Consultation outcome

Waste exemptions: overview of feedback and our response

Updated 1 July 2025

We proposed waste exemption charges to recover the costs from providing our waste exemption services and better regulatory oversight. It is important for us to oversee waste exemptions to make sure operators are not harming the environment and human health and reduce leakage from the circular economy. By making sure waste ends up at the right place, this helps legitimate waste businesses to grow.

The charges will help us meet our existing waste exemption legal duties including:

• carrying out periodic inspections
• maintaining a waste exemptions public register
• removing entries from the register

In recent years, our government grant-in-aid for environmental protection has reduced. Without charges we are unable to provide waste exemption services that members of the public, our customers and government expect.

In the following sections we describe the main themes raised by respondents and give our response.

Registration and compliance charges – feedback

We asked whether respondents agreed or disagreed with our proposed registration, common on-farm and compliance band charges:

• more respondents disagreed than agreed with the proposed registration charges
• respondents were split on whether they agreed or disagreed with the common on-farm charges
• for the compliance band charges, more respondents agreed than disagreed

Respondents representing the waste industry were generally more supportive to our proposals than the agriculture sector.

Some waste industry responses disagreed with the charge proposals or commented that they did not consider the charges high enough to enable suitable regulatory oversight.

Charge scheme design

Some respondents told us certain customer groups should not have to pay charges or should only pay reduced charges. This included farmers, pharmacies and veterinary practices, the NHS, local authorities, drainage boards and charities.

The pharmacy sector told us there are severe financial problems with many pharmacies closing across England. The T28 exemption is relevant to pharmacies, veterinary practices and the NHS. These sectors had concerns about registration and compliance charges.

We received suggestions for alternative ways of charging. This included using a fixed compliance charge for all waste exemptions and the removal of charge banding. Some respondents asked how waste exemption charges for bulk and linear registrations would be calculated.

Some respondents told us the level of charging should depend on the ‘size’ of the operator registering the exemption, therefore smaller businesses would pay less than larger businesses. For example, they disagreed that a farmer with 5 hectares of land should be charged the same as a farmer of 1,000 hectares.

Some suggested that whilst it was important for exempt sites to be properly regulated, the emphasis should be on illegal waste sites and those that do not register.

Impact for customers

Some respondents told us the £56 waste exemptions registration charge for 3 years should be lower or there should be no charge at all, for example because we already had their details registered.

Some respondents told us they would agree to pay once for their registration, but not every 3 years when renewing their exemptions. Others suggested they were unable to pay charges and said they should not have to pay or suggested ways to reduce the charges.

Respondents argued the costs are burdensome and could lead to more waste operators choosing not to register or an increase in illegal activities such as fly-tipping. Farmers expressed concerns about the financial strain and impact on their already tight budgets. There were also views that the charges are unfair, especially for those following the rules.

Some comments suggested the charges would disproportionately affect small businesses and farms, making it difficult for them to operate.

Support for proposal

Respondents told us exempt sites are often not compliant, which results in risks to the environment and human health. They also told us that illegal activity through waste exemptions impacts legitimate industry. The waste industry view waste exemptions as being open to abuse with limited regulatory oversight or intervention.

Some respondents in the agriculture sector who supported the charges thought they would help us recover our costs and support efforts to tackle waste crime, provided the charges were kept to a reasonable level.

Respondents told us:

• If these charges are to be used in conjunction with the waste fee for intervention we believe that this could help to turn the tide against illegal operators using waste exemptions.
• We strongly agree that the waste industry operating exemptions should be charged. Giving the EA opportunity to help support and educate. This needs to be understood as a benefit to the industry and not seen as a punishment. The charge should be considered immediately to whittle out sites and focus in on the trades who abuse the exemption.
• The tiered approach and reduced charges for multiple exemptions appear to provide a cost-reflective and fair solution, especially for operators managing multiple Band 1 or Band 2 waste exemptions. This approach balances regulatory oversight with efficiency, which I believe is reasonable and practical.

Registration and compliance charges – our response

We will implement the charges proposed in our consultation, but we will not charge for the T28 exemption or where operators are operating waste exemptions exclusively for charitable purposes. See the following sections for further details.

It is difficult to implement waste exemption charges that satisfy all circumstances and meet the needs of all customers. Waste exemption charges will allow us to fulfil our duties and deliver risk based and proportionate compliance activity, focussing on those that are the greatest risk.

