Maryland has become the sixth US state to pass an extended producer responsibility (EPR) law covering paper and packaging, marking a significant policy development in U.S. waste and recycling legislation.
Senate Bill 901, passed by lawmakers and sent to Governor Wes Moore on April 7, outlines a comprehensive framework requiring producers to fund and improve recycling, reuse, composting, and waste reduction efforts across the state.
Go deeper with GlobalData
New law sets ambitious recycling and reuse goals
Under the new law, a producer responsibility organisation (PRO) will be established to set and meet performance targets for recycled content, packaging recyclability, reuse systems, and contamination reduction.
These goals will be defined based on a statewide recycling needs assessment, which must be updated every ten years.
The PRO will be required to submit a five-year producer responsibility plan by July 1, 2028. In addition to setting targets for recycling rates across five-, ten-, and fifteen-year timelines, the plan will need to address the feasibility of incorporating reusable and compostable packaging.
The policy will cover packaging materials, beverage containers, and organics, with phased reimbursement to local governments starting at 50% in 2028 and rising to 90% by 2030.
US Tariffs are shifting - will you react or anticipate?
Don’t let policy changes catch you off guard. Stay proactive with real-time data and expert analysis.
By GlobalDataReimbursement structure and exemptions reflect local challenges
Unlike similar EPR legislation in other states, Maryland’s model allows for multiple PROs from the outset, drawing on a phased-in reimbursement model used in Minnesota.
This flexible structure is designed to accommodate Maryland’s fragmented recycling landscape, which includes a mix of public and private materials recovery facilities (MRFs), and a significant number of subscription-based waste collection households.
Fees set by the PRO must factor in eco-modulation—charging more for less sustainable packaging—and must reflect local conditions such as population size, geographic distance to facilities, and socioeconomic factors. The bill also establishes a process for producers to apply for exemptions for packaging that cannot be modified due to health or safety requirements. Such exemptions will expire after two years.
Certain producers are excluded from the bill’s requirements, including small producers and some paper manufacturers using 100% recycled content or virgin fibre. The bill also clarifies that energy recovery and landfilling do not qualify as recycling under its definitions.
Stakeholder support mixed amid industry concerns
The legislation was championed by Senator Malcolm Augustine, who cited economic and environmental motivations, and credited years of stakeholder consultation and compromise.
Organisations such as the Product Stewardship Institute played a key advisory role throughout the legislative process.
Chaz Miller, chair of the Maryland Recycling Network’s legislative committee, noted the bill’s tailored approach for the state’s diverse recycling systems. However, he raised concerns about potential implementation challenges, including the timing of reimbursement relative to plan approval.
Not all industry stakeholders support the legislation. The American Forest and Paper Association criticised the bill for applying EPR to paper, arguing that paper already has high recycling rates and established end markets.
The association called for recognition of voluntary industry efforts and investments in recycling infrastructure.
Despite the criticisms, Augustine said compromise was essential to the bill’s passage. “Legislating is compromising,” he said. “If both sides are somewhat dissatisfied, that often means we’ve landed in a workable middle ground.”
Maryland’s new EPR law is set to influence future debates around packaging waste management in the U.S., particularly as states weigh producer responsibility as a tool to improve recycling outcomes and reduce environmental impact.
