Misplaced Pages

#646353

24-544: The Landfill Tax Credit Scheme (LTCS) is a scheme for the distribution of funds generated from Landfill Tax in the United Kingdom. The scheme was established by the Landfill Tax Regulations in 1996. The LTCS was designed to help mitigate the effects of landfill upon local communities. It encourages partnerships between landfill operators, their local communities and the voluntary and public sectors. Since 2014,

48-527: A biodegradable and non-inert content into landfills at the inactive waste taxation level. A new testing regime was introduced, where a small amount of the load is tested to ascertain its biodegradable content. From 1 April 2018 to April 2019 the landfill tax rates were: From 1 April 2020 the landfill tax rates are: The Welsh Government took over responsibility for the tax in Wales from in 2018. The United States has numerous federal laws and regulations regarding

72-438: A means of inhibiting disposal by raising the cost in comparison to preferable alternatives, in the same manner as an excise or " sin tax ". Landfilling is discouraged due to a number of key reasons: In Australia, the landfill levy rate is determined by state and territory governments, and depending on the factors involved in the formulation, it differs from one state to another. The first-ever implemented Australian levy scheme

96-410: A similar scheme operates in relation to Scottish Landfill Tax . This waste -related article is a stub . You can help Misplaced Pages by expanding it . Landfill Tax A tax or fee may be imposed on landfills or other disposal facilities as a means of raising general revenues, to generate funds for inspection programs or long-term mitigation of environmental impacts related to disposal, or as

120-718: Is regulated by ENTRUST, a company limited by guarantee. Sections from the coalition government's Emergency Budget 2010: From 1 April 2015 to April 2016 the landfill tax rates were: With the Scotland Act 2012 , the Scottish Government gained the devolved power to levy its own landfill tax. The Scottish Landfill Tax was introduced by the Landfill Tax (Scotland) Act 2014 and began to be payable on 1 April 2015. In 2015 and 2016, there were concerns that some companies disposing waste to landfill were wrongly putting waste with

144-542: Is responsible for paying the tax and will pass the cost on to businesses and local councils on top of normal landfill fees. VAT is charged on the landfill fees and the landfill tax. Operators can reduce their tax liability by making payments to the Landfill Communities Fund under the Landfill Tax Credit Scheme . The fund aids community or environmental projects in the vicinity of a landfill site and

168-640: The Scotland Bill Committee of the Scottish Parliament , convened by Wendy Alexander , whose parliamentary motion started the whole Calman process. The Bill was presented to the House of Commons by the Secretary of State for Scotland , Michael Moore , on St Andrew's Day (30 November), 2010, and received an unopposed second reading on 27 January 2012. The UK government stated that it would not pass

192-655: The UK Supreme Court as a constitutional "devolution issue". The Supreme Court consists of two Supreme Court judges from Scotland and ten judges from other parts of the United Kingdom. When hearing appeals the Supreme Court sits with a bench of at least five judges, so even if both Scottish judges are present for a Scottish appeal, the majority of the bench will be judges who may not be especially well versed in Scots law and criminal procedure. According to Lord Hope of Craighead ,

216-571: The Waste Minimisation Act 2008 allowed for the charging of a landfill levy. Half of the landfill levy goes to local authorities with the other half going into a Waste Minimisation Fund. As of 2010 it is set at $ 10 a tonne but it can be reviewed by the Minister for the Environment. Landfill Tax was introduced in 1996 by Conservative Secretary of State for the Environment, John Gummer , and was

240-518: The Bill on 18 April 2012. The Secretary of State for Scotland, Michael Moore, described the legislation as the largest transfer of fiscal powers from central Government since the creation of the United Kingdom . Although the Scottish National Party supported some parts of the Bill as introduced, it opposed others. In particular, it considered that the income tax proposals were flawed. However,

264-543: The Bill would not harm Scottish interests, it represented a missed opportunity and had been overtaken by events, in particular the return of an SNP majority government in 2011 and the consequent independence referendum . There is a proposal to amend section 57(2) of the Scotland Act 1998 , which provides that the Lord Advocate , as a member of the Scottish Executive , has no power to do anything in contravention of

SECTION 10

#1733084840647

288-591: The Deputy President of the Supreme Court, non-Scottish judges will in practice defer to their Scottish colleagues in Scottish cases, and often simply concur with judgments written by the Scottish judges. However, the situation is seen by some, including the Scottish Government , as undermining the status of the High Court of Justiciary as the final court of appeal in criminal matters in Scots law, and even of undermining