Future compliance activity will inform the risks from each waste exemption and support us when we review our charges, to make sure we are not over or under recovering our costs. We understand some respondents would prefer charges that are based on business size, size of farm, annual turnover or number of employees. However, our compliance activity, and therefore our costs, do not vary based on business size. Under HM Treasury’s managing public money rules, we have a responsibility to set charges at the appropriate level to recover the costs of our regulatory activity.

In response to concerns that waste exemption registration charges will be payable every 3 years; these charges fund the ongoing maintenance and improvement of our digital services. These services result in significant savings in cost and time when registering waste exemptions.

Keeping digital systems running smoothly costs money, but to meet user needs, we need to continuously invest in and improve our service. This ultimately benefits our customers.

Our customer contact centre is also funded by the registration charge. They provide an important role in assisting customers with queries and processing their registrations.

T28 waste exemption

Pharmacies, veterinary practices and the NHS register T28 waste exemptions for sorting and denaturing controlled drugs. This treatment activity is important as it makes the drugs physically irretrievable in the waste chain. Pharmacies are required to do this prior to drug disposal under the Misuse of Drugs Regulations 2001. The management of controlled drugs is highly regulated to prevent misuse, with drug disposal following approved procedures with supervision and relevant documentation.

We believe controlled drugs are already regulated sufficiently through other legislation which in turn helps avoid environmental damage. We have concluded T28 exemptions should be registered without charge, and we will facilitate this through our digital service.

Bulk registrations

Bulk registrations apply where 30 or more exempt sites are registered at the same time with one or more of the same exemptions. We advise bulk registrants to consider the exemptions they are registering and the necessity of registering all the sites included in their bulk registration. This will help to reduce costs.

We will calculate bulk registration charges based on one registration charge and the total of all the compliance charges associated with each site in the bulk registration. There will only be reductions for multiple exemptions at each individual site.

Linear registrations

Linear registrations apply to U1, U12, D1 and D2 waste exemptions. We will calculate linear registration charges based on one registration charge and the total of all the compliance charges associated with each operational area contained within the registration. Linear network registrations need to divide their linear network into operational areas and advise us of those areas using a map or a spreadsheet that identifies their extent.

Further guidance on bulk and linear registrations can be found on GOV.UK.

The common on-farm approach – feedback

Many respondents from the agriculture sector agreed with the 15 waste exemptions included in the common on-farm approach. Positive comments included:

“…the creation of the common on-farm list, which simplifies the system and offers 15 exemptions at a reduced rate for farming businesses. This is a positive step and demonstrates recognition of the unique needs of agricultural operations…”

Others who agreed with this proposal said the common on-farm exemptions covered most necessary activities. Some suggested additional exemptions could be included in the common on-farm list, including:

• T6: treating waste wood and plant matter
• T29: carbon filtering non-hazardous pesticide washings
• T32: treating waste in a biobed or biofilter
• S1, S2, S3, T4 and T24 waste exemptions

Some farmers responded that certain common on-farm waste exemptions are beneficial to the environment and should not be subject to charges. Some said they should not need to pay for waste exemptions as they are already assessed for compliance with waste regulations under farm assurance schemes.

Some highlighted the importance of recycling and managing waste on farms, arguing these practices should be encouraged rather than penalised. Farmers commented that they would be being charged to register activities that have long been part of standard farming practices.

Many respondents from the agriculture sector told us they were facing financial challenges and therefore should not have to pay for waste exemptions. Some told us they were not able to pass on costs and raised concerns over the wider economic climate.

There were also calls for greater clarity and simplicity in the regulations. 

The common on-farm approach – our response

We will implement the common on-farm charge with the addition of the T29 and T32 waste exemptions.

The common on-farm charge approach acknowledges the specific needs of the agriculture sector. It minimises costs whilst enabling risk-based and proportionate regulatory oversight of waste activities on farms.

T29 and T32

These waste exemptions are not commonly used on farms. However, we agree they are most likely to be used in an agricultural context. Using the common on-farm approach will mean we will need to take risk-based decisions on what waste exemptions to assess when visiting farms.

T6 waste exemption

We will amend our guidance to clarify this exemption does not need to be registered where virgin wood or plant matter is treated at the place of production.

S1, S2 and T4 exemptions

These are not suitable for the common on-farm approach. Operators storing waste and carrying out basic treatments to facilitate the collection of their own waste, for example compacting cardboard to increase the amount that can be stored within a container before collection, can use Non-Waste Framework Directive exemptions which you do not need to register. These are not subject to charges. If operators accept waste from others, then they must register the relevant waste exemptions.

