A little-known paint industry scheme is taking millions of dollars a year out of the pockets of Australian consumers and sending it to a secretive organisation with no public accountability. 

Every litre of architectural and decorative paint sold in Australia has a levy of 15 cents plus GST attached to it for sales between one and 20 litres. There are over 100 million litres of paint sold in Australia every year, meaning the levy may be raking in millions. 

The money goes to a not-for-profit charity organisation called Paintback Ltd, which has been granted secrecy exemptions to laws requiring the public disclosure of revenue, operations and spending. The exemption was granted to protect “commercially sensitive” information. 

The scheme’s members include major paint brands such as Dulux, Bristol and Wattyl, and the majority of the members of Paintback’s board are representatives of paint companies. 

Paintback operates paint recycling collection points around the country, and says its aim is to keep paint out of landfill and from being illegally dumped. The organisation also conducts research into the “circular economy”, but declined to reveal how much money it spends on each of these areas of operations. 

No transparency 

The Australian Charities and Not-for-profit Commission (ACNC) classifies Paintback as a “large” organisation, meaning its revenue is over $3 million a year. 

However, exactly how much the scheme brings in or where the money goes is a mystery to the public. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), which approved the scheme in 2016 and renewed it for ten years in 2021, granted Paintback broad secrecy provisions.

The ACCC says it maintains no role in monitoring the effectiveness of the scheme and will only consider the experience of the scheme again if an application for an extension of the levy is lodged when the current one expires in 2031. The Commission says an “additional level of detail in financial reporting is not necessary for the realisation of the public benefits of the Scheme”. 

At the time of Paintback’s 2021 application for the renewal of the levy, the New South Wales Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) supported the proposal overall, but called for more financial transparency and reporting of key information, such as the disposal outcomes and where used paint ended up. The ACCC dismissed the EPA’s concerns.  

Paintback argued that greater financial transparency would threaten the viability of the scheme, as paint companies involved may pull out due to “commercially sensitive” information being published.

“Greater transparency in respect of Paintback’s financial information is unnecessary to safeguard the recognised environmental public benefits accruing from the Scheme and indeed would involve significant public detriments that would compromise the effectiveness (and potentially the existence) of the Scheme,” Paintback’s lawyers said at the time.    

Paintback told us overhead expenditure is 8% of spending and all remaining expenditure is spent on “collections, recycling and reuse processes, disposals, research and development, safety auditing and market education and training”.

‘Unusual arrangement’ 

Sandra van der Laan is a professor of accounting from the University of Sydney who focuses on financial reporting, accountability and regulation. 

She says the secrecy arrangements granted to Paintback are “unusual” and rarely seen in charities or nonprofits outside of religious organisations. 

“I don’t know how they got permission not to have that stuff made public … The public has a right to know what they are doing with the benefits of that charitable status,” Laan says. 

She adds that, in her opinion, the argument of “commercial sensitivity” is questionable and that secrecy risks undermining public trust in the scheme.

Paint sellers and buyers confused

Tom, not his real name, runs a paint shop in New South Wales; a subsidiary of Dulux. He asked for anonymity over fears the company could retaliate against him for speaking out.  

He says tradies and regular paint buyers have asked him about the 15 cent levy and what the money goes towards and he has to tell them that he doesn’t know. 

“What are they doing? I don’t understand, and there is no clear communication with us as paint sellers,” he says.

He says another gripe is the 100 litre limit on how much paint can be dropped off at collection points each day, with painters having to hoard hundreds of litres of paint that they can’t dispose of. 

“The painters feel like they have already paid for this scheme through the levy; why can’t they dispose of their paint?” says Tom. 

The NSW EPA also raised concerns that the levy didn’t cover the full cost of paint disposal in the state.

Paintback responds 

Paintback interim chief executive John Ferraro says since beginning in 2016 the scheme has collected and treated over 51 million kilograms of unwanted paint and packaging. ÌÇÐÄVlog asked how much of that collected paint ended up in landfill; Paintback replied that its annual rate of “diversion from landfill” ranged between 54% to 79%.  

“Paintback now provides an extensive network of cost-free collection points which span over 165 locations across Australia, collaborating with local councils and drop-off sites to cater to over 85% of the general population,” he says.

Ferraro says the organisation is “proud of the unique structure of the scheme”, whose aim is to “protect the environment”.

The post The secret house paint tax you’re paying for appeared first on ÌÇÐÄVlog.

If you’ve been scanning your TV for something to watch, you’re likely to have seen the Renovator Paint Runner Pro being spruiked at some point on the home shopping channels. The long and short of this product is that it offers the benefits of a paint roller without the spatters. It’s not everything it says, though it is relatively mess free.

Testing the Paint Runner Pro

With a claim that the Paint Runner gives an even finish without splatter or drips, we couldn’t not try it out.

Available for $36.50, the Paint Runner Pro is a large hollowed-out paint roller. You can pour up to a litre of paint into the paint runner, then push out the paint through small holes onto the roller’s microfibre pad when you run it down a surface. The idea is since you carry your paint with you, there’s no need for multiple trips back and forth to the tray to re-coat your roller.

