The EU’s Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation is creating a more consistent framework, but small businesses selling across borders still face national EPR systems, registration and reporting requirements.
The EU’s new packaging regime is intended to make rules more consistent across the single market. For small businesses selling products across borders, however, a common regulatory framework does not necessarily mean a common compliance process.
Go deeper with GlobalData
Discover B2B Marketing That Performs
Combine business intelligence and editorial excellence to reach engaged professionals across 36 leading media platforms.
Regulation (EU) 2025/40, known as the Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR), entered into force on 11 February 2025 and generally applies from 12 August 2026. It covers packaging and packaging waste regardless of material or origin, with requirements covering packaging design, composition, reuse, recycling and waste management.
The regulation aims to reduce packaging waste and its environmental and health impacts while improving the functioning of the EU internal market.
Yet one important part of the system – extended producer responsibility (EPR) – continues to rely on national registers and arrangements.
For businesses selling packaged products across borders, compliance therefore depends not only on the EU rules but also on where packaging is first made available on the market, which national system applies and what information must be provided.
For a large manufacturer with dedicated regulatory staff, this may be another routine compliance function. For a small online seller shipping relatively few parcels into several EU countries, the administrative effort and fixed costs can be harder to absorb.
One EU regulation, multiple national systems
EPR is based on a simple principle: businesses responsible for placing packaging on the market contribute towards the cost of managing it when it becomes waste.
The PPWR requires producers to register in each Member State where they make packaging or packaged products available for the first time, or where they unpack packaged products without being the end user. Each Member State is required to maintain a national producer register.
The regulation seeks to make registration and reporting more consistent. It requires common formats and provides for information submitted to national registers to be interoperable, based on open standards and machine-readable. But it does not replace national registers with a single EU producer register.
That distinction matters to small businesses.
A seller making occasional deliveries into several countries may put relatively small quantities of packaging on each national market while still having to establish its compliance position in each relevant jurisdiction.
The PPWR provides simplified reporting for producers that make less than 10 tonnes of packaging available for the first time on a Member State’s market in a calendar year, although Member States can set a lower threshold in certain circumstances.
For producers below the applicable threshold, the concession is therefore about simpler reporting, not exemption from EPR. Registration and other applicable obligations remain relevant.
The practical task for a small seller consequently extends beyond calculating how much packaging it uses. It must identify where it is considered the producer, register where required, understand the applicable EPR arrangements and maintain the packaging data needed for reporting.
Cross-border sellers face a complex compliance landscape
Research commissioned by Amazon and published in May 2026 illustrates the differences businesses can encounter in national registration systems.
The study examined the registration process for an Amazon seller operating across 10 EU countries. It identified 64 unique registration fields, with individual markets requiring between 11 and more than 20 fields and an average of 16. The research found that 55% of the fields were country-specific.
Amazon also reported differences in authentication systems, languages and registration procedures. In some countries, it said, sellers had to deal with both a national register and a producer responsibility organisation, while other processes could be completed in a single step.
The research was commissioned by Amazon, which has a commercial interest in reducing barriers to cross-border e-commerce. Its findings should therefore be viewed in that context.
They nevertheless illustrate a broader issue with EU packaging compliance: harmonising the legal framework does not automatically produce an identical administrative experience in every Member State.
For a small company without dedicated compliance staff, navigating different portals, languages, registration procedures and reporting arrangements can create costs before the underlying EPR contribution itself is considered.
The PPWR also gives online marketplaces a role in producer responsibility compliance.
Platforms that allow consumers to conclude distance contracts with producers must obtain information about the producer’s registration in the relevant Member State and a self-certification confirming compliance with applicable EPR requirements before allowing the producer to use their services.
For online sellers, EPR compliance can therefore become a condition of access to important sales channels, rather than simply a reporting obligation owed to an environmental authority.
Authorised representatives add another layer to the cross-border picture.
Under Article 45(3) of the PPWR, a producer established in one Member State that makes packaging or packaged products available for the first time directly to end users in another Member State must appoint an authorised representative for EPR in that destination country.
The regulation also allows Member States to require producers established outside the EU to appoint an authorised representative.
The European Commission proposed in December 2025 to suspend the requirement applying to producers established in another Member State until 1 January 2035 as part of efforts to reduce administrative burdens.
However, that proposed suspension has not been adopted, so the requirement in Article 45(3) remains part of the PPWR.
In June 2026, the Council said work on the proposed changes to EPR authorised-representative requirements had been discontinued after a large majority of Member States expressed strong reservations. It pointed instead to a broader review of EPR frameworks expected as part of the Circular Economy Act.
Businesses should therefore distinguish carefully between requirements in the adopted PPWR and simplification proposals that have not become law.
For non-EU sellers, this distinction is particularly important because the PPWR allows Member States to require producers established in third countries to appoint an authorised representative for EPR.
Why compliance costs matter more to small sellers
The commercial effect of packaging compliance is unlikely to be the same for every business.
A multinational consumer goods company can spread the cost of registration, reporting, data management and professional compliance support across large sales volumes. It can also employ specialists to manage EPR obligations in different markets.
A micro-business selling small quantities across several countries has fewer resources over which to spread those costs.
The EPR contribution itself may be relatively modest for a business placing small quantities of packaging on a national market. The greater challenge can be the combination of registration, packaging data collection, reporting, translation, external compliance support and, where applicable, representation – costs that are not necessarily proportional to the amount of packaging sold.
When those costs arise in several relatively small markets, a seller may have to consider whether the revenue generated in each country justifies the effort required to remain compliant.
That makes packaging compliance a potential competitiveness issue for small businesses engaged in cross-border e-commerce.
The PPWR includes safeguards aimed at avoiding disproportionate burdens. Producer responsibility organisations must treat producers equally regardless of their origin or size and must not place a disproportionate burden on businesses placing small quantities of packaging on the market.
Simplified reporting below the applicable threshold is another measure aimed at reducing administrative demands. But neither measure eliminates the need to understand the national systems through which EPR obligations are administered.
The European Commission has acknowledged that implementation of the PPWR has generated practical questions because of the regulation’s novelty and complexity. It published guidance and a detailed FAQ in 2026 to address implementation issues raised by businesses, Member States and other stakeholders.
The issue has also prompted calls for greater simplification. In June, the Council highlighted concerns among Member States about legal certainty and consistent interpretation of the PPWR as the regulation approached its 12 August 2026 general application date.
For businesses, however, the immediate priority is to understand their position under the rules that apply rather than wait for the regulatory framework to become simpler.
Companies selling packaged products across EU borders should map the Member States in which they make packaging available for the first time, establish which entity is considered the producer in each market, identify the relevant registration and EPR obligations, and maintain packaging data that can support national reporting.
Online sellers should also check what information marketplaces require, while businesses established outside the EU should pay particular attention to national requirements governing third-country producers.
The PPWR is intended to create a more harmonised European packaging framework. But harmonisation of the rules is only part of the picture. The way those rules are registered, reported and enforced still depends in important respects on national systems.
For large producers, managing that complexity may be an expensive but manageable regulatory task. For smaller sellers, it can influence the basic commercial decision of whether serving a particular market is worthwhile.
That is the challenge beneath the PPWR’s drive for greater consistency: Europe may have one packaging regulation, but cross-border businesses do not yet have one simple compliance process.
