Pricewatch queries: Why you can’t get a 22 cent bag in your supermarket

A couple of weeks back we highlighted the disappearance of 22-cent bags from Tesco. When we asked the retailer about it, we were assured that it was responding to consumer demand and that the absence of plastic bags is better for the environment.

Far be it from us to accuse Tesco of greenwashing. But there is a bit more to the story than it might have implied. With help from RTÉ Radio 1's The Ray D'Arcy Show (on which Pricewatch does a regular turn), we have found out more.

Supervalu, Tesco and Dunnes Stores have all phased out or are in the process of phasing out 22-cent bags. Instead they offer customers the option of buying a "bag for life" at a cost of 70 cent.

This 70 cent price is important, because the 22 cent environmental levy applies only to plastic bags that cost 69 cent or under. If retailers charge 70 cent for a plastic bag, no levy applies and they pocket all the money. If they charge 68 cent, they would have to pay 22 cent in tax, and would only pocket 46 cent from each bag sold. So the advantage of charging 70 cent is obvious.

According to Revenue, gross receipts for the plastic bag tax was €12 million 2015 and €13 million in 2014. A written answer to a Dáil question in 2013 revealed that €203.4 million had been raised since the levy was introduced in 2002, which means some €230 million has been raised in the past 14 years.

With retailers getting rid of the cheaper bags and charging 70 cent for the durable ones, that revenue stream will dry up.

Of course, if these retailers really cared about consumers and the environment, they could scrap the 22-cent bags (which are an environmental menace) and charge 69 cent for their bags for life. That way they would still pay the environmental levy and still make a handsome profit.

We contacted the main supermarkets to see if they would consider this. The answers were not inspiring.

“We are in the process of gradually phasing out our 22-cent bags,” said Tesco.” The popularity of these bags has been in decline in recent years, with many customers opting to reuse bags instead. We keep the prices of our bags under review and we offer customers a variety of reusable bag options, including a standard reusable bag at 70 cent, which is in line with the market.”

So that was no help.

Musgrave, which owns Supervalu and Centra, sent this statement. "In an effort to become more environmentally friendly, along with it being a more economical option for shoppers in the long term, we encourage customers to choose from a Bag for Life at 70 cent or a cloth bag at €2."

We asked Musgrave if it would sell the bags for a little less than 70 cent. Response: “If you sell them for less than 70 cent, then they are subject to the levy and you have to add that price on.”

The retailer appeared to suggest that if it sold the bags for 69 cent, it would have to add the levy on to that, which would take the cost to 91 cent, which would mean the levy did not apply.

Confused? Us too.

Dunnes Stores did no respond to the queries.

Don’t overpay for Esta

A reader by the name of Jim is heading to the US with his family in the days ahead, and last week he went about completing the Esta (Electronic System for Travel Authorisation) application for himself and two others. He just googled “Esta application” and the second link that appeared directed him to Esta.ie.

“I completed the application and was a little surprised that the charge was $85 per person,” he says. “But, as I’d already keyed in all the data, I went ahead with it. It was some time after I had completed the application that I realised that this is a private service and not the official US government site, where the charge is just $14 per application.”

He accepts that there is a notice on the site saying it’s a private service, “but, in my haste to get the job done, I didn’t see it initially as the site looks quite ‘official’. This isn’t a scam, but it is something that travellers should be aware of,” he says.

When he realised what he had done, Jim notified the supplier and requested a cancellation of his application. “They were back to me by the following morning to confirm that they would cancel, and my credit card was duly refunded. So, I saved myself about $200, even if I had to complete the applications twice over.

“Anyway, I thought this might make for a good piece of consumer advice.”

He is absolutely right.