Our colleagues at enlisted a professional painter to serve as product tester and expert judge at a nearly finished new-build. After “priming” the runner as directed, we topped up the paint. We used a sealer for the first coat on a plasterboard wall. Unfortunately the paint was difficult to get through the small microfibre holes in the pad. The force required may make the device difficult to use in some circumstances, particularly if you suffer from arthritis.

You can screw the Runner Paint Pro onto any broom handle to extend the reach but, of course, this means applying sufficient force is difficult. When we detached the Runner Paint Pro from the broom handle, it was much easier to use, though still required a deal of force to squeeze out the paint.

We were impressed at the lack of drips and splatter, so it does meet this claim. If it’s full of paint, you can confidently carry the Paint Runner over uncovered carpet to another job without fear of spilling or spotting. We filled another roller with topcoat, but also found a decent amount of pressure was required for good coverage. Our professional painter reckoned the finish wasn’t close to what he’d get from a good standard roller. It had a textured and, in places, “bubbly” appearance.

Another issue is the Runner’s narrowness. Standard rollers are usually twice as wide, which makes it easier to paint straight, even lines. While the Runner claims to cover up to 17m² of wall with one litre of paint, our trial found it was closer to 6m²/L. In contrast, the rule of thumb for roller painting is 12m²/L. Once the microfibre pad wears out, replacement sleeves set you back $35 each including postage, compared to less than $5 for a standard roller cover. We found the pad difficult to clean.

Also included is a “flocked edger” for cutting-in around window frames, skirting and ceilings. This gave a slightly uneven, textured finish. It only holds a small amount of paint so it needs regular refilling.

The post The Renovator Paint Runner Pro review appeared first on ÌÇÐÄVlog.

On this page:

• Our expert testers
• How we test
• Test criteria explained
• Our test lab
• Ready to buy?

Our expert testers

ÌÇÐÄVlog maintains a highly professional -accredited laboratory and the vast majority of our product testing is done in-house. However, some tests, including paint, demand particular expertise and equipment that we don’t have, so in these cases we engage an accredited external lab to do the hiding power, washing and scrubbing resistance tests according to our requirements. We perform the stain resistance test in-house.

How we choose what we test

With so many to choose from, what makes us choose one paint product to test over another? As with most of our product testing, our aim is to test the most popular brands and types on the market and what you are most likely to see in the retailers.

We survey manufacturers to find out about their range of products, we check market sales information and we also check for any member requests to test specific paints. From this information we put together a final list that goes to our buyers. They then head out to the retailers and purchase each product, just as a normal consumer would. We do this so we can be sure they are the same as any consumer would find them and not ‘tweaked’ in any way.

We test low-sheen acrylic paints – the most commonly used paint type for interior walls – and white colour only, for consistency between products. Added tints may affect the hiding power (a darker tint will probably improve it), but should have no effect on resistance to washing, scrubbing or staining.

How we test

Hiding power is tested by an accredited laboratory as per the Australian Standard AS 1580. This measures how well the paint hides a black test pattern, using two coats at the manufacturer’s recommended maximum coverage rate. One of the tested paints (with good hiding power) is used as a reference against which the other paints are compared. A paint with a comparatively poor score may need a third coat on walls to hide any underlying colours or marks.

Most paints claim a spread rate of 16 square metres per litre. For those paints with a lower claimed spreading rate, such as 10 square metres per litre, we test their hiding power at both their claimed rate and at 16 square metres per litre, in case their natural spreading rate is more than claimed. In our latest test the results were mixed, but we didn’t see major differences in most cases, and our results are based on their claimed spreading rates.

Resistance to washing is tested by the same lab as per the Australian Standard. This involves 200 wash cycles with sponge and soapy water, with the gloss of the paint measured before and after. All the paints passed this test with excellent results (they had no significant loss of sheen) so we didn’t factor this test into the scores.

Scrub resistance is tested by the same lab, based on the US standard ASTM D2486. The paint panels are scrubbed with a bristle brush and an abrasive cleanser (Jif); the number of cycles taken to significantly wear the paint is noted. Lower scores here don’t mean the paint can’t be scrubbed safely, but do indicate it may wear faster than better-scoring paints.

Stain resistance is tested using cordial, red wine, tomato sauce, and felt-tip pen. The ÌÇÐÄVlog tester applies stains to the panels for one minute, then assesses for stain removal using water on a damp sponge; if unsuccessful, he tries again with water and dishwashing detergent; if unsuccessful, he tries again with Ajax Spray n’ Wipe.

Test criteria explained

The overall score is made up of:

• Hiding power 70%
• Scrub resistance 15%
• Stain resistance 15%

We weight hiding power most heavily as this is a key factor in how much paint you’ll need to use, and therefore the cost-effectiveness and painting time needed. But if scrubbing or stain resistance are more important to you, you can look for the paints that score best for those aspects in our review.

All the paints scored 100% for resistance to washing so this was not factored into the score.

Our test lab

Testing paint requires a very specific laboratory, as described above in How we test. While ÌÇÐÄVlog does have high quality NATA-accredited laboratories, we don’t have the necessary equipment or skills to test paint to the Australian standard. So instead, when we review paint, we send it to a qualified external lab.

Ready to buy?

Check out our interior paint review.

The post How we test interior paint appeared first on ÌÇÐÄVlog.