S3 waste exemption

This is not suitable for the common on-farm approach, it is normally registered by water companies or their contractors.

T24 exemption

This is for anaerobic digestion and requires additional regulatory effort making it unsuitable for the common on-farm approach or a lower charging band.

We acknowledge there are sensitivities with waste exemption charges in the current economic climate. However, we doubt there would be a good time to introduce charges for services that are currently free. We have developed specific charge proposals for farmers that are low cost and light touch, risk-based and proportionate. We will keep our charges under review, informed by our compliance activity.

We want to support the agriculture sector with specific waste exemption guidance. Through consultation responses and associated questions, it is clear waste exemptions are not well understood, and we believe they are being registered in error or because they are free. This may be making the perceived financial impact of charges appear more pronounced than we would expect.

Given the variety of standards that are assessed as part of farm assurance schemes, it is unlikely waste exemptions are assessed in appropriate depth during farm assurance checks. Farm assurance scheme providers are not regulators and not able to use regulatory tools such as enforcement notices or take legal action for non-compliance. They are also not able to refer compliance issues to the regulator.

Waste crime

Fly tipping is a major concern for landowners like farmers and we sympathise with those who are impacted by illegal waste activity on their land. The government is clamping down on waste crime including fly tipping and the illegal dumping of waste by:

• introducing mandatory digital waste tracking

• considering reforms to the waste carrier, broker and dealer system

We do not believe waste exemption charges would encourage fly tipping and the waste industry have generally not highlighted this as a risk from our proposals.

Waste exemption charges will help fund our work carrying out compliance activity and detecting illegal activities operating under the guise of legitimate waste exemptions. Detecting non-compliance and waste crime earlier helps reduce the risk of environmental damage and cost of clean-up.

It is a legal requirement for exempt waste activities to be registered. Where they are not, the activity is illegal and may be subject to enforcement action. Our enforcement and sanctions policy explains how we use our powers to secure compliance with laws that protect the environment. 

We will plan for any increase in unregistered exempt waste activities. A proportion of our waste exemption charge income will be used to monitor previously exempt activities that are no longer registered.

Compliance charge banding – feedback

Band 1 exemptions

More respondents agreed than disagreed with the waste exemptions presented in Band 1, whilst some suggested exemptions that could be in lower compliance charging bands. This included the S1, S2, U1, U9, T6 and T10 exemptions.

Band 2 exemptions

More respondents agreed than disagreed with the waste exemptions presented in Band 2, whilst some suggested exemptions that could be in a lower charging band. This included the D1 waste exemption for depositing waste from dredging inland waters and the S3 waste exemption for storing sludge.

D1 exemption

Some respondents commented on issues associated with the disposal of spoil removed from dredging inland watercourses. The D1 exemption allows waste spoil to be deposited along the banks of the water it was dredged from. Some respondents were concerned about the additional financial burden, the scope of the financial impact assessment and suggested that the D1 exemption should be in Band 3.

S3 waste exemption

Responses were conflicting as to where this exemption sits - as band 1, band 2 or band 3. Justification for lowering the compliance charge band included water companies being green on the Environmental Performance Assessment sludge metric and that the charges should acknowledge earned recognition through the Biosolids Assurance Scheme.

Some respondents told us S3 exemptions should be viewed as a special case. We were told that sludge storage is based on several factors including site suitability for delivery (weather and ground conditions), and the farmers requirements, which can change with short notice.

Some responses highlighted S3 exemptions are registered for a 3-year period but a condition of the S3 exemption is that waste can only be stored at the location for up to 12 months. It was suggested this means the S3 exemption registration charge is an annual cost whereas other exemption registration charges would be 3 yearly costs. 

Band 3 exemptions

More respondents agreed than disagreed with the exemptions we proposed in Band 3. Some respondents suggested that the D7 exemption for burning waste in the open should be in a higher charge band because of the environmental risks associated with this activity.

Upper compliance band exemptions

More respondents agreed than disagreed with the exemptions we proposed in the upper band. A small number of respondents suggested the T9 waste exemption for recovering scrap metal should be in another lower cost charge band.

Compliance charge banding – our response

Waste exemption charge bands allow us to deliver risk-based and proportionate compliance activity, focussing most on those waste exemptions that are the greatest risk.

Band 1 exemptions

We will implement waste exemption charges for Band 1 exemptions as detailed in our charges consultation.

S1, S2 and U1 exemptions have been identified as being routinely abused and would likely be subject to any future waste exemption reforms. These waste exemptions can require additional regulatory effort compared to other types of waste exemptions.

