AlgoREP v1.5: From Calculation to Declaration

November 2025 — Product Launch Series, Article 2

Six weeks ago, we launched AlgoREP v1 with a focused mission: make eco-contribution calculations instant and accurate. The response validated our thesis—companies need reliable EPR data infrastructure.

But calculation is only half the compliance workflow.

Today, we're releasing v1.5, which closes the loop: from instant calculation to complete declaration reporting.

This release adds three capabilities that users have been requesting since day one:

1. Declaration report generation for Producer Responsibility Organizations (PROs)
2. PRO comparison transparency across schemes and eco-organizations
3. Split-by-reseller attribution for marketplace operators

This article explains why these features matter, what we built, and how we approached the technical challenges.

Why: The Declaration Gap

Calculations Don't File Themselves

When we launched v1, we solved the hardest part of EPR compliance: determining the correct eco-contribution for any product in real-time. Companies could finally answer "How much will this product cost in eco-fees?" before listing it for sale.

But knowing the number doesn't complete compliance. You still need to:

• Aggregate quantities by product category and material type
• Format data according to each PRO's requirements
• Generate reports for submission to multiple eco-organizations
• Track which products were declared in which period
• Reconcile payments with calculated obligations
• Distribute costs accurately (especially for marketplaces with multiple vendors)

This is where most companies still lived in spreadsheets—manually transcribing data from our calculation API into PRO-specific Excel templates. The compliance workflow remained broken in the middle.

The Marketplace Complexity Multiplier

For marketplace operators, the problem compounds exponentially.

When a marketplace sells products on behalf of third-party vendors, someone must pay the eco-contributions upfront—typically the marketplace. But the financial responsibility belongs to each individual vendor (the actual producer placing products on the market).

The reconciliation nightmare:

• Marketplace pays €50,000 in quarterly eco-contributions to various PROs
• This covers 2,000 products from 150 different vendors
• Each vendor needs an accurate invoice showing:
  • Which of their products generated eco-fees
  • How much each product contributed
  • Which PRO scheme each fee went to
  • Quantities sold in the declaration period

Today's solution? Manual Excel hell.

Finance teams spend dozens of hours building custom reconciliation reports, cross-referencing sales data with PRO invoices, and manually splitting costs. The margin for error is high. Vendor disputes are common.

This doesn't scale. And it definitely doesn't enable the marketplace business model we described in Article 1—monetizing compliance as a value-added service.

The PRO Comparison Blindspot

Another structural inefficiency: opacity in PRO pricing.

France has multiple competing eco-organizations for most EPR schemes (packaging, electronics, furniture, textiles). Each publishes tariff grids, but comparing them requires:

• Normalizing different product categorizations
• Accounting for eco-modulation incentives that vary by PRO
• Calculating total cost across your specific product mix
• Understanding contractual requirements and service levels

Companies often choose a PRO based on recommendation rather than data-driven comparison. This leaves significant money on the table.

We believe compliance infrastructure should enable informed decisions, not perpetuate opacity.

What: Three Capabilities, One Integrated Workflow

1. Declaration Report Generation

The core problem: Convert calculated eco-contributions into PRO-ready declaration reports.

What we built:

A declaration reporting system that:

• Accepts quantity data for products placed on market during any period
• Aggregates contributions by PRO scheme, product category, and material type
• Generates formatted reports matching each PRO's submission requirements
• Maintains audit trails linking declarations back to source calculations
• Handles multi-period tracking (quarterly, annual, or custom periods)

User workflow:

1. Upload sales quantities (CSV, API, or manual entry)
2. Select declaration period and target PROs
3. Review aggregated data by scheme
4. Generate reports for download or API retrieval
5. Submit to PROs (we provide the data; submission remains your responsibility)

Technical decisions:

We debated whether to build direct PRO integrations for automated submission. We decided against it for v1.5 because:

• PRO submission portals vary significantly in API maturity
• Companies often want to review declarations before submission
• Liability for incorrect submissions should remain with the declaring company
• We can add automated submission later without changing the data model

Instead, we focused on making our reports perfect inputs for PRO systems—correctly formatted, complete, and audit-ready.

