Environmental groups question whether supermarket bag fees truly support sustainability goals
Singapore’s plastic bag charge has significantly reduced usage and generated millions in proceeds, but growing questions over how the money is spent are testing public trust in the policy.
Millions Collected Since Policy Launch
Since July 3, 2023, large supermarket operators in Singapore with annual turnover above S$100 million have been required to charge at least five cents for each disposable carrier bag. According to the National Environment Agency, the policy raised more than S$3 million in its first six months and over S$6 million in 2024 alone, based on 129 million disposable bags issued.
Concerns Over Internal Use of Funds
The Singapore Environment Council has raised concerns that not all proceeds are being used for external environmental or social causes. Executive director Cheang Kok Chung noted that some retailers spent a majority of the funds on internal initiatives such as refrigeration upgrades and vehicle electrification, which he said could be considered standard business responsibilities rather than public benefit initiatives.
Hao Mart Draws Particular Attention
At the extreme end, supermarket operator Hao Mart used nearly all of its proceeds for internal operating expenses. The retailer collected about S$32,000 in the second half of 2023 and S$21,000 in 2024, channeling the funds toward Goods and Services Tax payments and administrative costs. The council warned that such practices could undermine public support for the bag charge scheme.
How Major Retailers Spent the Money
CNA’s review of published reports showed varied approaches across supermarket chains. FairPrice Group collected the largest amount, exceeding S$5 million across 2023 and 2024, with roughly half directed to the FairPrice Foundation and donations to WWF Singapore. Sheng Siong donated most of its proceeds to the President’s Challenge, while Don Don Donki split funds equally between Zero Waste SG and food aid charities. Cold Storage and Giant spent most proceeds on refrigeration upgrades, with smaller portions allocated to community events.
Deregistration of Smaller Supermarkets
Hao Mart and Ang Mo Supermarket were deregistered from the scheme at the end of 2025 after their annual turnover fell below the S$100 million threshold under the Resource Sustainability Act. As a result, they are no longer required to charge for plastic bags or report proceeds, although both may continue charging at their discretion. NEA confirmed that deregistered operators are no longer subject to transparency requirements under the scheme.
Are Consumers Subsidising Businesses
Economists have questioned whether consumers are effectively subsidising supermarket operations. NTU professor Euston Quah said that if proceeds are used to lower operational costs, consumers may be directly increasing company profits. Public policy experts also noted that unclear messaging around the purpose of the charge risks weakening its legitimacy, even if compliance remains high.
Strong Impact on Plastic Bag Usage
Despite the debate, NEA reported that supermarkets participating in the scheme saw a 70 to 80 percent reduction in plastic bag usage. This suggests the charge has been effective as a deterrent, even as discussions continue over whether proceeds should be more tightly guided toward external environmental or social outcomes.
Singapore’s plastic bag charge has delivered measurable reductions in plastic use and raised substantial funds, but differing interpretations of how proceeds should be used are shaping public perception. For both Singaporeans and regional observers, including those in Indonesia, the debate highlights a broader policy challenge of balancing environmental goals, business responsibility, and consumer trust.
Sources: CNA (2026) , AsiaOne (2026)
Keywords: Plastic Bag Charge Singapore, NEA Policy, Supermarket Sustainability, Environmental Funds, Consumer Fees
