Packaging waste rules in the United States are changing quickly. By 2026 seven states will make producers—not municipalities—pay for the collection and recycling of the packaging they place on the market. Reporting, eco-modulated fees and design targets will all start to apply at the same time.
This guide explains the new Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) landscape, state by state, shows the common obligations that cut across every program and looks at how these U.S. rules connect with existing European compliance work.
Reading time: ~12 min
Extended Producer Responsibility makes brand owners or importers financially—and sometimes operationally—responsible for the recycling of the packaging they sell. The United States has no federal EPR law, so states are taking the lead.
By 2026 the following seven states will have packaging EPR programs covering consumer-facing products: California, Colorado, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Oregon and Washington. Producers must join a Producer Responsibility Organization (PRO), file detailed packaging reports and pay fees that fund collection and recycling. The Circular Action Alliance (CAA) is already the designated or likely PRO in most of these states.
Nearly every law features a 2032 horizon for design change: 100 % recyclable, reusable or compostable packaging, plus sizeable reductions in plastic use—often around 25 % for single-use plastics.
The details below convert the original comparison table into narrative form while preserving every data point.
2026 focus: Ban on misleading chasing-arrows labels for non-recyclable packaging and continued roll-out of the PRO program plan. 2032 goals: 100 % recyclable or compostable packaging, plastic weight reduction and higher recycling rates. Main PRO: CAA. What stands out: Ambitious plastic pollution mitigation fund plus strict recycled-content and labelling rules.
2026 focus: First fee payments to the PRO; statewide program becomes fully operational. 2032 goals: Improved access to recycling and post-consumer recycled content targets. Main PRO: CAA. What stands out: Emphasis on equitable recycling service across urban and rural areas.
2026 focus: Producer registration, reporting, fee payments and full enforcement of a PFAS ban in certain food packaging. 2032 goals: Reduced packaging volume and toxicity, higher recyclability. Main PRO: State-contracted stewardship organization (CAA is bidding). What stands out: Option to restrict sales for non-compliant producers.
2026 focus: Registration and reporting begin, eco fees collected. 2032 goals: Alignment with peer states on recyclability and recovery rates. Main PRO: CAA. What stands out: New entrant expected to harmonize quickly with existing programs.
2026 focus: First simplified report due 31 May; statewide recycling needs assessment starts. 2032 goals: 100 % refillable, reusable, recyclable or compostable packaging; producers cover up to 90 % of recycling costs. Main PRO: CAA. What stands out: Broad scope includes packaging, food-service packaging and printed paper; some B2B exemptions.
2026 focus: First full program year; 2025 fees now funding upgraded collection and sorting infrastructure. 2032 goals: Producer-funded network covering most consumer packaging. Main PRO: CAA. What stands out: One of the earliest large-scale producer-financed recycling systems.
2026 focus: PRO appointment, registration with the Department of Ecology and baseline material report due 31 May. 2032 goals: Higher recycling rates and system efficiency; tight limits on small-business exemptions. Main PRO: To be confirmed (likely aligned with others). What stands out: Potentially strict enforcement, including sales bans.
Despite different wording and timelines, all seven programs share these pillars:
Fees and eco modulation: Annual charges fund collection and recycling; easier-to-recycle or lower-impact packaging pays less, difficult or toxic packaging pays more.
Reporting and data collection: Producers must classify packaging by material and format, calculate weights by state and disclose supply-chain details. Minnesota and Washington both fix 31 May as a key reporting date.
Design standards and targets: By 2032 most packaging must be fully recyclable or compostable and meet recycled-content or weight-reduction goals.
Exemptions and thresholds: Many states exempt very small businesses (e.g., revenue under US $1–5 million or packaging under one tonne per year), but thresholds vary and can change.
Enforcement and penalties: Fines typically start at about US $1 000 per day and can reach US $50 000 per day, plus public non-compliance lists or sales bans.
The current seven-state cluster is expected to grow. Federal agencies encourage state programs, and more than ten other states—such as New Hampshire, Hawaii and Illinois—are studying or drafting packaging EPR. Related measures, including PFAS bans in food packaging and plastic-bag charges, are converging with EPR.
The role of PROs is also shifting: CAA already manages or plans to manage programs in five of the seven states, helping to harmonize processes while still operating under distinct state statutes.
Producers that already comply with Europe’s complex, multi-stream EPR systems can leverage that experience in the United States. France’s AGEC law, for instance, forces companies to declare eco-contributions across numerous streams—packaging, textiles, electronics, furniture, batteries and others—under constantly evolving rules.
The same pattern is emerging in the U.S. Manual spreadsheets and ad-hoc calculations will not scale. Integrated data and AI-powered tools that already automate eco-contribution calculations in France can be extended to U.S. states, keeping one reliable source of packaging truth and routing it through each program’s rules.
Which companies are “producers”? Usually the brand owner named on the packaging. If that firm lacks a physical presence in the state, the importer or distributor may become the producer. Some states also involve online marketplaces.
Do these laws only target plastic? No. They cover paper, cardboard, metal, glass, plastic and sometimes food-service ware or printed paper. Fee levels differ by material.
Can small businesses ignore EPR? Possibly, if they stay below each state’s revenue or tonnage threshold, but those limits vary and may shrink. Plan ahead.
How do U.S. and European EPR interact? They are separate legal systems but share core concepts: producer financing, eco-modulated fees and detailed material reporting. Solid data infrastructure can serve both regions.
By 2026, U.S. packaging EPR will be operational in seven states, with fees, reporting and 2032 design targets already influencing business decisions. Treat EPR as a single, strategic challenge—across U.S. states and European markets—supported by robust data and automation. To see how automated eco-contribution calculation can simplify multi-market compliance, discover our solutions.
