U.S. and Canada: Packaging EPR Q&A
Packaging EPR Questions That Brands Are Asking in The United States and Canada
RLG’s recent webinar, #AMA: Top Ten Questions Brands Are Asking, introduced brand representatives from some of the world’s biggest companies to the most common questions about EPR laws for packaging that are routinely posed to our teams.
Though we ran out of time to offer an answer to every question asked during the webinar, we are committed to supporting producers through the process of preparing to report packaging data under EPR laws, and so we are pleased to publish answers to all of the questions we received.
We invite you to watch this space to receive our Top Ten Questions report, which is currently underway and will be shared in our Knowledge Hub shortly. Or reach out to schedule a one-on-one meeting with an EPR compliance consultant.
Please be advised that this post is for information purposes only; consult a lawyer or advisor for insights into your company’s circumstances.
Coming Soon: 10 Best Practices for Packaging Data Health (for EPR Reporting)
Learn more about our upcoming webinar on January 28, 2025 and discover the best ways to collect reliable packaging data for reporting.
Questions About Packaging EPR Laws in North America
- How long does it take to collect packaging data and get it ready for reporting — in general?
Depending on the number of SKUs for which a company must gather data, and the strength of digital infrastructure and human resources, data preparation can take between three and six months.
With the first reporting deadline being March 31, 2025 in the United States, it is recommended that producers begin collecting and preparing packaging data as soon as possible.
2. What if I don’t have any way of knowing the data on where my products are ultimately sold?
EPR program operators often accept population factor calculations to estimate product sales in a given region. In the United States, it is expected that Circular Action Alliance (a packaging Producer Responsibility Organization) will share a standardized formula for reporting using a population factor as an admissible guide for calculating sales data.
3. What does the data management process look like for RLG for a business that doesn’t have any of its packaging data?
RLG can handle every part of data collection, verification, storage, analysis, and reporting. Through our Supplier Data Hub we can take on the work of communicating with suppliers to ensure that the proper data is collected, and then we can validate that data using our database of over 50 million packaging SKUs. We can also supplement missing data.
4. If we hire RLG to consult, would you be able to definitively tell us if we have to comply and for which products?
Many different industries are facing similar confusion regarding their obligations (or lack thereof) under packaging EPR laws. An EPR Impact Analysis can clarify a company’s obligations under the laws, provided that the laws themselves are clear. RLG is frequently in communication with Producer Responsibility Organizations and regulators to seek clarifications if/when aspects of EPR laws require interpretation.
5. Is there a website where the different regulations of each US state can be found (links, for example)?
Each state has its own EPR regulations in the United States. However, we invite you to visit RLG’s Packaging EPR law update for the United States; it’s a great resource to find key deadlines, core concepts, and links to relevant laws.
6. Will producer fees vary from state to state or will there be some standards across states?
Although producers are advocating for increased harmonization for EPR laws from state to state, it is widely expected that fees will not be standardized. Working with RLG’s compliance support services is one way to simplify and streamline in spite of the diversity of laws.
7. How do you handle products with multiple layers of different packaging (ex: a paper lid with aluminium layer and flexible plastic layer)?
RLG is able to parse and report packaging data at a granular level, including complex and composite packaging. This is very common among our clients.
8. What does it mean to be a brand holder or owner? For example, would a retailer be considered the brand holder if they sell items with Nike or Reebok (etc.) brands?
A brand owner is the entity that owns the copyright to a brand; a brand “holder” could refer to the copyright owner, or to a licensee of a brand. What’s at stake in this question is whether or not a brand holder or owner is considered the party responsible for reporting under EPR laws. Most of the time, the brand owner (who is also the seller) is first in line in the producer hierarchy to report packaging data, followed by a licensee—but this may not always be the case, as supply chains may vary from state to state.
9. To the moment, none of the United States has a reporting system or obligations in place?
The first reports are expected to be due to Circular Action Alliance in March of 2025 in the United States, in Oregon.
10. Do packaging EPR laws apply to ecommerce (online) sales?
In short, yes. Producers must also be aware that they could be responsible for reporting shipping materials as well, such as envelopes, tape, boxes, packing materials, etc.
11. What are the minimum limits of the company to comply with the regulations? Are there limits of turnover, sales, or number of workers?