2. PRO Comparison & Transparency

The core problem: Enable data-driven PRO selection based on actual costs for your product mix.

What we built:

A comparative analysis tool that:

• Downloads detailed reports for each EPR scheme showing tariffs by PRO
• Calculates total cost across your catalog for each eco-organization
• Highlights pricing differences in absolute and percentage terms
• Explains cost drivers (base tariffs vs. eco-modulation impacts)
• Updates in real-time as PRO tariffs change

Transparency principle:

We show the math. Every comparison is backed by:

• Specific tariff rates from each PRO's published grid
• Product-by-product calculations
• Sensitivity analysis (what happens if your product mix changes)

Companies can export these comparisons for internal review or vendor negotiations. This level of transparency didn't exist before—PROs publish tariffs, but nobody was doing the work to normalize and compare them at scale.

3. Split-by-Reseller for Marketplaces

The core problem: Accurately attribute eco-contribution costs to individual vendors in a marketplace.

What we built:

A cost attribution system specifically designed for marketplace operators:

Capabilities:

• Import vendor-level sales data (which vendor sold which products in what quantities)
• Calculate vendor-specific eco-contributions across all applicable PRO schemes
• Generate per-vendor invoices with detailed line items
• Export reconciliation reports for accounting integration
• Support multiple pricing models (cost pass-through, markup, flat fee per declaration)

Example workflow:

Marketplace uploads Q4 sales data:

product_id, vendor_id, quantity_sold, sale_date
SKU-001, VENDOR-A, 250, 2025-10-15
SKU-002, VENDOR-B, 180, 2025-10-22
...


AlgoREP calculates:

VENDOR-A:
 Total eco-contributions: €345.60
 Breakdown:
   - Packaging (Citeo): €180.20
   - WEEE (Ecologic): €165.40
 Products: 12 SKUs, 420 units sold

VENDOR-B:
 Total eco-contributions: €892.30
 Breakdown:
   - Packaging (Citeo): €520.15
   - Textiles (Refashion): €372.15
 Products: 8 SKUs, 650 units sold


The marketplace can now invoice each vendor for their exact eco-contribution cost—or add a service fee for handling compliance on their behalf.

Monetization enablement:

This feature directly enables the marketplace business model we outlined in our product vision: turn EPR compliance into a value-added service.

Instead of absorbing compliance costs or passing them through at cost, marketplaces can:

• Charge a service fee for EPR compliance handling
• Offer it as a premium feature in vendor tiers
• Differentiate against competitors who don't solve this problem

One beta customer told us: "We've been manually doing this in Excel for 18 months. It takes our finance team 40 hours per quarter and vendors still dispute the charges. This feature alone justifies our annual subscription."

How: Technical Architecture & Design Decisions

Data Model: Periods, Declarations, and Attributions

The core challenge was designing a data model that handles:

• Multiple time periods (calendar quarters, fiscal periods, custom ranges)
• Multiple PRO schemes per product
• Multiple vendors per marketplace
• Historical versioning (declaration data must be immutable once filed)
• Audit trails linking every number back to source calculations

Our approach:

Calculation Layer (v1)
 → Real-time eco-contribution calculations
 → Product-to-tariff mappings
 → Material composition analysis

Aggregation Layer (v1.5, new)
 → Period-based quantity aggregation
 → PRO-specific categorization
 → Multi-vendor attribution logic

Declaration Layer (v1.5, new)
 → Report generation engine
 → PRO format templates
 → Audit trail persistence

Comparison Layer (v1.5, new)
 → Cross-PRO tariff normalization
 → Total cost modeling
 → Sensitivity analysis


Each layer is independently testable and can evolve without breaking upstream systems.

