Water fees and the water bill
Water fees and the water bill
The March 14 and March 15 editions of The Jakarta Post
featured news on the water fees for farmers. It said that on
March 14 a new draft of a government regulation was proposed,
obliging farmers to pay for water used for irrigation. The
following day, two legislators responded to the issue by vowing
to reject this move as it is stipulated in the water resources
bill the House of Represernatatives (DPR) has been deliberating
on.
The fee that the farmers have to pay as stipulated in Article
7 (5), called the fee for the financial management of basin water
resources for irrigation use, is the same as the fee for the
irrigation water service (IPAIR) that farmers have to pay to
their association.
The difference between the two fees is that IPAIR is paid in
an irrigation scheme level while the former is paid in a basin
water resources management unit, which is managed by an
institution. The two fees are not a water charge if what is meant
is a tax for using water.
The water charge as a tax for water utilization is stipulated
in Law No.34/2000 on the amendment of Law No. 18/1997 on regional
taxes and regional retribution, specifically Articles 2 and 2A.
Both the water resources bill and the draft of the government
regulation never talk about the water charges being a tax, except
as a service fee or contribution. This is the first main
misunderstanding concerning the water charge discourse nowadays.
The second misunderstanding is a perception that the water
resources bill stipulates that there is an irrigation water
charge. This perception may have come from a wrong conclusion on
the implication of the water use right that is given to farmers
as stipulated in articles 41 (1) and 41 (2). The noncommercial
water use right will be granted to water use associations and the
commercial water use right will be granted to agricultural
enterprises in using irrigation water.
However, accepting the water use right, commercial or
noncommercial, does not necessarily oblige or free someone from
paying the water charge automatically. The water resources bill
does not stipulate the relation of the water use right to the
water charge as a tax. But it can be implicitly concluded from
articles 80 (1) and (2) in the bill, in which it says all users
of water, except for basic needs, will be obliged to pay
management service fees.
We can be sure that farmers will not have to pay a water
charge as a tax not from the bill, but from Law No. 34/2000,
specifically in the explanation given in Article 2 (d), which
states that there is no tax on water used for basic household
needs or agricultural purposes. This principle should be
integrated into the water resources bill.
KUSWANTO SA, Bogor, West Java