Each state has its own thresholds for businesses that must report. Thresholds are based on factors like total weight of packaging sold into the state or total revenue. Some types are businesses are excluded because they are nonprofits or government entities, and some goods are excluded if they are medical devices. An EPR Impact Analysis would clarify if a business (or its products) are excluded from packaging EPR laws.
12. How much can producers utilize estimates or average data to fill in gaps of missing data?
RLG has a database of over 50 million packaging SKUs that can be used to estimate packaging weights across common packaging material types. If a producer is missing data on a product, our database and proprietary calculations can be used to develop highly accurate estimates of packaging data.
Similarly, the Average Bill of Materials (ABOM) method has been used to estimate packaging weights by grouping similar packaged SKUs and applying the same details across the entire group. This approach helps avoid the need to list, weigh, and classify each SKU individually. However, while this method may save time, it can result in significantly overestimating your obligations, leading to larger payments than necessary.
Moreover, certain provinces in Canada are now moving away from accepting estimates or the ABOM method for calculating packaging weights.
In the United States, where EPR laws are maturing, averages and estimates are currently being permitted, however, it’s expected that as technology advances and brands become more accustomed to packaging EPR reporting, the US will see an increased emphasis on actual, real weights. The packaging PRO CAA has indicated that there are three acceptable methodologies for determining weight, but these may change as EPR policy matures.
13. If we know we are obligated, when should my company start looking into gathering the data needed to report to CAA? Also, how can RLG help with this process?
Because first reports are due in the US in March, it’s imperative to begin preparing data immediately. RLG can handle all aspects of gathering data from suppliers or aggregating and verifying data that has already been prepared internally.
14. Are licensees responsible or is the brand responsible for reporting?
In some instances, a brand owner is responsible; in others, a licensee. Because the supply chain in each state can vary, as well as contractual agreements and terminology, the party responsible for packaging EPR reporting can vary. A state-by-state analysis may be required to determine obligations in each jurisdiction.
15. I don’t think Oregon has declared an actual PRO yet. If that is true are there any concerns with Oregon reporting timing?
Circular Action Alliance is the only PRO that has been put forward in Oregon and is expected to be confirmed, with the first packaging data reports being due in March 2025. The first fees will be announced in July 2025, and there is no known intention of moving the deadline at this time.
16. For RLG’s Horizon Scanning service – is that at the state level or municipal level?
RLG’s Horizon Scanning service keeps clients informed, through written communications and webinars, regarding any EPR laws across many different fractions (material types). In the United States and Canada, EPR laws exist at the state and provincial level, so that is what our experts monitor and report on in North America. In other parts of the world, where EPR laws are passed at the national level, we monitor that as well. If national EPR laws were to pass in either Canada or North America, our experts would be well informed—and so would our Horizon Scanning clients.
17. Are there any special considerations for the franchisee business model?
In some states, franchises are covered by EPR laws for packaging, and in others they are not. Because the franchisee business model is especially complicated within state-by-state EPR laws, we recommend an EPR Impact Analysis to determine obligations. Also to consider is that some EPR laws cover food service ware, like disposable clam shells or disposable, single-use cutlery.
18. What provinces in Canada already have active laws?
Please feel free to visit our blog article An Overview of Packaging EPR laws in Canada to learn more about Canada’s individual packaging EPR laws.
19. When will the earliest fee payments begin for CO, OR, and CA?
The earliest fee payments under packaging EPR in the United States will begin in July 2025, based on the 2024 calendar year. Colorado fees are due January 2026, for the calendar year of 2025. Fees in California for the calendar year of 2026 are due in 2027.
20. We are planning on tracking total mass of packaging by material type. I have seen at least one suggestion that number of components must also be counted.
This question mostly likely refers to what is generally called the BOM method (Bill of Materials). Slightly different than ABOM (referred to in question 12 above), the BOM method allows companies to compile a comprehensive and detailed list of all materials used in their products, making it easier to identify materials subject to EPR programs. By centralizing information on materials, the BOM enables companies to precisely track those used in their products and can also help reduce costs associated with materials, such as those related to eco-design packaging.
