Promised: no tax increases. Planned: a plastic tax with 819 new posts

Today the federal cabinet adopted its interim report on modernising the state.^[2] On the bureaucracy costs of business it so far shows net relief of around 232 million euros a year; the report itself speaks of “merely” this sum.^[1] At the same time there is a draft act from the coalition parliamentary groups for a new excise duty on plastic packaging: 550 euros per tonne from July 2027, 819 additional posts in customs and administration, and new reporting obligations for companies.^[4][9]

Politically the cabinet decided on the plastic tax on 6 July 2026 with the draft federal budget for 2027.^[4] It has not discussed the text of the act. According to a letter from seven business associations and the customs and finance union BDZ to the Chancellery, it is to reach the ongoing budget procedure as drafting assistance, without the involvement of the departments responsible.^[5] According to dpa the draft from the finance and environment ministries is still to be agreed within the government.^[13]

What was promised, what is now planned

An express “no tax increases” does not appear in the coalition agreement; the agreement raises, for instance, the minimum rate of trade tax.^[7] The promise comes from today’s chancellor himself. According to a Handelsblatt report, the retail association nevertheless speaks of a breach of the coalition agreement.^[8]

And the plastic tax is not the only new tax. For the sugar tax the federal government reckons on around 1.2 billion euros a year from 2028; together the two would come to more than 2.5 billion.^[25][3] On 1 October the Chancellery halted the draft on the sugar tax for the time being.^[10]

More bureaucracy rather than less

The draft puts the new bureaucracy costs for business at 44.1 million euros a year, plus 8.8 million one-off.^[4] That is around a fifth of what the federal government had cut from bureaucracy costs, net, by the end of June.^[1] For customs, IT and the ministry the federal government plans spending of 283.5 million euros up to 2029.^[4]

The associations consider the official value far too low. They estimate the compliance cost at at least 600 million euros a year and themselves call for an independent examination.^[5] That would be a good third of what the government has so far saved on the compliance cost of business: 1.7 billion euros.^[1]

It is even unclear who owes the tax. The draft attaches to the “extraction” of packaging; in the assessment of Plastics Europe, packaging law does not know this term.^[4][11] Relief for packaging made from recycled plastic is something the federal government intends to introduce only by statutory instrument, and a system of proof for it is still missing.^[4] Even the customs and finance union, whose members would have to collect the tax, warns together with the associations against an “unprecedented fast-track procedure”.^[5]

What it means for industry

According to its own association, German plastics production in 2025 was 26 per cent below the 2021 level.^[12] But it is not only the makers of plastic who are affected; it is everyone who packages: food and drinks manufacturers, retail and logistics. Films, closures, lids, capsules and transport packaging are covered too.^[13] According to a report in packaging journal, the draft does not distinguish between single-use and reusable.^[14]

Ecologically, a tax on plastic alone is contested. A report commissioned by the Federal Environment Agency warned in 2023 of mis-steering in favour of other materials, some of them ecologically worse.^[15] The final report of 2025 nevertheless considers an entry point via plastic packaging possible, combined with incentives for recycling-friendly design.^[16] In April 2026 Austria dropped a planned levy on non-recyclable plastic packaging after resistance from business and retail, which warned of the effort involved and of more expensive food.^[17]

In the end the customer pays

The draft says so itself: the tax is “designed so that those liable pass the burden on to the end customer”. As its aim it names in first place “additional revenue for the federal budget”; the tax “can at the same time” contribute to less plastic packaging.^[4]

Per item it sounds small: 1.93 cents per large PET bottle, 0.28 cents per yoghurt pot.^[3] But it hits almost every packaged product in the shopping trolley. At just under 1.5 billion euros a year and around 41 million households, if passed on in full that is around 36 euros per household per year.^[4][18] On top would come the sugar tax, if it comes after all, and possible mark-ups along the supply chain.

Today the government takes stock of its reduction of bureaucracy, and at the same time it is planning 819 posts for a single new tax. That is not reduction, that is expansion announced in advance.

What belongs to a fair assessment

The tax has a background. Since 2021 Germany has paid the EU a levy of 0.80 euros per kilogram of non-recycled plastic packaging waste, around 1.25 billion euros in 2026.^[19][20] According to the draft the new tax is to bring in an amount of this order for the federal budget on a permanent basis.^[4] The previous coalition already wanted to pass the EU levy on to producers and those placing goods on the market in 2024.^[22]

What also belongs here is what the federal government itself stated in 2023: because Germany’s share of the EU plastics levy is smaller than its share of contributions based on economic strength, no additional costs arise for taxpayers.^[21] For me that means: the new tax does not offset an additional burden, it creates a new source of revenue. Its planned yield is also above the EU contribution.^[4][19]

There are supporters too. Deutsche Umwelthilfe calls it “important and right” that single-use plastic packaging should have a price, and demands that reusable packaging be exempted and that paper and metal be included.^[13][23]

What I demand

First: no new tax by fast-track procedure. An act that creates hundreds of posts and makes almost every purchase more expensive belongs in a regular procedure with a cabinet decision, agreement between the ministries and a hearing.

Second: keep your word. A promise against tax increases applies to excise duties too.

Third: honest costs. Before parliament debates it, the national regulatory control council should examine the costs independently. Between 44 million euros according to the draft and 600 million according to the associations lies too much latitude.

Fourth: circularity rather than the till. Packaging law already provides for licence fees to be graded by recyclability and recycled content; the environment ministry has to issue the necessary regulation.^[24] The coalition agreement announced a reform of this rule.^[7]

Fifth, to the members of parliament from the Union: do not vote for a new tax that breaks your chancellor’s promise.

Less plastic? Gladly, through recycling, reusables and intelligent incentives. More forms and higher prices at the till? No.

Andreas W. HerbCEO MBG Group, Paderborn