accessories The introduction of a new EPR and the obligation to separate textile waste from other waste will affect all Swedish households and all businesses that produce textile waste. Textiles are used in a number of different areas and for a number of different functions. EPR will encompass a large proportion of these areas and functions but not all of them. EPR will be introduced for clothes, home and interior textiles, bags made from textiles and textile accessories, which means, for example, that furniture, technical textiles, filters, fabric by the metre, mattresses and shoes will not be covered by the new EPR scheme. To define the area of application, the Inquiry have taken the provisions of the as guide, and the Inquiry judge that EPR with this scope will lead to fulfilling the requirements of the Directive regarding separate collection of textiles. To make application easier for the companies, in the ordinance the Inquiry have chosen to use the Customs Tariff CN codes to define which textiles are to be covered. The current textile collection system will be retained Charities have built up systems for collecting, sorting and selling textiles and textile waste over a long period, and several charities are currently hired by municipalities and companies to collect both textiles and textile waste. year, these charities collect about 38,000 of textiles and textile waste, thus constituting key actors in reaching the target of increasing textile re-use and material recovery in . The surplus that the operations of charities generate goes to non-profit-making purposes in both and abroad. Collection also takes place on a lesser scale by private second-hand actors and by dealers receiving end-of-life textiles in their business premises. Many households are thus already used to separating textiles and textile waste from other domestic waste. Unlike the products currently covered by producer responsibility, in the textiles sector there is also a well-established to used textiles to . The Inquiry has viewed it as an advantage that some textile waste is already separated from ordinary domestic waste. Instead of re- placing already established collection pathways with a completely new collection system, the proposals of the Inquiry therefore result in the ability to retain today’s collection system. After notifying the , collection of textile waste will be allowed in the following cases: •collection of textile waste arising in or in conjunction with com- mercial operations, •collection of textile waste in conjunction with the sale of textiles, •collection of textile waste by charities, •collection of textile waste by remake actors, •a municipality’s collection of textile waste within the municipality. Of these, remake actors may retain the part of the collected waste that they use in their own operations, and charities may retain everything they have collected. Other actors that may collect textile waste must hand over all the collected materials to the producers’ licensed collection system. A continued opportunity for municipal collection is laid down based on the that emerged during the course of the Inquiry to protect and develop existing municipal initiatives. The obligation to collect textile waste in each munici- pality is incumbent upon the producers. The actors that already operate textile waste collections can choose whether they want to continue to operate as they do today or whether they want to offer their services to the new producers’ collection systems. The collection of textiles that do not constitute waste is not affected in a legal sense by the introduction of EPR. In other words, the second-hand actors, both commercial and charities, that cur- rently only receive textiles for which there is no disposal purpose can continue to do so. The producers must sign up to a licensed collection system Responsibility for the system for collecting textile waste meeting the requirements will not rest with the individual producers. The pro- ducers are only obliged to ensure that their products are dealt with in a licensed collection system, and it is the operator of the collection system that is responsible for ensuring that the system is run and functions in line with the requirements. The reason for this is that operating effective supervision of the collection system would be problematic were this supervision need to cover each individual producer. The system proposed will enable the Swedish Environ- mental , as the licensing body, to instead focus their supervisory measures on the body that operates the licensed collection system. A producer that places textiles on the Swedish market is only obliged to: •ensure that a body that holds a licence to run a collection system has undertaken to manage the producer’s textiles when they be- come waste, The requirements for a collection system are linked to achievement targets As shown above, there are two main purposes for introducing EPR for textiles: increased environmental benefit and for the producers to bear the cost of managing the waste generated by their products. To achieve these purposes, it is sufficient that the legislator sets requirements for what is to be achieved, while leaving it to the producers themselves to decide how the targets are to be met. This approach creates the best conditions for collection, sorting, re-use and recycling being organised in the most effective way, as it is in the producer’s own interest to keep costs down. This also paves the way for the development of large-scale sorting capacity, increased, re-use, and more effective material recovery processes being driven by producer demand. However, it is not enough to demand that targets be attained. This requirement must be supplemented by certain fundamental requirements made of the scheme. To a certain extent, these are derived from the minimum requirements of Article 8a of the . The requirements can be divided