21. Do you have to track each specific order and item in order or can you do an average based on all items?
In order to have a meaningful understanding of the packaging being put on the market, sales data should be tracked per item when possible. That said, reporting guidelines typically require the submission of a total weight based on packaging data multiplied by product sales—not information on individual sales or items sold.
22. Do you notice any important distinctions between the EPR guidelines domestically and those that have already been in place internationally, such as in the EU?
The EPR landscape in the EU is more mature than EPR in North America, and as a result, brands selling into EU countries must often report packaging data at a much more granular level than in North America. Also, EPR laws in EU countries, as well as England, are often passed at a national level.
23. Are EPR states allowing the sharing of recycling infrastructure to help meet recycling goals?
Although each state with EPR laws for packaging is unique, PROs usually have oversight of all or part of the collection and recycling infrastructure handling covered materials. PROs will oversee and monitor the movement of materials through final disposition in order to meet statutory goals. Depending on the status of existing infrastructure in each state, PROs may facilitate collaboration among recyclers.
24. Has CAA announced when they will share the next steps for those that have registered with them?
CAA offers regular quarterly updates. Please reach out to CAA to learn more.
25. Are there clear reporting categories for OR, CA, and/or CO yet?
To date, only Oregon has published its reporting categories (covered material categories).
26. To clarify, the reporting due in March 2025 covers material for what period?
Reports due in Oregon in 2025 will cover the calendar year of 2024.
27. Other than states with EPR laws, are there any other fees required by non-EPR states for “non-green” packaging?
There are a number of states in the US with EPR-adjacent laws. For example, the state of Washington requires producers to report both new and recycled content of plastic (and has begun to issue fees for noncompliance). New Jersey requires a certain amount of recycled content in specific containers and also reporting. We expect to see these kinds of laws increase over time. These kinds of laws are often regarded as precursors to traditional EPR.
28. To clarify, for the US, the sale is per state and not nationally?
Sales thresholds are typically national in the US—so if your national revenue threshold is within published amounts for covered entities, you will likely have obligations. However, producers who must report will only report information on sales within the relevant state.
29. For the Colorado EPR, is there no threshold? I just saw that SMEs must apply as well but I didn’t see any sales figures.
CAA has published information regarding Colorado obligations and exemptions here, which are accurate as of the time of this publication.
30. Where can we find a list of the data points for reporting to make sure we are asking the right questions to suppliers?
Each state will require specific packaging data to be reported, so you will need to investigate the covered material categories and reporting requirements in the state where your company is obligated to report. RLG’s Supplier Data Hub, which is part of our packaging data management services, is designed to make the data collection process simpler, consolidating the data-gathering process to a single standardized platform.
31. What area of companies are taking on this? Legal, Sustainability, Finance?
We’re seeing every company approach packaging EPR compliance independently, with some companies enlisting a dedicated compliance person (or team), some delegating tasks to legal, and others enlisting finance. We’ve also seen data management teams involved in packaging reporting. Procurement teams can also play a role in EPR compliance, as they vet compliance support companies (like RLG) or publish Requests for Information (RFIs) or Requests for Proposals (RFPs). We invite you to reach out to RLG to learn more about how we support compliance with packaging EPR laws.
32. Can you talk about “off ramps”?
We’ve seen a number of industries pushing for “off ramps,” or exemptions, that would exclude certain products from being covered by EPR laws. How lawmakers respond to the requests has varied.
33. If we have been reporting to EU EPR schemes for years, is it fair to assume our existing data gathering processes will translate to US/Canada EPR regulations?
Producers that are already gathering data to report into the EU will be well positioned to adapt to packaging EPR laws in the United States and Canada; however, we anticipate that there will be different reporting requirements in North America than overseas.
34.What are the requirements or rules in the EU countries?
Each country has unique rules; to understand how the rules may affect your business, consider an EPR Impact Analysis.
Did We Answer Your Question About Packaging EPR Laws in North America?
We hope this publication has been helpful. If you have a question about EPR laws for packaging in North America—or anywhere worldwide—please do not hesitate to reach out to us. We would be pleased to put you in touch with one of our EPR experts.
Continue Reading
This article is for informational purposes only and should not be regarded as legal counsel. Information is valid as of the time of publication and is subject to change. Always refer to primary sources for the most up-to-date information.
