White Paper - Container (Bottle) Deposit Laws
April 2016
A bottle redemption program often referred to as a “bottle bill” requires an additional fee on
beverage containers, such as bottles and cans, at the time of purchase. These fees work like
a deposit and usually are totally or partially recovered by individuals who recycle these
containers. Increased recycling reduced greenhouse gas emissions, litter, and waste to
landfills are often cited as benefits to bottle bill programs.
History/Purpose
In the 1950s and 1960s, refillable bottles could be returned to the store for a 5-10 cent refund
per bottle. These “deposit” bottles were eventually phased out around the country and
replaced by beverage containers without a deposit. However, many states reintroduced this
deposit system in the 1970s and 1980s with a slight variation. They no longer used refillable
bottles. Instead, the programs focused on re-routing highly valuable aluminum, plastic and
glass beverage containers from municipal landfills to recycling centers.
Today’s programs operate by charging a 5-10 cent fee on beverage containers that can
be recouped when consumers return the empty bottle. The deposit is charged by the
distributor to the retailer and then passed on to the consumer. Once the bottles are returned,
consumers may be reimbursed by retailers or redemption centers. Retailers or redemption
centers are then reimbursed by distributors. Typically, these programs were implemented with
a litter reduction goal in mind. Bottle bill states report an average decrease in beverage
container litter of 78 percent, and an average decrease in overall litter of 39 percent when the
programs were first implemented.
Increased recycling and a reduction in waste are two additional goals associated with the bottle
bill program. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reported that in 2008, Americans
generated about 250 million tons of trash and recycled 83 million tons, or 33.2 percent of this
material. Total solid waste generation increased from approximately 150 million tons to 250
million tons between 1980 and 2008. However, the amount of waste sent to landfills is still
approximately the same due to improved recycling and waste combustion programs. The
recycling rate increased from less than 10 percent in 1980 to over 33 percent in 2008.
Additionally, waste combustion programs increased from non-existence in 1980 to handling
12.6 percent of waste generated in 2008. This makes a reduction of overall disposal of waste in
a landfill from 89 percent of the amount generated in 1980 to 54 percent of municipal solid waste
(MSW) in 2008.
Page 1 of 5
Currently 10 states have container deposit laws. A new one hasn't been implemented since
2005. The states with container deposit laws consistently recycled bottles at rates of 66 percent
to 96 percent. The bottle bill states make up only 28 percent of the U.S. population but they
recycled 46 percent of the containers recycled in 2010, the most recent year of the
comprehensive study on bottle bills by the association pushing for deposit laws, the Culver City,
Calif.-based Container Recycling Institute (CRI).
New York
5 cents
Massachusetts
5 cents
California
5 cents less than 24 oz; 10 cents 24 oz or larger
Connecticut
5 cents
Oregon
5 cents
Vermont
15 cents on liquor containers; 5 cents all others
Michigan
10 cents
Hawaii
5 cents
Iowa
5 cents
Maine
5 cents
Click here for more detailed information on the 10 bottle bill states.
History of Bottle Bills in Florida
Florida experimented with an Advance Disposal Fee (ADF) program originally passed in 1988,
implemented October 1, 1992, and restructured in 1993 to use competition to improve recycling
markets. The ADF imposed a penny fee per container on certain cans, bottle, jars, and
beverage containers with recycling rates of less than 50 percent. It then allowed exemption
from the fee for companies that met recycling or recycled content goals. The idea was to
improve recycling rates and create competition between companies to meet the recycling
goals. The Legislature allowed the ADF to sunset October 1, 1995, after three years of
implementation.
The 2009 Florida Campaign
The Florida Beverage Container Deposit Act was introduced on January 19, 2009, establishing
a 20 or 30 cent deposit on almost all beverages sold in the state. The bill died in committee on
May 2, 2009.
Bill Number and HB 435, Florida Beverage Container Deposit Act.
Name
click here for bill text
Primary Sponsor Kevin J.G. Rader
Containers
Covered
any sealed, individual container made of glass, aluminum, steel, bimetal, or
plastic, in sizes of at least 6 fluid ounces but no more than 1 88 gallon or
3.8 liters
Page 2 of 5
Beverages
Covered
All ready-to-drink beverages, excluding milk
Deposits
6-25oz: 20¢
25oz-1gal: 30¢
Handling Fees
20% of deposit, paid by distributor to redemption center or dealer
Other Fees /
Taxes
None
Reclamation
System
Return to dealer or redemption center
Unredeemed
Deposits
Retained by distributor
Progress
Jan 19, 2009: HB 435 Filed
Feb 6, 2009: Referred to Agriculture & Natural Resources Policy Committee
Mar 3, 2009: First Reading
May 2, 2009: Indefinitely postponed and withdrawn from consideration, died in committee.
