Deposit and Return Scheme for Scotland Regulations 2020 (as amended): Fairer Scotland Duty assessment
Fairer Scotland Duty Assessment (FSDA) for The Deposit and Return Scheme for Scotland Regulations 2020 (as amended by the Deposit Return Scheme (DRS) for Scotland Amendment Regulations 2025) and the Deposit and Return Scheme for Scotland (Designation of Scheme Administrator) Order 2025.
The poverty premium and affordability of living costs
41. The existence of a ‘poverty premium’, where low-income consumers tend to overpay for goods and services has been well-documented. This is noted in the main for energy, communications and insurance, but also for food.[22],[23]
42. In the case of food, the poverty premium has been linked to the lack of access to large supermarkets to get multi-buy deals or higher delivery charges for small shopping baskets. It has also been noted that foregoing quality goods can be used as a coping strategy for those on low incomes.[24] This may mean that low-income households face budget pressures and may be less able to absorb any additional costs where they cannot be avoided.
43. Data from the Scottish Government insight monitor[25] shows that 31% of Scottish adults are concerned about the cost of groceries in the coming year. This was highest for those managing less well financially (45%), and those in semi-skilled and unskilled manual occupations; unemployed and lowest grade occupations (42%).
44. The 2021 UK Census has shown that as prices rise, all households are reducing spending on food and non-alcoholic drinks. The poorest fifth of households spend 7% less, while the richest fifth of households spend 14% less.[26] Suggesting that households are either consuming less, or where applicable, switching to lower cost or quality alternatives.
45. In the UK, an average 12% of weekly household spend went on food and non-alcoholic drinks in 2022/23 (13% for Scotland), while for the lowest 20 per cent of households by equivalised income it was higher at 14.4%. For households on low income, the upfront spend to pay a deposit may be more significant and present a cash flow challenge, in the early days of the DRS. Low-income households may also be more inclined to purchase lower priced products where the deposit will be a greater percentage of the overall price of the product.[27]