Displaying items by tag: Import

Guatemala: The government has introduced a new distribution tax of US$0.2 per 42.5kg bag of cement. The new legislation also intends to regulate cement and clinker imports and appoint personnel to supervise storage sites, according to the El Periódico newspaper.

The UK waste fuels industry is facing potential challenge from changing Dutch environmental legislation. As part of its new National Climate Agreement the government in the Netherlands is considering imposing a tariff of Euro32/t on imported refuse-derived fuel (RDF) from the start of January 2020. It also wants to add a CO2 tax of Euro30/t on industrial emitters from the start of 2021.

This is bad news for the UK’s waste export market because 1.28Mt or 44% of exported waste fuels from the UK in 2018 went to the Netherlands. The majority of this was RDF. That was more than the next two biggest destinations, Sweden and Germany, combined. Andy Hill of Cynosure Partners summed up the UK situation in the June 2019 issue of Global Cement Magazine when he said, “The UK generates more far more waste than it has landfill, recycling and alternative fuel capacity combined. Quite simply, that’s why the UK exports and has become a leading force in Europe in terms of RDF and solid recovered fuel (SRF) exports.”

Graph 1: International Waste Shipments exported from England, 2011 – 2018. Source: UK Environment Agency.

Graph 2: Destinations of English waste fuels exports in 2018. Source: UK Environment Agency.

Waste management companies and their representative associations on both sides of the North Sea are not taking this terribly well. Robert Corijn, chair of the RDF Industry Group, a European waste organisation, summed up his members response by pointing out both the environmental cost of the new legislation and the risk to jobs in the UK. “RDF export forms a vital and flexible part of the UK’s waste management system, supporting over 6800 additional jobs in the UK, and saving over 0.7Mt/yr CO₂e emissions.” Robert Loos of the Dutch Waste Management Association made a similar response questioning what exactly the Dutch government was attempting to achieve.

Steve Burton, one of the directors of UK-fuels producer Andusia, went further by saying that the Dutch had proposed the move on environmental grounds because it has an incineration capacity of 8Mt/yr but produces only 6Mt/yr of waste. “So they think that by setting a tax it will significantly curtail how much gets incinerated in the Netherlands and thus produce less CO₂. All very sensible if you consider CO₂ in isolation in your own country. However, the Dutch Government aren’t looking at the bigger picture…” He then went on to point out that the RDF would then either get burnt elsewhere or landfilled resulting in no overall CO₂ emissions reduction. His further assessment, which you can read here, goes on to speculate amongst other things that Dutch Energy for Waste (EFW) plants could end up having to cut their gate fees by more than the import tariff in order to keep running. The state-owned EFW plants would then made a loss for the tax payers until the market stabilised. It should be noted that the data from the Environment Agency indicates that Andusia exported just under 38,000t of RDF to the Netherlands in 2018.

The more prickly issues of using waste fuels may prove tricky for Dutch legislators. Corijn’s distinction above of using CO₂e for the savings from RDF usage is important in this argument since burning RDF and alternative fuels, either for generating energy or making cement, still releases CO₂. In the European Union (EU) it’s the biomass fraction of RDF that’s important for the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) and the like because biomass emissions are counted as carbon-neutral. Remove this effect and the benefit of waste fuels are more to do with the waste hierarchy and reusing materials rather than leaving them to rot and release methane, a gas with a more potent global warming effect than CO₂. Despite this, at face value, importing rubbish and then burning it to release yet more unwanted CO₂ may seem nonsensical to the parliamentarians. Perhaps the other thing they should consider is that waste-derived fuels are manufactured products to set specifications. On-going arguments around the world about the developed world ‘exporting its rubbish’ frequently ignore this point.

Since the new Dutch National Climate Agreement is currently at the proposal stage it has a long way to go before it becomes law. First it has to be turned into legislation and then this has to be approved by the Dutch Parliament. As indicated so far the waste management industry will continue to fight its corner with vigour.

Nigeria: Oyebamiji Dauda, the chairman of the Lagos State Bricklayers’ Association, has urged the government to cut the price of cement. He wants it to make cement manufacturing more competitive by allowing more producers to operate in the market, according to the News Agency of Nigeria. He added that the ‘high’ cost of cement was negatively affecting building construction. Dauda’s ideas to ease the price of cement include government subsidy, tax breaks for local producers of building materials and further penalties for imported products.