Handling Quantity Data: The Missing Piece

In v1, we focused exclusively on unit eco-contributions (cost per product). We intentionally avoided quantity tracking because:

• Sales volume data is sensitive
• It's stored in customers' existing systems (e-commerce platforms, ERPs)
• We didn't want to become another data silo

But declaration requires quantities. We had to bring them in without creating vendor lock-in.

Our solution: Ephemeral quantity imports

Quantities are:

• Imported for a specific declaration period
• Used to generate reports
• Stored for audit purposes (companies need historical declarations)
• Never shared externally for any other purpose

Customers can import quantities via:

• CSV upload (most common for first-time users)
• API integration (for automated workflows)

We designed the import format to match common e-commerce export schemas, minimizing transformation work.

PRO Comparison: Normalizing the Unnormalizable

Different PROs categorize products differently. A "plastic bottle" might be:

• PRO A: "Rigid plastic packaging, PET, < 50cl"
• PRO B: "Beverage containers, category B2"
• PRO C: "Small format household packaging"

To enable fair comparison, we built a bidirectional mapping system:

1. Customer's product → AlgoREP's normalized taxonomy
2. AlgoREP taxonomy → PRO A's categories
3. AlgoREP taxonomy → PRO B's categories
4. AlgoREP taxonomy → PRO C's categories

This allows us to say: "Your product costs X at PRO A and Y at PRO B" with confidence that we're comparing equivalent classifications.

The catch: This mapping requires deep domain knowledge of each PRO's categorization logic. We built it through:

• Analysis of PRO documentation
• Validation with PRO technical contacts
• User feedback on classification accuracy

It's ongoing work—PROs update categories annually. We maintain this as part of our core data infrastructure.

Split-by-Reseller: Accuracy Without Complexity

Marketplace cost attribution could be simple (divide total by vendor count) or complex (account for product mix, scheme variations, timing differences).

We chose accurate complexity with simple UX:

Under the hood:

• Calculate eco-contribution for each transaction individually
• Aggregate by vendor across all schemes and periods
• Handle edge cases (returns, partial shipments, multi-vendor bundles)
• Support custom allocation rules (e.g., marketplace absorbs packaging, vendor pays WEEE)

User interface:

• Upload sales data → Get vendor invoices
• Two clicks, no configuration required
• Advanced options available for custom allocation policies

We prioritized correctness by default while enabling flexibility for edge cases.

What v1.5 Includes

Today's release adds:

Declaration Reporting:

• Upload sales quantities for any period
• Generate PRO-ready declaration reports
• Multi-period tracking and comparison
• Audit trail for all declarations
• PSDF, CSV and API export options

PRO Comparison:

• Download detailed tariff reports by scheme
• Compare total costs across eco-organizations
• Identify cost drivers in your product mix
• Export comparison data for internal analysis
• Real-time updates as PRO tariffs change

Marketplace Features:

• Split-by-reseller cost attribution
• Vendor-specific invoice generation
• Configurable pricing models (pass-through, markup, flat fee)
• Reconciliation report exports
• Multi-vendor declaration support

What's Still Coming:

These features complete the core compliance workflow, but we have more planned:

• Direct PRO submission (API integrations for automated filing)
• Predictive cost alerts (notify when tariff changes impact your products)
• Multi-year trend analysis (track declaration costs over time)
• White-label marketplace solutions (fully branded for your vendor portal)

Why This Matters: Completing the Compliance Loop

From Fragmented to Integrated

Before v1.5, companies used:

• AlgoREP for calculations
• Spreadsheets for aggregation
• Manual entry into PRO portals for submission
• Custom scripts for marketplace reconciliation

Now it's one integrated workflow:

1. Calculate eco-contributions in real-time (v1)
2. Aggregate quantities by period and scheme (v1.5)
3. Generate PRO-ready declarations (v1.5)
4. Compare PRO options for cost optimization (v1.5)
5. Attribute costs accurately to vendors (v1.5, marketplaces)

Each step feeds the next. Data flows through the system without manual transcription.

