About those tariffs: The process for govt. to actually change fuel and taxi prices

GREAT BAY--Two recent calls from Members of Parliament have put tariffs back in focus in St. Maarten. MP Francisco Lacroes has questioned the way turnover tax is reflected in fuel prices, while MP Darryl York has urged government to update taxi fares in light of the sharp increase in fuel costs. Although both issues deal with prices paid by the public, they are not governed by the same legal process.

On fuel, the Minister of TEATT has authority under the Prijzenverordening (Price Ordinance) to set maximum prices by ministerial regulation when prices are deemed contrary to, or threatening to, the public interest. The law says the minister may prohibit the sale of goods above or below prices set by the minister, and any such regulation, amendment, or repeal must be published in the Afkondigingsblad (National Gazette). That is the legal basis used for the official petroleum price regulations.

The current official petroleum price regulation shows that turnover tax is reflected twice in the price buildup, once after the maximum wholesale price and again after the consumer price. In the July 2025 regulation, for example, the buildup lists a 5 percent turnover tax on the wholesale side and another 5 percent turnover tax on the consumer side before arriving at the maximum consumer price inclusive of tax. That is why Lacroes is arguing that fuel is being taxed at more than one stage of the pricing chain.

However, the legal question is more complicated than simply asking TEATT to delete one line from the fuel buildup. The turnover tax law states that the tax rate is 3 percent and may be changed by landsbesluit, houdende algemene maatregelen. It also says that within six months of such a decree taking effect, a draft national ordinance must be submitted to Parliament to ratify it. In other words, changing the tax itself is not the same as changing the maximum pump price.

That means TEATT can adjust the regulated fuel price by ministerial regulation, but reducing, exempting, or restructuring turnover tax on fuel likely requires action under the tax law as well, not just a TEATT decision. So if the complaint is about the legal treatment of turnover tax in fuel pricing, the issue is not only a pricing matter, it is also a tax law matter.

Taxi tariffs work differently. They are not set under the pricing regulation used for fuel. Instead, the Landsverordening personenvervoer says that by landsbesluit, houdende algemene maatregelen, rules may be established for buses, taxis, and tour vehicles concerning, among other things, tariffs, schedules, and transport conditions.

The current taxi fare structure is contained in the Landsbesluit taxitarieven 2020, published as AB 2022, no. 09. That decree repealed the previous taxi tariff decision and established new taxi rates and zoning. The decree also includes related rules such as night surcharges, waiting-time charges, hourly hire rates, and the requirement that the tariff table be clearly displayed in the taxi or handed to the passenger.

So, if government wants to raise or revise taxi fares, it cannot do so the same way it changes fuel prices. It would need to amend or replace the taxi tariff decree, which is a formal landsbesluit, houdende algemene maatregelen, and publish that change officially. That is the proper legal route for adjusting the fare schedule York is talking about.

The background to that taxi decree also matters. The explanatory text to the 2022 taxi tariff decision says the revised rates followed negotiations between major taxi associations and departments within TEATT, and noted that the earlier tariff structure had remained unchanged for about 20 years despite rising costs, especially fuel. That suggests that while consultation may not always be spelled out as a hard legal precondition to every fare change, in practice government has treated taxi tariff reform as a policy process involving the sector.

Put simply, fuel and taxi tariffs sit in two different legal lanes. Fuel prices can be adjusted by TEATT through ministerial regulation under the pricing law, but tax changes inside the fuel price structure may require separate action under the turnover tax law. Taxi fares, on the other hand, are set by national decree under the public transport law, so any increase would require amendment of the existing taxi tariff decree, not just a ministerial announcement.

For a clean takeaway: Lacroes is really challenging the tax treatment within the fuel pricing formula, while York is calling for a revision of the legally fixed taxi fare schedule. Both are about affordability, but they do not move through government in the same way.

And then, finally, there is the customary train (though sometimes skipped) of advice moving through the Social Economic Council (SER), Government's Legal Affairs Department, the Advisory Council etc etc. and not necessarily in that order.

‍