There are examples where T10 waste exemptions have been used to hide illegal waste activity. For U9 waste exemptions, the conditions allow significant quantities of waste to be stored. In both cases we need to check compliance with these exemptions and will therefore keep them in Band 1.

We will amend our T6 waste exemption guidance to clarify that you do not need to register to manage virgin wood and plant matter at the place of production.

Band 2 exemptions

We will implement waste exemption charges for Band 2 exemptions as detailed in our charges consultation.

D1 waste exemption

We understand the need to deposit waste spoil produced from dredging inland waters along the banks of the water it was dredged from. Spoil removed from watercourses can be difficult to dispose of, particularly where it is contaminated by historic industrial activities.

We have included the D1 waste exemption in the common on-farm approach and we will not charge organisations for exempt waste activities that are carried out exclusively for charitable purposes.

Other organisations such as internal drainage boards will benefit from the charging approach for linear exemption registrations.

The D1 waste exemption will remain in Band 2, but we will keep this under review as part of future charge reviews.

S3 waste exemption

The S3 exemption is for sludge storage before subsequent use under the Sludge (Use in Agriculture) Regulations 1989. Sludge contains organic matter and plant nutrients, but it can also contain chemicals and pathogens that could be of risk to human health and the environment.

Charging for S3 waste exemptions will enable compliance activity that will support our strategy for safe and sustainable sludge use, whilst our work on the existing sludge to land framework and sludge use regulatory tools are developed.

We note the role of the Biosolids Assurance Scheme (BAS) in sludge management. This scheme cannot be used to support our regulatory work. The BAS does not produce inspection data for us, nor is there any reporting of non-compliance through the scheme. It is important that we are funded to assess compliance under Band 2 compliance charges, which are still a low cost and a light touch form of regulation.

S3 exemption registrations may need minor changes to locations without the need for a new registration each time. We will view these exceptional circumstances pragmatically and consider edits to registrations through our National Customer Contact Centre at no extra cost. We will consider improvements to our digital services to allow customer ‘registration edits’.

If sludge is stored incorrectly, for example, at unsecure locations or where the sludge has a lower dry matter content, this could pose a pollution risk to water courses and ground water. Band 3 compliance charges would only cover minimal campaign related work and affect our ability to conduct effective compliance activity.

The S3 waste exemption will remain in Band 2, but we will keep this under review as part of future charge reviews.

Band 3 exemptions

We will implement waste exemption charges for Band 3 exemptions as detailed in our charges consultation, except for the T28 waste exemption, which will be non-chargeable.

Upper compliance band exemptions

We will implement waste exemption charges for upper compliance band exemptions as detailed in our charges consultation.

Charitable purposes – feedback

Respondents had mixed views on whether charities should pay for waste exemptions. Responses were evenly split between those who thought charities should pay and those who thought they should not. Some respondents felt there needed to be fairness in charges and everyone should pay, whilst others told us charities should pay reduced charges or suggested alternative charge approaches.

Some respondents told us certain charities could afford charges whilst others could not. Some thought charities should not pay but trusts should. Others suggested charities should be regulated the same way as other sectors to make sure the charity sector acts to equivalent standards.

Charitable purposes – our response

We will not charge operators registering waste exemptions exclusively for charitable purposes. Charities help people, communities and causes that need support and their primary goal is to serve the public good.

This includes but is not limited to community groups, charitable trusts, wildlife trusts, NHS Trusts, scout and girl guide groups, schools, allotment associations and places of worship. ‘Charitable purposes’ has the meaning given in section 2 of the Charities Act 2011.

As is the case for other operators, we are not currently able to means test whether an operator is able to pay for their waste exemptions or have a variable charge or sliding scale approach according to business size, turnover or profit.

We will monitor waste exemption registrations that are exclusively for charitable purposes and keep our decision not to charge under review.

We are developing a charity registration in our digital service. We may require a Charity Commissions registration number to help give us confidence that our decision not to charge charities is not abused.

Affordability – feedback

Respondents from the agriculture sector told us they could not afford the charges and said proposals represented another tax on their sector. Many respondents told us that criminals should pay through fines resulting from enforcement action.

One industry stakeholder sought views from their members on the charge proposals and the common on-farm approach. They acknowledged the need for effective regulation and oversight to make sure we can protect the environment and tackle waste crime, but they disagreed with waste exemption charges. This was because they felt there was a lack of transparency in the charge calculations, and because of the financial burden on farmers and the perception of costs. Some stakeholder members questioned why registration charges were necessary when they were already registered. Concerns about longer term cost escalation (as our charges will increase annually in line with inflation as measured by the Consumer Prices Index) were also raised.