312-651: The European Convention rights. Given that, alongside being the adviser to and representative of the Scottish Government in Scots law, the Lord Advocate is head of the system of criminal prosecution in Scotland and every prosecution in a Scottish court proceeds with his/her authority, this provision effectively allows any human rights issue raised in any criminal proceedings in Scotland effectively to be appealed to

336-504: The SNP agreed to support the Bill, after the proposals to return certain powers were dropped, and agreement was reached that the details of the income tax changes would be subject to approval by MSPs. After the Bill received legislative consent from the Scottish Parliament, the Cabinet Secretary for Parliamentary Business and Government Strategy , Bruce Crawford , MSP argued that, although

360-636: The Scottish Parliament, most notably: The proposed legislation was based on the final report of the Calman Commission , which was established by an opposition Labour Party motion in the Scottish Parliament in December 2007, against the wishes of the Scottish National Party minority government . Professor Jim Gallagher , the civil servant who drafted the Bill, was appointed to advise

384-506: The UK's first environmental tax. The tax is seen as a key mechanism in enabling the UK to meet its targets set out in the Landfill Directive for the landfilling of biodegradable waste. Through increasing the cost of landfill, other advanced waste treatment technologies with higher gate fees are made to become more financially attractive. The amount of tax levied is calculated according to

408-553: The activities of the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB). Many cities and counties collect fees from landfills within their jurisdiction to recover the costs of local solid waste planning and inspection programs, to operate programs for the collection and disposal of household hazardous wastes , and to fund some costs of recycling and reuse programs. Landfills in San Jose are subject to

432-487: The bill unless it had obtained a legislative consent motion from the Scottish Parliament , although the Parliament of the United Kingdom could have passed the Bill in any case. The governing Scottish National Party indicated that it planned to block the bill. However, after a deal was reached between the two governments on 21 March 2012, the Scottish Parliament unanimously passed a legislative consent motion in respect of

456-681: The highest disposal tax in California, with the Disposal Facility Tax set at $ 13.00 per ton in 1992. Scotland Act 2012 The Scotland Act 2012 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom . It sets out amendments to the Scotland Act 1998 , with the aim of devolving further powers to Scotland in accordance with the recommendations of the Calman Commission. It received royal assent in 2012. The Act gave extra powers to

480-672: The integrity of Scots law. The Advocate General for Scotland asked an expert group, chaired by Sir David Edward , to consider this issue and make recommendations, which led to the amendments to the Scotland Bill proposed by the UK Government. The Scottish Government remains concerned that the amendments may not fully address the issue, particularly as a result of the decision of the Supreme Court in Fraser v HM Advocate , and appointed their own expert group, chaired by Lord McCluskey , to consider

504-704: The location of waste disposal being metropolitan or regional, being obligatory versus voluntary, providing a tax exemption for certain materials and having levy zones. At the time of writing (2020), ACT has set the largest levy rates (metropolitan: $ 146.2, regional: $ 199.2) for construction and demolition (C&D) waste among Australian jurisdictions, followed by NSW (metropolitan: $ 141.2, regional: $ 81.3) and SA (metropolitan: $ 140, regional: $ 70). The main factors giving rise to non-uniform levy rates include state revenue requirements and priorities, cost disparity between jurisdictions and regional versus metropolitan areas, available facilities and regulatory framework. In New Zealand

SECTION 20

#1733084840647

528-427: The operation of landfills, but there is no national landfill tax or fee. Although states and local governments may choose to collect fees and taxes on the collection or disposal of solid waste. Landfills in California are subject to fees and taxes levied by cities and counties, as well as by the state. The Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 authorized a state fee (set at $ 1.40 per ton effective 2002-07-01) to fund

552-406: The weight of the material disposed of and whether it is active or inactive waste. Inevitably there will be some mixing of waste such as inert bricks and concrete mixed with small amounts of wood or mineral dust packaged in polythene bags. It is for the producer of the waste to decide what is reasonable and acceptable in terms of active waste contamination of inert waste. The landfill site operator

576-554: Was enforced in New South Wales (NSW) metropolitan area in 1971, which was rated at $ 0.51 per tonne. A scheme that was subsequently followed by some other Australian states and territories. Except for Northern Territory (NT) and Tasmania (Tas), all of Australia’s other jurisdictions (Australian Capital Territory (ACT), NSW, Victoria (Vic), Queensland (Qld), South Australia (SA), Western Australia (WA)) have introduced landfill levies. The sources of disparity in landfill levy imposition are

#646353