Belarus: The Council of Ministers has required companies to obtain a special license for importing Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) from outside the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU). The requirement will take effect later this month and will be in effect for six months, according to the Belapan news agency. The new regulations have been introduced to support the local sector.

In January to April 2019, Belarus imported 0.13Mt of cement including 65,000t from other EEU countries, according to the National Statistical Committee. In the same period, Belarus’ companies made 1.25Mt of cement, an increase of nearly 12% year-on-year, and exported 0.44Mt.

Ghana: The Cement Manufacturers Association of Ghana (CMAG) is lobbying the government against a recent fumigation levy of US$0.50/t on imported clinker by the Ministry of Health. At a recent meeting the association discussed this tax and others negatively affected the cement sector, according to the Business and Financial Times newspaper. It is also unhappy about more longstanding charges, including a VAT restructuring levy of 5%, and a 2% special tax as well as a new 11% electricity tariff and a proposed increase in the cost of a certification licence from the Ghana Standards Authority and impending. CMAG is also complaining to the Customs Division of the Ghana Revenue Authority about imports.

Kenya: Data from the Kenya Bureau of Statistics shows that cement production fell by 6% year-on-year to 1.46Mt in the first quarter of 2019 from 1.55Mt in the same period in 2018. Cement consumption dropped by 3% to 1.46Mt from 1.50Mt. Cement consumption previously grew by 2.8% year-on-year to 5.9Mt in 2018 from 5.8Mt in 2017. However, production fell by 2.6% to 6.07Mt from 6.23Mt. Imports increased by around 50% to 23,000t but exports decreased by 63% to 0.14Mt from 0.39Mt, mainly due to a major drop in deliveries to Uganda and Tanzania.

Philippines: The Philippine Cement Importers Association (PCIA) has refuted the claims of local cement manufacturers that an increase in cement imports has caused ‘serious injury’ to their operations. In a position paper submitted to the Tariff Commission on the imposition of safeguard measures on imported cement, the PCIA said that some local producers were reporting continued profits despite the level of imports, according to the Manila Bulletin newspaper. It also denied accusations that cement imports were absorbing 17.2% of local production and 14.2% of total market demand.

"We have a domestic cement industry that is robust and resilient amid the import surge, and already competitive against imports,'' said the PCIA. "The 2013 to 2017 results of operations of the domestic cement industry showed its ability to compete with cement imports. Despite the surge of imports during the period of investigation (2013 - 2017), the domestic industry continued to exhibit improving revenues and continuing profitability." It finished by saying that the Philippine cement industry was globally competitive and did not require any structural adjustment.

Eurasian Economic Union: The Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) produced 12Mt of cement in the first quarter of 2019. Armenia produced 68,000t and imported 47,200t. Belarus produced 0.84Mt, imported 79,500t and exported 0.26Mt. Kyrgyzstan produced 0.35Mt, imported 38,600t and exported 0.15Mt. Kazakhstan produced 1.47Mt, imported 0.11Mt and exported 0.33Mt. Russia produced 9.3Mt, imported 0.18Mt and exported 0.17Mt. Usually production in the first quarter represents 16 – 19% of annual production. Consumption of cement in the EEU region is expected to grow by 2.5% year-on-year in 2019.

Bangladesh: The Chattogram Customs Authority has seized 30 containers of cement imported under false declaration by Pran Dairy at Chattogram Port. Sources quoted by the Daily Sun newspaper said that the company has attempted to avoid paying the correct import tariffs by falsely declaring the consignment as high-density polyethylene (HDPE) for the UAE. However, when custom officials examined the shipment they found Saudi Arabian-branded cement instead.

A total of 10,200 sacks of 50kg bags of cement were found. The duty payable on HDPE is 32% compared to 91% for cement. The importer was attempting to avoid paying import tariffs of over US$350,000.

Trinidad & Tobago: The Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) is continuing to hear arguments about whether Rock Hard Cement should be exempt from higher taxes applicable to third party goods. Both the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) Council for Trade and Economic Development (COTED) and the World Customs Organisation (WCO) previously ruled that Rock Hard Cement imports from Turkey and Portugal were correctly classified as ‘other hydraulic cement,’ according to Barbados Today. However, lawyers on behalf of Trinidad and Tobago and Trinidad Cement have dismissed this classification of the imports, insisting that the classification of the World Customs Organization (WCO) and COTED were ‘unsafe, unreliable and incorrect.’ As such the imports should be classified as ‘building cement grey’ and liable to a tariff of 15% instead of 5%. The case continues.