into three groups: adequacy requirements, national coverage requirements and other requirements. The most central requirements are linked to the adequacy of the collection system. To be considered adequate, the collection system must •provide easily accessible collection points where households and businesses alike wishing to dispose of textile waste can do so easily and free of charge, •as far as possible site collection points close to places that a large number of households visit regularly, •operate collection in a way that encourages preparation for re-use and material recovery. To be considered national, the collection system must provide collection points in each municipality, and the geographical spread in each municipality is to be reasonable in terms of population density and the location of operators. The other requirements that must be met by the collection system are of a more administrative nature. These include an obligation to give producers access to the system on non-discriminatory terms, how the producers’ charges are to be calculated, ensuring safety and certain compulsory information. The targets that the collection system is to attain are ambitious, and when licences are applied for, it must be probable that the intended collection system is capable of attaining the targets. There are two types of target to be attained. The first target is linked to collection and the second to managing the material col- lected. The two targets complement each other. Without the target to reduce the amounts of waste, in principle the second target could be met immediately, with no need for the new collection system to function. To measure collection efficiency, the is to estimate how much textile waste is thrown away in residual waste and in the energy recovery fraction at re- cycling centres in 2022 by analysing waste samples. The estimated amount is to be divided by the Swedish population to produce an average that states how many kilogrammes of textile waste each per- son annually throws away as residual waste or in the energy recovery fraction at recycling centres. The long-term target is for this average to be reduced by 90 percent. The target will be worded such that the average is to fall in three stages in relation to 2022; the different levels of the stages are to be attained at four-yearly intervals after the collection system has taken over responsibility for collecting the textile waste. This means that: •in 2028 the average is to have decreased by 70 percent, •in 2032 the average is to have decreased by 80 percent, •in 2036 the average is to have decreased by 90 percent. To monitor developments, the is to conduct waste sample analyses every two years. The target for handling the collected material will be introduced in a single step. From 2028 onwards, at least 90 percent of the textile waste collected by the collection system by weight is to be prepared for re-use or be sent for material recovery. The waste hierarchy is to be applied, and where waste is not prepared for re-use, material re- covery is primarily to take the form of the textile waste being used for remake and secondarily to take the form of the textile waste being used for fibre recycling. EPR covers Swedish and foreign actors The definition of who is to be considered to constitute a producer determines who in the manufacturing and delivery chain is to be responsible for the cost of dealing with the textile once it has be- come waste. In the first instance, actors established in will have producer responsibility for textiles placed on the Swedish market. Only in cases where textiles are sold directly to the Swedish end user by distance selling will the producer responsibility be placed on the foreign seller. There will only be one producer responsible for each textile product. Depending on how the product has been placed on the market, producer responsibility may exist for manu- facturers, importers, wholesalers, hirers and retailers. Producer refers to an entity: •established in that professionally manufactures, sells, hires out or imports and releases textiles on the Swedish market, •that is not established in and, through a distance selling contract, professionally sells textiles directly to private house- holds or to end users other than private households in . Release on the Swedish market refers to making a textile available to someone else in for the first time. When textile waste is used as a raw material in its existing form, this is positive from an environmental perspective, as it demands fewer resources than, for example, recycling the fibre to create new fibre. To facilitate this type of business, a remake actor that manu- factures textiles at least 80 percent of which comprise textiles released on the Swedish market therefore does not constitute a producer. Producer responsibility also exists when a waste holder wishes to dispose of textiles which have not been released on the market. This concerns, for example, actors wishing to dispose of clothes that cannot be sold for various reasons. Measures to reduce the risk of freeriders There are a number of different practical and legal obstacles that, taken in combination, make it impossible to ensure that all actors are treated equally and take their share of responsibility for the col- lection and management of textile waste. Resolving several of these obstacles will require international agreements, amendments to EU legal acts and more provisions on cross-border administrative collaboration. This type of measure cannot be brought about within the remit of a government inquiry. While there are some measures that can be taken to reduce the obstacles that have been identified, it is not therefore possible for the Inquiry to propose measures that would safeguard the fair treat- ment of all actors. There is thus a risk of foreign producers engaged in the distance selling of textiles directly to Swedish