Deposit return scheme for Scotland: BRIA
Full business and regulatory impact assessment (BRIA) assessing the regulatory impacts of deposit return for drinks containers for businesses in Scotland.
17.0 Annex C: Competition Impact Assessment
Annex C Table 1: Summary of Competition Impacts
| Competition checklist question | DRS competition impacts | |
|---|---|---|
| Q1a | Will the measure directly limit the number or range of suppliers by: | |
| Awarding exclusive rights to supply? |
No impact anticipated. |
|
| Purchasing, franchising or licensing from a single supplier or a restricted group of suppliers? |
No impact anticipated. |
|
| Introducing a licensing scheme that places a fixed limit on the number of suppliers? |
No impact anticipated. |
|
| Introducing a licensing scheme that controls quality? |
No impact anticipated. |
|
| Q1b | Will the measure indirectly limit the number or range of suppliers by: | |
| Significantly raising the costs of current suppliers, causing them to leave the market? |
No significant impacts anticipated. |
|
| Significantly raising the costs of new suppliers relative to existing suppliers? |
No impact anticipated. |
|
| Significantly raising the costs of some current suppliers relative to other current suppliers? |
No significant impacts anticipated. |
|
| Q2 | Will the measure limit the ability of suppliers to compete by: | |
| Controlling or substantially influencing the price a supplier may charge? |
No significant impacts anticipated. |
|
| Controlling or substantially influencing the characteristics of the products supplied? |
No significant impacts anticipated. |
|
| Limiting the sales channels a supplier can use, or the geographic area in which a supplier can operate? |
No significant impacts anticipated. |
|
| Substantially restricting the ability of suppliers to advertise their products? |
No impact anticipated. |
|
| Introducing restrictions on production processes or how suppliers are governed? |
No significant impacts anticipated. |
|
| Q3 | Will the measure limit suppliers' incentives to compete vigorously by: | |
| Incentivising suppliers to coordinate activities over which they would ordinarily compete? |
No impact anticipated |
|
| Q4 | Will the measure limit the choices and information available to consumers by: | |
| Limiting the ability of consumers to decide from whom they purchase? |
No significant impacts anticipated. |
|
| Changing the information available to consumers but not improving their ability to make informed decisions? |
No significant impacts anticipated. |
|
| Increasing the cost of changing supplier? |
No significant impacts anticipated. |
|
Annex C Table 2: DRS containers distributed in Scotland in 2017 by container type
| Container Type | Number of Containers | Percentage of Containers |
|---|---|---|
| Glass Bottles (non-refillable) |
333,011,097 |
20% |
| Metal Cans |
639,361,200 |
38% |
| PET Bottles |
694,115,099 |
42% |
| Total | 1,666,487,396 |
100.0% |
Source: Kantar Data for Zero Waste Scotland
Annex C Table 3: DRS containers distributed in Scotland in 2017 by outlet type
| Outlet Type | Number of Containers | Percentage of Containers |
|---|---|---|
| Supermarkets | 857,548,074 |
51.5% |
| Convenience | 145,840,578 |
8.8% |
| High Street | 126,626,502 |
7.6% |
| Discounters |
125,633,914 |
7.5% |
| Hospitality |
121,683,735 |
7.3% |
| Multiples (inc. forecourt) |
115,166,835 |
6.9% |
| Online |
85,011,398 |
5.1% |
| Symbols and Independents |
66,944,281 |
4.0% |
| Other |
22,032,076 |
1.3% |
| Grand Total | 1,666,487,393 |
100% |
Source: Kantar Data for Zero Waste Scotland
Annex C Tables 4 and 5 below set out the estimated real change in the price of different sizes of cola and beer across Scotland, based on the impacts discussed above. They show a flat-rate applied deposit would result in smaller products, in general, becoming relatively more expensive per millilitre than larger sized equivalents.*
Annex C Table 4: Percentage change in average cost to consumer of purchasing cola
| Real cost to consumer | 33cl | 50cl | 1L | 2L |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low (0.5p) | 0.60% |
0.37% |
0.34% |
0.29% |
| Medium (1p) | 1.19% |
0.75% |
0.69% |
0.57% |
| High (1.5p) | 1.79% |
1.12% |
1.03% |
0.86% |
Source: Kantar Data for Zero Waste Scotland
Annex C Table 5: Percentage change in average cost to consumer of purchasing beer
| Real cost to consumer | 33cl | 568ml | 66cl | 2L |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low (0.5p) | 0.40% |
0.53% |
0.26% |
0.06% |
| Medium (1p) | 0.84% |
1.05% |
0.52% |
0.12% |
| High (1.5p) | 1.26% |
1.58% |
0.78% |
0.19% |
Source: Kantar Data for Zero Waste Scotland
* The proportional price of the deposit increase for beer first rises between 33cl & 1 pint, before dropping. This is due to the average price being lower for the pint size compared to the smaller 33cl size. This is predominantly due to the fact that a majority of craft and imported beer is sold in the 33cl format, pushing up the price compared to that of the pint size, which is more utilised by domestic and lower price options.
Contact
Email: DRSinScotland@gov.scot
There is a problem
Thanks for your feedback