Support was provided for the proposals but we were also warned of unintended consequences such as fly-tipping and illegal waste dumping on farmland.

Some respondents told us waste exemptions should continue to be free for activities that are commonly used on farms should continue to be free or that waste activities not involving waste brought in from elsewhere should continue to be free.

Some respondents from the water industry indicated they were not aware of waste exemption charges and provisions for payments were not made under Price Review 24 (PR24) to fund the costs. Others indicated the charges were an unbudgeted cost, adding additional burden on businesses that are undertaking wider environmental improvements.

Affordability – our response

Whilst waste exemptions are generally viewed as low risk, some are higher risk than others. Some are not suitable for the lower tier form of regulation the waste exemption regime provides.

Waste exemptions are only low risk when they are complied with. We know they are abused, and we need funding to carry out our regulatory duties to monitor compliance and help operators to comply. Our proposals will allow us to deliver proactive compliance checks and help us to tackle issues before they escalate. Where we are required to periodically inspect waste exemptions, our charge proposals will facilitate this, whilst remaining low cost, risk-based and proportionate.

We recognise there are sensitivities with introducing waste exemption charges, particularly when they have previously been free to register. However, we must move to a position where we recover our costs from those we regulate.

We cannot use money from fines arising from our prosecutions as this is returned to HM Treasury. We do not set the level of fine as this is the role of the courts. Fines from prosecutions would not enable full cost recovery or provide a sustainable form of funding.

In some cases, waste exemption compliance does not lead to enforcement action resulting in fines, for example where advice and guidance and warning letters are used. This compliance activity still represents a cost to us that we need to recover.

We know that introducing waste exemption charges will be difficult for some customers. We recognise economic circumstances can have a significant impact across various sectors. We therefore want operators to only register waste exemptions they need to minimise their costs.

Inflation and rising costs impact our own service delivery in much the same way as any other organisation. We aim to fully recover the costs of regulatory services delivered to charge payers. Our activity requirements and cost analysis are scrutinised internally, by Defra and HM Treasury.

For the water industry, we acknowledge charging for exempt activities is occurring at the same time as other water industry obligations. We pre-consulted with Water UK prior to the end of PR24 to inform them of our waste exemption charges proposals.

Water companies should be prepared for the impacts of regulatory change. We cannot delay waste exemption charges if water companies did not consider this in their submissions to The Water Services Regulation Authority (Ofwat) as part of the price review process. Waste exemption charges are not likely to be significant for each individual water company. Ofwat’s price review process contains uncertainty mechanisms included in the price control package.

Refunds – feedback

We asked whether respondents agreed or disagreed with our proposal to offer a partial refund of the compliance element of the charge to operators who transition from a waste exemption to an environmental permit. We also asked if there were other circumstances where waste exemption charges should be refunded.

Many respondents agreed that the proposal seemed fair, with some respondents saying a full refund should be given.

Suggestions for other forms of refund included situations where a waste exemption is not used (for example if a business stops trading) or is only used occasionally. Other suggestions included offering refunds and advice in situations where a registered operator realises they hold exemptions that are not required (for example, if they made a mistake or misunderstood what the waste exemption would allow).

Refunds – our response

We will set out our full approach to refunding waste exemptions as part of our GOV.UK waste exemptions guidance. We will keep our refunds approach under review when other refund scenarios arise.

Where requested, we will consider providing a partial refund of the compliance element of waste exemption charges for exempt activities which have stopped, because they are superseded by a waste environmental permit. The registration charge element will not be refunded. We will not offer a refund where the transition to a waste environmental permit is the result of our enforcement action.

Waste exemptions – outcome and next steps

From July 2025 we will start charging for waste exemptions. After this date, any new or renewed waste exemptions will be subject to the charges.

As a result of our consultation, we will:

• include additional waste exemptions in the common on-farm approach (T29 – carbon filtering non-hazardous pesticide washings and T32 – treating waste in a biobed or biofilter)
• exclude operators registering waste exemptions exclusively for charitable purposes from charges
• exclude T28 exemptions from charges
• update the T6 exemption guidance to make it clearer when this exemption needs to be registered
• update our digital services to include waste exemption charges
• update our overall waste exemption guidance, including content on waste exemption charges
• make sure our advisors are ready to support customers with waste exemptions and charges
• work with key stakeholders to improve waste exemptions guidance for their sectors