The 2011 Florida Campaign
In September 2011, the Florida Senate issued an interim report on the merits and drawbacks of
deposit systems, and detailed alternative programs used in Florida and other states.
The report did not recommend in favor of or against a refund system for Florida. The report
concluded –
“The Florida Legislature will need to determine how to prioritize recycling efforts and which
approach is most applicable in our present economic and political climate. In considering if a
bottle bill program is the right choice for Florida, the Legislature would have to consider carefully
the amount of the deposit to charge, which types of beverage containers to include, how to
handle collections, and where to allocate unredeemed deposits. Florida may choose to increase
recycling education programs since DEP reported that curbside recycling is available to 80
percent of single-family residences. Educational programs could focus on changing residents’
recycling habits and focus on higher-value beverage containers, such as aluminum or glass.
Page 3 of 5
Due to the economic downturn, now more than ever, bottle bill programs need to balance the
needs of businesses within what the communities’ budgets can accommodate. Improving
recycling rates involves many variables, and oftentimes, one size does not fit all.”
The Florida Senate
Click here for the full Interim Report 2012-122
September 2011 Committee on Environmental Preservation and Conservation
Opposition to Bottle Deposit Laws
Bottle bill opponents include beverage container manufacturers, soft drink bottlers, beer, wine
and liquor distributors and retail grocers. As ‘new age’ drink containers are targeted for inclusion
in existing bottle bills, juice, sports drink and bottled water manufacturers have joined the antibottle bill forces. A new group of bottle bill opponents that has emerged in recent years consists
of waste haulers and owners of materials recovery facilities who want the revenue from the
valuable aluminum cans that are recovered through bottle bills.
Huge sums of money have been spent to defeat ballot initiatives over the past twenty years, with
industry opponents outspending proponents by as much as 30:1. In 1996, $3 million was spent
to defeat the Measure 37 expansion initiative in Oregon.
Bottle bills have been stalled in state legislatures and the U.S. Congress for over two decades,
seldom getting to the floor for a full vote. They are generally defeated in small committees, often
by a narrow margin. These defeats are due to the tremendous influence the well-funded,
politically powerful beverage industry lobby wields over our elected officials.
A 1996 report by the U.S. Public Interest Research Group revealed that the beverage industry
spent more than $14 million dollars in campaign contributions aimed at defeating the National
Bottle Bill between 1989 and 1994. Members of a U.S. Senate Committee who voted against
the National Bottle Bill in 1992 received an average of 75 times more in anti-bottle bill PAC
money than those who voted in favor of the bill.
Opponents - Opponents of bottle bills include, but are not limited to,
Anheuser Busch
The Coca Cola Company
Pepsi-Cola Company
Can Manufacturers Institute
Distilled Spirits Council of the United States
Food Marketing Institute
International Bottled Water Association
National Beer Wholesalers Association
Grocery Manufacturers Association
National Food Processors Association
National Grocers Association
American Beverage Association
Page 4 of 5
Many of the arguments that opponents level against bottle bills try to minimize the bottle bills'
effectiveness and maximize their costs. However, the arguments in favor of bottle bills put these
industry "myths" into perspective. Click here to read these arguments.
Supporters - Bottle bills have historically enjoyed widespread public support on a statewide and
national level. Supporters of bottle bills include, but are not limited to –
Defenders of Wildlife
Garden Club of America
League of American Bicyclists
League of Women Voters of the U.S.
National Association of Counties
National Audubon Society
National League of Cities
National Parks and Conservation Assoc.
National Wildlife Federation
Natural Resources Defense Council
Rails to Trails
Sierra Club
Trout Unlimited
U.S. Public Interest Research Group
New bottle bills receive much public favor, and most respondents to statewide polls supported
expansion of their existing deposit laws. Organizations, authorities, and citizens from all walks
of life have expressed support for bottle bills over the years.
Numerous polls have shown most of the public to be in favor of bottle bills. Click here to read
about support for bottle bills.
Summary
I am unable to find reference to any movement to advance a bottle redemption program in
Florida more recent than the Senate discussion in September 2011.
Page 5 of 5