The UK Government is reforming its Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) scheme for packaging following sustained criticism from glass manufacturers, drinks producers and the hospitality sector over the financial burden of packaging waste charges.
Announced on 11 November 2026, the measures aim to address concerns about double charging for glass drinks containers, reduce costs for businesses and ensure that packaging fees better reflect the recyclability of different materials.
Discover B2B Marketing That Performs
Combine business intelligence and editorial excellence to reach engaged professionals across 36 leading media platforms.
Under the changes, glass drinks containers supplied directly by producers to pubs, restaurants and other licensed hospitality venues will be exempt from EPR fees from April 2027.
The Government estimates that this could save businesses up to 6p per beer bottle and 10p per wine bottle. A pub selling 10,000 beer bottles and 3,700 wine bottles annually could save up to £870.
The announcement follows criticism that some hospitality businesses are effectively paying twice for packaging waste management. Many already pay commercial waste contractors to collect and manage their waste, while EPR charges create an additional financial obligation.
Environment Secretary Dame Angela Eagle said the Government had listened to industry concerns and was taking action to make the system fairer.
The reforms are also intended to support the UK glass industry, which has argued that the existing fee structure does not adequately recognise the material’s recyclability.
EPR reforms target double charging and packaging costs
Introduced in April 2025, the UK’s packaging EPR scheme requires businesses placing packaging on the market to contribute towards the costs of collecting, sorting and managing packaging waste.
The policy is designed to shift more of these costs from taxpayers and local authorities to producers, while encouraging businesses to reduce packaging waste and improve recyclability.
However, its implementation has attracted criticism over how costs are allocated, particularly for glass drinks containers supplied to hospitality businesses.
The British Soft Drinks Association (BSDA) welcomed the direct-supply exemption, describing it as a significant first step towards addressing unfair packaging costs.
Its director general, Andy Bagnall, said the industry supported the principle of producer responsibility but warned that an unfair allocation of costs could undermine the effectiveness of the scheme.
He also called for a solution covering drinks containers supplied through wholesalers and other intermediaries, rather than directly from producers to hospitality venues.
This is an important distinction because the announced exemption applies specifically to qualifying direct supplies. Businesses using indirect distribution channels may therefore continue to face the costs that prompted the industry’s objections.
The British Beer and Pub Association (BBPA) also welcomed the changes, estimating that they could reduce cost pressures on British brewers by tens of millions of pounds.
However, its chief executive, Emma McClarkin, warned that leased and tenanted pubs must also benefit.
She highlighted the position of approximately 12,000 publicans operating leased and tenanted premises as small and medium-sized businesses, warning that more than a quarter of Britain’s pubs could otherwise miss out on the benefits.
Government considers lower fees for recyclable materials
Alongside the hospitality exemption, the Government plans to review how EPR fees reflect the recyclability of different packaging materials.
Under the proposed approach, packaging that is easier to recycle, including glass and paper, could attract lower fees, while harder-to-recycle materials, including certain plastics, could face higher charges.
The Government estimates that the changes could reduce annual fees for the most recyclable packaging by up to 40%.
However, these reductions are not yet confirmed. PackUK, which administers the packaging EPR scheme, is expected to launch a call for evidence in early 2027 to examine the proposed fee structure.
The review could have implications for packaging manufacturers, converters and brand owners when making decisions about material selection, packaging design and procurement.
Nick Kirk, executive director of British Glass, welcomed the announcement, saying it recognised the importance of the UK glass industry and the need for a fairer approach to packaging fees.
He said the measures represented a positive step towards ensuring that highly recyclable materials such as glass were properly recognised, while also benefiting other recyclable materials, including metal and paper.
For glass manufacturers, the changes come against a backdrop of wider cost pressures, including production costs and international competition.
British Glass has argued that the scheme’s weight-based charging approach places a disproportionate burden on glass packaging because of its weight, despite the material’s ability to be recycled repeatedly without losing quality.
The Government is also examining international trade issues affecting the sector. The UK’s Trade Remedies Authority is conducting investigations into alleged dumping of glass containers from China and alleged subsidies affecting imports from Turkey. A provisional anti-dumping measure on Chinese imports was introduced in September 2026, while both investigations remain ongoing.
Separately, the Government plans to launch a call for evidence in December 2026 on ways to encourage businesses to increase packaging reuse at scale.
Belu warns EPR costs threaten charitable funding
While welcoming the Government’s willingness to address industry concerns, British water company and social enterprise Belu says the reforms do not go far enough.
The company, which directs 100% of its net profits to WaterAid, estimates that it faces £1.1 million in EPR-related costs over two years.
Belu argues that these charges reduce the funds available to support clean water, sanitation and hygiene programmes around the world.
Charlotte Harrington, CEO of Belu, said the Government’s announcement was an important step but should mark the beginning of a wider review of the scheme.
She said the changes would address some of its unintended consequences but would not reverse costs already incurred by businesses.
For Belu, she added, the £1.1 million in EPR-related costs represented money that would otherwise go directly to WaterAid.
The company is also calling for the Government to reconsider how EPR rules apply to social enterprises.
Harrington highlighted what she described as an inconsistency in exempting charities from EPR disposal fees while imposing costs on social enterprises whose profits are used to fund charitable activities.
“There is an obvious contradiction in exempting charities from EPR disposal fees while imposing these costs on social enterprises whose profits exist to fund those same charitable outcomes,” she said.
Belu argues that the scheme does not adequately distinguish between conventional commercial businesses and organisations whose business models are designed to generate social and environmental benefits.
Harrington called on the Government to extend its review to social enterprises, ensuring that businesses directing their profits towards charitable causes are not unfairly penalised.
The Government’s latest announcement does not set out specific changes to EPR fees for social enterprises.
Further reforms will shape the UK’s packaging EPR system
Despite the concessions, the Government has reaffirmed its commitment to the underlying principle of producer responsibility: businesses should contribute towards the costs of managing the packaging waste associated with their products.
According to Defra, the scheme has already provided £1.4 billion to local councils to improve recycling services.
The challenge now is to ensure that the system delivers its environmental objectives while allocating costs more accurately across packaging materials, supply chains and different types of businesses.
For manufacturers, converters, drinks producers and brand owners, the proposed changes could influence packaging choices, recycling strategies and the economics of supplying different markets.
However, important questions remain over the treatment of indirect distribution channels, the inclusion of leased and tenanted pubs, costs already incurred by businesses and the position of social enterprises.
The forthcoming consultations in December 2026 and early 2027 will provide opportunities for industry stakeholders to influence the next phase of reform.
For the wider packaging industry, the UK experience highlights a central challenge for EPR systems internationally: balancing the principle that producers should pay for packaging waste management with a fee structure that fairly reflects material recyclability, actual waste-management arrangements and the diversity of businesses operating across the supply chain.