end users failing to fulfil their Swedish producer responsibility obligations, either due to a lack of knowledge or deliberately. To make it easier for foreign actors to fulfil their producer re- sponsibility obligations, it will be possible to appoint a producer representative as an intermediary to act on their behalf. To reduce the risk of producers who sell textiles via digital market- places failing to fulfil their producer responsibility obligations, a re- sponsibility will be imposed on the intermediary. Anyone who acts as an intermediary in the distance selling of textiles to end users in may only do so for sales from producers that, themselves or through a producer representative, have ensured that a body licensed to operate a collection system has undertaken to manage the textile waste for which the producer is responsible. to the restrictions resulting from the e-Commerce Directive, this requirement only applies to intermediaries established in . Information and transparency are important to attaining the targets To attain the collection targets set, households and other waste holders merely being aware of EPR and the new obligation to separate textile waste from other residual waste is not enough. also be prompted to change their behaviour and hand over their textile waste to those licensed to collect it separately. There is thus an extensive need for information. As stated above, as well as information, there is a need for more instruments that encourage more sustainable consumer behaviour. Per capita consumption of textiles in is high. Bodies operating licensed collection systems are to provide munici- palities with the information they need to inform households in the municipality concerned. Bodies operating licensed collection systems are also responsible for augmenting the municipality’s information to households and for informing waste producers other than house- holds. Households are to receive information on •the obligation to separate their textile waste from other waste, •how households can help prevent textile waste occurring, •the importance of extending the lifetime of the textile, •the environmental benefit to which sorting contributes, •the environmental impact of the textile, •the collection and handling targets and whether these are being met, •the proportion of the collected textile waste that is exported. Bodies operating licensed collection systems must also inform pro- ducers of the opportunities available for material recovery of differ- ent types of textiles, the measures producers can take to simplify the collection system’s handling of the collected waste, and the measures producers can take to extend the lifetime of the textile. To make distance sellers abroad aware of the new requirements and make it easier for them to fulfil their producer responsibility obligations, the is to work with the licensed collection systems to produce information in English specially designed for this target group. To make it possible to monitor whether the targets are being met and obtain a holistic picture of textile collection and handling in , all actors that collect textile waste must submit data to the each year. The statutes are to enter into force on 1 January 2022. For practical reasons, EPR will need to be introduced in several stages, and some of the proposed provisions are therefore not to be applied until a later date. Before responsibility for collection can be transferred from the municipality to one or more collection systems, enough time must be available for the licence process, to expand the col- lection system, and for all producers to enter into contracts with a licensed collection system. Responsibility for collecting textile waste will therefore not be transferred to the licensed collection systems until 1 January 2024. The table below summarises the economic impacts of introducing EPR for textiles in . The Inquiry have based its calculations on the target that states that the amount of textile waste disposed of as residual waste and in the energy recovery fraction at recycling centres is to fall by 90 percent. The deadline for attaining this target is not until 2036. Even if the initial investment cost is significant, this means that the costs linked to collection will increase gradually as the collection targets become more ambitious. It has not been possible to express all the impacts in monetary terms, mainly due to a lack of data. Where this is the case, the im- pacts have been described qualitatively, and their importance is indicated in the table by a plus sign if they generate a benefit and a minus sign if they generate a cost. To avoid costs being counted twice, the costs in the table should not be added together and interpreted as the total cost of the introduction of EPR. The most obvious example here is the annual million that the licensed collection system is expected to cost, which is also shown on the cost side for the producers.1 1Ultimately, the cost of the collection system will be passed on to consumers. However, the expected price increases for textiles are not included in the million per year shown in the table. This cost item only denotes the cost in terms of the time that households need to spend on handling textile waste after the introduction of EPR. Economic impacts of EPR for textiles One-off cost (SEK) Annual cost (SEK/year) Companies that sell textiles 1,300,000 320,200,000 4,600,000 Collectors of textile waste 296,000,000 Unlicensed (excluding charities) 446,000,000 4,200,000 2,500,000 6,888,750 A plus sign indicates a benefit and a minus sign indicates a cost. Consequences for companies placingtextiles on the market Seen in terms of market share, the companies affected by EPR are mainly (>99 percent) Swedish companies in the textile manufac- , textile sales, textile hire and laundry sectors. EPR involves the costs of administering applications to the Swedish Environ- mental