The Yukon Chamber of Commerce wants the Yukon government to hit the brakes on the extended producer responsibility program.
The chamber, which recently announced plans to dissolve, wrote a letter to Yukon Premier Ranj Pillai and Minister of Environment Nils Clarke on May 27. The letter calls the extended producer responsibility program “poorly understood, financially cost-prohibitive, overly complex and administratively expensive, destroying what little profit margin privately-owned Yukon-based businesses have; all at the dawn of a pending global recession.”
The extended responsibility program is set to begin this summer across the territory. The program, which was added to the Environment Act in January 2024, puts the responsibility for the collection and recovery of waste with the person who manufactured that waste — i.e., the business or “steward.”
Producer responsibility organizations act on behalf of businesses they’ve struck agreements with to collect and recover waste. These organizations, according to the Yukon government, lead engagement and communication efforts.
According to the Yukon government website for EPR, there are currently four producer responsibility organizations in the territory: Call2Recycle, which focuses on batteries; Interchange Recycling, which takes care of oil, diesel exhaust fluid and antifreeze; Circular Materials, focusing on packaging and paper materials; and Product Care, hazardous and special products.
Each organization has its own date to begin implementation of the stewardship plan. Call2Recycle is set to start June 24, Interchange Recycling on Aug. 1, Circular Materials on Nov. 1 and Product Care some point in the fall.
The stewardship programs “must provide reasonable and free access to collection facilities or collection services,” per the 2024 extended producer responsibility regulation legislation.
In 2023, YG environmental analyst Natalia Baranova told the News that the government could save “several millions” of dollars due to the EPR system.
An economic analysis prepared for YG, published in 2023, also found that under extended producer responsibility, households, communities and the government would experience cost savings. However, EPR scenarios in the analysis were more costly overall, per the report.
But the chamber’s letter, signed by chair John Campbell, says that the cost of goods in the Yukon will rise due to the EPR program.
“This 'solution' - the EPR program - does not match viable or realistic Yukoner or program needs considering our small population and distance to market for appropriate recycling, not to mention that it appears as though the EPR is a tariff - a tax by a new name - and that this new YTG Tariff will be passed on to the consumer who will pay into multiple recycling or EPR programs each time the product is warehoused, distributed or consumed,” reads the letter.
“This program will cause financial harm to businesses and to consumers, while misleading Yukoners, operators and consumers that the EPR will make a positive impact in environmental waste diversion.”
The letter asks the government to delay the implementation of the program and review the financial implications, and consider “alternative, realistic models that don’t have our small business community and economy bearing sole financial responsibility to divert waste in our territory.”
The letter followed a different letter, sent to Clarke on May 21 by Alan Lebedoff, the president of ALX Exploration Services. He calculated that the EPR program would cost his business an extra $100,000 a year.
“Your claim that these costs will not affect consumers ignores basic economics: businesses, classified as "stewards" under the regulations, will pass these costs to consumers, further driving up the cost of living in an already expensive territory,” wrote Lebedoff.
He also asked the government to delay the implementation of the program until December 2026. He also asked that the government conduct a “transparent, collaborative economic impact assessment with businesses” and engage directly with mining companies and other stakeholders.
The Canadian Federation of Independent Businesses, a national non-profit, also wrote to Clarke and Pillai on May 30. They asked that the roll-out be paused until 2026.
They also want to see a “full economic impact analysis, including comparative cost modeling and recession scenario testing.”
They also want the government to raise the exemption threshold to include businesses making $2 million in annual revenue (up from $1 million), to treat each franchise location as a separate entity, and have enforcement take an education-first approach for the first year of implementation. They also ask the government to consider “alternative models” like “shared municipal-territorial stewardship or limiting the list of prescribed products to ease the transition.”
Contact Talar Stockton at talar.stockton@yukon-news.com
