3 ms·

The devil is in the details. For example the "chemical tax" is on the weight of the products, so when you buy consumer electronics you are supposed to be paying

The devil is in the details. For example the "chemical tax" is on the weight of the products, so when you buy consumer electronics you are supposed to be paying 120 kr/kg up to a maximum of 320 kr before VAT. This is blamed on environmnentally hazardous flame retardants on circuit boards. So the very design of this tax incentives less weighty electronic products, but I've learned that some electronic products longevity is correlated to its cooling, so you end up paying for the heat sink instead of the circuitboard. So it can even become a perverse incentive where you buy the cheapest possible product that might last a shorter compared to a heavier version that lasts longer.

belorn 10y ago
The obvious question is then why they chose to tax the total weight and not the total amount of hazardous flame retardant (or what ever classification they want to categorize the environmentally hazardous chemicals"). Maybe the industry refuse on the ground of trade secrets, or maybe it would be too costly for the producer to produce the correct measurements, or maybe retailers has not enough pressure to get producers to follow such regulative requirements. Thus a imperfect solution with imperfect incentives, but which hopefully is calculated to do more good than harm in the cost-benefit analyses.
- JanneVee 10y ago
  Yes but the imperfect incentives isn't punishing "consumption" of electronic devices. One clear example is the consumer version of a surround system with built in bluray. The day that the blu-ray drive gives up the consumer goes out buys a new one and throws out the old one. Now if we compare that to the enthusiast and buys a heavy receiver, separate speakers, and blu-ray player and is taxed individually on each component. What happens the day blu-ray gives up... he goes out and buys new blu-ray and keeps the old stuff. Same goes for the pc-gamer that builds his own PC. Buys individual components gets taxed on each, upgrades and replacements of components are taxed. But a regular consumer goes out and buys a flimsy laptop taxed less and throws away the laptop when it breaks.
walshemj 10y ago
which Is the problem with things like mandating maximum power for vacuum cleaners you just get a lower power motor which is run at 100% duty instead of a higher power one run at a lower duty cycle - with the effect of reducing the design life of the device.

belorn 10y ago

The obvious question is then why they chose to tax the total weight and not the total amount of hazardous flame retardant (or what ever classification they want to categorize the environmentally hazardous chemicals"). Maybe the industry refuse on the ground of trade secrets, or maybe it would be too costly for the producer to produce the correct measurements, or maybe retailers has not enough pressure to get producers to follow such regulative requirements. Thus a imperfect solution with imperfect incentives, but which hopefully is calculated to do more good than harm in the cost-benefit analyses.

JanneVee 10y ago
Yes but the imperfect incentives isn't punishing "consumption" of electronic devices. One clear example is the consumer version of a surround system with built in bluray. The day that the blu-ray drive gives up the consumer goes out buys a new one and throws out the old one. Now if we compare that to the enthusiast and buys a heavy receiver, separate speakers, and blu-ray player and is taxed individually on each component. What happens the day blu-ray gives up... he goes out and buys new blu-ray and keeps the old stuff. Same goes for the pc-gamer that builds his own PC. Buys individual components gets taxed on each, upgrades and replacements of components are taxed. But a regular consumer goes out and buys a flimsy laptop taxed less and throws away the laptop when it breaks.

walshemj 10y ago

which Is the problem with things like mandating maximum power for vacuum cleaners you just get a lower power motor which is run at 100% duty instead of a higher power one run at a lower duty cycle - with the effect of reducing the design life of the device.