Levy delay puts millions in revenue at risk, say senators

Opposition Senator Ramon Small-Ferguson says the Government’s delay in legislating an increase in the environmental protection levy has cost the country vital revenue, at a time when tax and grant receipts for the April-to-June quarter were already $28.7 billion below budget.

The Environmental Protection Levy Act 2026, which was passed in the Senate on Friday, now sets October 1 as the implementation date for an increase in the levy from 0.5 per cent to 0.8 per cent.

Noting that the legislation was just brought to Parliament this week, Small-Ferguson charged that the delay in the implementation of the levy was troubling.

“The Government has had more than seven months to prepare the legislation and Parliament is only being given days to consider it. It doesn’t seem like good governance to me,” he said during a debate on the legislation.

Noting that the Government had projected that the new measure would raise an additional $3.6 billion between May 2026 and March 2027, the opposition senator reasoned that “on a straight line basis, the five-month delay places approximately $1.6 billion of that projection at risk”.

He wants the Government to tell the country how much of the original projected sum would be collected and what would be done to close the gap.

SEEKING FULL DISCLOSURE

Small-Ferguson also wants the Government to disclose how much has been collected from the levy and the sum spent on environment projects.

“If this levy is just another revenue measure, then the Government should just say so,” he noted.

He said if the levy was intended to protect the environment, then the legislation should account for how this should be done.

In his contribution to the debate, government Senator Keith Duncan said it was important that legislative changes be implemented on a timely basis to minimise any further revenue loss which puts critical projects and programmes in the Budget at risk.

Referencing a report by Jamaica’s fiscal commissioner, Duncan said the five-month delay had resulted in an estimated revenue shortfall of $646 million.

Responding to Small-Ferguson’s push for the levy to be ring-fenced for environmental projects, the government lawmaker said they are not specifically designated for environmental purposes as all revenues go into the Consolidated Fund.

However, he argued that those funds are allocated for environmental purposes even if they are not formally earmarked for that purpose.

The bill seeks to implement an environmental protection levy on imported and locally manufactured goods.

The objects and reasons of the bill states that the environmental protection levy is aimed at mitigating the negative impact on the environment arising from the consumption, use and disposal of imported and locally manufactured goods.

editorial@gleanerjm.com