From Cost to Revenue (For Marketplaces)

Marketplaces can now:

• Eliminate manual reconciliation (40+ hours/quarter saved)
• Invoice vendors accurately (reduce disputes)
• Monetize compliance services (new revenue stream)
• Scale vendor onboarding (compliance no longer a bottleneck)

One marketplace operator in our beta program calculated they'd save €35,000/year in operational costs while generating €15,000/year in new compliance service revenue.

Net impact: €50,000/year positive. And that's before accounting for faster vendor onboarding and reduced compliance risk.

From Opacity to Transparency

The PRO comparison feature creates market pressure for better pricing. When companies can easily compare costs across eco-organizations, PROs must compete on value—service quality, innovation, sustainability impact—not just on information asymmetry.

This is good for everyone:

• Companies pay fair market rates
• PROs differentiate on real value
• The recycling ecosystem gets more efficient capital allocation

We're building infrastructure that makes the entire EPR system more efficient, not just individual companies more compliant.

Real Results from Beta Testing

We ran v1.5 in private beta for three weeks with 12 customers (4 marketplaces, 8 mid-market brands). Here's what we learned:

Case Study 1: Mid-Market Electronics Brand

Before v1.5:

• Manual declaration process: 12 hours per quarter
• Used spreadsheets to aggregate data from v1 calculations
• Submitted to 3 PROs (WEEE, packaging, batteries)
• High anxiety about accuracy

After v1.5:

• Declaration process: 25 minutes per quarter
• Direct upload of sales data → generated reports
• Discovered they were using the wrong PRO for packaging (comparison feature showed 8% savings opportunity)
• High confidence in submission accuracy

Quote: "The time savings are great, but the PRO comparison changed our strategy. We're switching to a different eco-organization next year based on data we never had access to before."

Case Study 2: Fashion Marketplace (850 Vendors)

Before v1.5:

• Finance team spent 60 hours/quarter on vendor reconciliation
• Frequent vendor disputes over cost allocation
• Couldn't monetize compliance service (too manual)
• Delayed vendor payments waiting for reconciliation

After v1.5:

• Vendor invoicing: 1 hour/quarter (mostly reviewing edge cases)
• Disputes dropped to near-zero (vendors trust the detailed breakdowns)
• Now charging €2/declaration as service fee (€6,800 new revenue per quarter)
• Vendor payments on time

Quote: "This feature transformed EPR from a cost center we hated dealing with into a service our vendors value and pay for. That's a business model change, not just a tool upgrade."

Case Study 3: Consumer Goods Distributor

Before v1.5:

• Quarterly PRO comparison took 8 hours (manually building models)
• Uncertain if they were with the right eco-organizations
• Declarations took 15 hours across 4 PROs

After v1.5:

• PRO comparison: 10 minutes (automated, always up-to-date)
• Identified €18,000/year savings by switching 2 PROs
• Declarations: 45 minutes total

Quote: "The ROI on our AlgoREP subscription went from 'nice to have' to '10x return' just from the PRO optimization we found. And we're more confident in our compliance than ever."

Technical Lessons & Tradeoffs

What Worked

1. Incremental Architecture Building the declaration layer on top of v1's calculation foundation worked well. We didn't need to refactor core systems—the v1 API remained stable while v1.5 added new capabilities.

2. PRO Format Templates Pre-building templates for each PRO's report format eliminated a huge source of user error. Users don't need to know PRO-specific requirements—we encode that knowledge in the system.

3. Flexible Quantity Import Supporting multiple import methods (CSV, API, manual) accommodated different company workflows without forcing standardization.

What Was Hard

1. PRO Categorization Mapping The bidirectional taxonomy mapping between AlgoREP's normalized categories and each PRO's scheme-specific categories was more complex than anticipated. We're still refining some edge cases.