and reporting to the collection system. On top of this, there will be the inspection fee payable to the and payments to the collection system for the textiles placed on the market. Alarge number of foreign businesses distance-sell textiles to Swedish end users, but their proportion of the total textile market is small. The Inquiry that it is unlikely that smaller actors that sell textiles to on single occasions will fulfil their producer re- sponsibility obligations. The foreign actors that do fulfil their pro- ducer responsibility obligations will be affected in the same way as Swedish companies and incur similar types of costs, although it is assumed that many will make use of producer representatives. Textile intermediaries are given responsibility for conducting checks, which they are expected to resolve through amendments to their con- tracts with the sellers who use the digital marketplace to sell textiles. Consequences for collectors of textile waste Licensed collectors will incur the costs of the licence process, col- lection and management of textiles, an inspection fee payable to the , the duty to provide information and administrative costs. By far the largest cost item is the waste management costs (transport, sorting and incineration). Unlicensed collectors (excluding charities) The number of actors judged likely to exercise the opportunity to collect textile waste without a licence is about 65. This group will incur notification and reporting costs. If they enter into agreements with the licenced collection system, they may obtain compensation for their collection costs. The number of charities that collect textile waste is estimated to be about 20. This group will incur the costs of notification and a higher cost for reporting than other actors who collect textile waste with- out a licence. If they enter into agreements with the licenced collec- tion system, they may obtain compensation for their collection costs. Consequences for waste producers Households and consumers will incur costs of sorting waste and see higher prices for textiles. The producers are expected to allow the costs of EPR to be passed on in their entirety to consumers, which is equivalent to a price increase of for a T-shirt. Operators that produce waste will experience similar consequences to households and consumers, and the same arguments as above thus also apply to this group. Consequences for sorting and material recovery operators Operators that sort or recycle textile waste are expected to expe- rience a higher demand for their services with the introduction of EPR. Provided that such increased demand does arise, this can be expected to mean the creation of new jobs. Impacts for the public sector The municipalities will incur the costs of incinerating remaining textile waste in residual waste and of some information initiatives. The cost of the textiles in residual waste can be financed via the waste charge. The cost of providing information to local residents has been judged to be negligible. will incur recurring costs of supervision, guidance, processing and analysing waste samples. will additionally incur the one-off costs of producing licence application regulations, processing licence applications from collection systems, receiving and administering notifications from producers and the unlicensed collection systems, and of drafting information in Swedish and English for producers. Costs linked to supervision will be financed via inspection fees from producers and the licensed collection system. The body or bodies that operate a licensed collection system will also compensate the Agency for its waste sample analysis costs. Other costs will be managed within existing budgets. The Inquiry judges that the proposals will only affect the courts to a limited extent and that any additional costs will thus be able to be managed within existing budgets. The impacts for the environment are a smaller carbon footprint, lower energy and water consumption, lower emissions of environmental toxins, less acidification, a lower impact on lakes and seas (eutro- phication) and a less negative impact on land use and biodiversity. Increased separate collection of over 85,000 of textile waste that previously went to energy recovery and now instead are being prepared for reuse and material recycling have the potential to contribute to great environmental benefits in circular cycles. The climate footprint can be almost halved if our clothing is used twice as many times, provided that extended use replaces the purchase of newly produced textiles. Although it is not known exactly how many more times the garment will be used as a result of EPR, it is reasonable to assume a longer lifetime. Recycling of textile waste into new fibre to be used in new textiles can contribute to a reduced climate impact of up to10 percent per average textile. Using textile waste as material for remake provides an even greater environmental benefit than other material recycling. In other words, there is great potential for environmental benefit here. The Inquiry judges that a combination of EPR and instruments that help consumers to act in a more sustainable way can have a major impact. Exactly how great an environmental benefit can be attri- buted to the proposal on EPR needs to be studied in more detail but previous studies have estimated an environmental benefit amounting to significant monetary sums (based on slightly different assumptions and data). Med producent avses i detta kapitel den som1. yrkesmässigt tillverkar, för in till , förmedlar eller överlåter en vara eller en för- packning, eller2. den som i sin yrkesmässiga verksamhet frambringar avfall som kräver särskilda åtgärder av renhållnings- eller miljöskäl. 1.1Förslag till lag om ändring i Härigenom föreskrivs i fråga om att 15 kap. 9 och 15 §§ och 29 kap. 9 § ska ha följande lydelse. Med producent avses i detta kapitel den som