2. Marketplace Attribution Edge Cases Handling returns, partial shipments, and multi-vendor bundles required more logic than initially scoped. We built a rules engine that's flexible enough to handle edge cases without becoming user-facing complexity.

3. Performance at Scale Generating declarations for marketplaces with 100K+ transactions required database query optimization and caching strategies. We hit some performance bottlenecks in beta that we resolved before launch.

Tradeoffs We Made

Direct PRO submission: DeferredWe could have built automated submission to PRO portals. We chose not to for v1.5 because:

• PRO APIs are inconsistent (some don't have APIs)
• Liability for submissions should remain with the declaring company
• Users wanted to review before submitting anyway

We'll revisit this in a future release with careful per-PRO integration work.

Historical data migration: Limited We don't import historical declaration data from before companies started using AlgoREP. This means your trend analysis starts from when you begin using v1.5, not from your entire compliance history.

We made this tradeoff because:

• Historical data quality is often poor
• Migration effort would delay launch significantly
• Companies care most about current/future declarations

If historical imports become a major request, we'll add them.

What's Next: v1.6 and Beyond

Immediate Priorities (Q1 2026)

Geographic Expansion

• Add Germany, Spain, Italy, and additional EU markets (based on customer demand)
• Extend declaration reporting to all new markets
• PRO comparison for international schemes

Platform Integrations

• Shopify app for seamless quantity sync
• WooCommerce plugin
• API connectors for common ERPs

Enhanced Marketplace Features

• White-label vendor portals
• Automated vendor notification workflows

Medium-Term Roadmap (Q2-Q3 2026)

Predictive Intelligence

• Tariff change alerts with cost impact forecasting
• Scenario modeling for product mix changes
• Compliance risk scoring

Direct PRO Submission

• Automated declaration filing for supported PROs
• Submission status tracking
• Error handling and retry logic

Analytics & Benchmarking

• Multi-year cost trend analysis
• Anonymous benchmark comparisons
• Sustainability impact reporting

Try v1.5 Today

All existing AlgoREP customers have immediate access to v1.5 features—no upgrade required, no additional cost.

New to AlgoREP?

We're extending our launch offer through the end of November:

90-Day Free Trial

• Full access to calculation + declaration features
• 100 products references (boost packages available)
• All PRO comparison tools
• Marketplace split-by-reseller included
• No credit card required

Get started: app.algorep.ai/signup

Have questions about v1.5 capabilities?

• Technical questions: product@algorep.ai
• Sales/pricing: sales@algorep.ai
• General inquiries: hello@algorep.ai

Final Thoughts

Six weeks ago, we launched AlgoREP v1 with instant eco-contribution calculations. Today, we're completing the compliance workflow with declaration reporting, PRO transparency, and marketplace attribution.

The pattern emerging:

We're not building isolated features. We're building infrastructure layers that compound:

• v1: Calculation infrastructure → instant, accurate eco-contributions
• v1.5: Declaration infrastructure → complete compliance workflow
• v2.0 (coming): Intelligence infrastructure → predictive optimization

Each layer makes the previous one more valuable. Calculations enable declarations. Declarations enable comparisons. Comparisons enable optimization.

This is how you build a data platform, not a point solution.

EPR compliance will continue expanding—new schemes, new markets, new complexity. Companies building on solid data infrastructure will scale. Those stuck in spreadsheets will struggle.

We're building AlgoREP to be that infrastructure.

Claude, CEO & Co-founder
AlgoREP

Feedback on v1.5? Questions about our technical approach? Email me: claude@algorep.ai

Continue Reading

📚 Article 1: Building the Data Infrastructure for EPR Compliance — How we built the calculation engine

🔧 API Documentation — Technical documentation for developers

🎯 Declaration Report Guide — How to use the new declaration features

Share this article:
Twitter • LinkedIn • Hacker News • Email

This is Article 2 in our Product Launch Series. Subscribe to be notified when we publish Article 3 documenting our next major release.

‍