Within 24 hours of each other, the European Parliament and the Council of the EU have set their positions on one of the most disputed duties in the PPWR: appointing an authorised representative for extended producer responsibility (EPR) in every member state where you first place packaging on the market. Neither position is law. Article 45(3) of Regulation (EU) 2025/40 has applied since 12 August 2026 and applies today exactly as written.
This explainer sets out what the duty requires, how the three texts now on the table differ, and what a packaging or compliance team should do while the amending regulation is negotiated.
What Article 45(3) requires
A producer that makes packaging or packaged products available for the first time in a member state other than the one where it is established must appoint, by written mandate, an authorised representative for EPR in that member state. The wording comes from Article 45(3), which refers to the producer categories in Article 3(1), point (15)(c) and (d). In practice that means sellers who supply packaging or packaged goods directly to end users abroad, including through distance sales.
The representative must be established in the member state concerned. Compliance providers describe the tasks as registering in the national producer register, reporting packaging volumes and materials, and paying into the national scheme. The producer keeps the underlying legal responsibility: the mandate delegates the work, it doesn’t transfer liability.
The text also contains a second sentence, which allows member states to require producers established in third countries to appoint a representative when they first make packaging available there. Whether and how a given country uses that option is a matter of national law, so check each market.
Two different representatives in one regulation
The PPWR has two representative roles, and they are often confused. The Article 3(1)(19) definition covers a representative of a manufacturer, appointed to handle specified product-conformity tasks such as keeping a copy of the declaration of conformity and technical documentation. The Article 3(1)(20) definition covers the representative for EPR, which exists only to carry out Chapter VIII producer obligations in one member state.
Compliance providers such as EUVerify and Certivo describe the conformity representative as an EU-wide appointment and the EPR representative as a per-country one. One of each does not replace the other. Read Articles 17 and 45 in the Official Journal text before you sign a service contract for either.
How the three texts differ
The Commission put the idea forward on 10 December 2025 in proposal COM(2025) 982. Parliament’s Environment Committee voted on 5 October 2026 to narrow it, and Parliament adopted its position in plenary on 20 October. The Council followed on 21 October with a mandate built on a different test.
| Text | Who would be relieved | Test | Duration | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Commission proposal COM(2025) 982 | EU-established producers selling in other member states | No size limit | Suspends Article 45(3) until 1 January 2035 | Proposal |
| European Parliament position (20 October 2026) | EU-based micro and small enterprises | Fewer than 50 employees and turnover or balance sheet under EUR 10 million | Until 2035, or until a Circular Economy Act is adopted | Negotiating position |
| Council mandate (21 October 2026) | EU-established producers placing small quantities in another member state | Under 1 tonne of packaging per calendar year in that state | Scheduled expiry in 2032, with a Commission review by 31 December 2030 | Negotiating mandate |
The Council’s own press release says the mandate also carries a safeguard clause for producers found in breach of EPR obligations, and that a comprehensive solution is expected in the upcoming Circular Economy Act. Packaging Europe reports that Parliament’s packaging and battery file passed with 616 votes in favour, 9 against and 39 abstentions, according to the Mundolatas coverage of the vote.
Why the tests matter in practice
Parliament’s test is about the company: its headcount and financial size. The Council’s test is about the product: the tonnage placed in a single member state. A mid-sized brand owner with 200 employees and a niche export line of 600 kg per year in Austria would fall outside Parliament’s version and inside the Council’s. A 12-person company shipping 5 tonnes a year into Germany would be the reverse.
Trilogue negotiations will have to reconcile these, along with the 2032 and 2035 end dates. Nothing in the leads says when talks will conclude, only that the Council presidency wants to open negotiations with Parliament as soon as possible.
What stays in place whatever the outcome
Every version on the table touches only the appointment of a representative. Registration, reporting and fee payment in each country remain, and the producer must still comply with national EPR rules where the packaging is likely to become waste. Parliament’s text says explicitly that other EPR duties are unaffected.
The Commission’s guidance for small producers makes the same point from the other direction. Packaging Europe reports that the Commission notes producers under 10 tonnes of packaging per calendar year already get flexibilities, and that member states and producer responsibility organisations may waive registration fees, set flat fees, simplify updates and reduce audits. Those options depend on national choices.
National law can also be stricter than any EU relief. Ekovio, a compliance provider, points out that France’s Environmental Code (Article L. 541-10-9-1) already requires a representative with no size threshold, so the EU vote would not by itself change the French position. Verify this against the French text.
Who is outside every proposed exemption
Producers established outside the EU are not covered by the Commission, Parliament or Council relief described in the sources. A US or UK seller shipping to EU consumers keeps the obligation wherever a member state applies it.
The cost pressure is real for small sellers. Packaging Europe reports that registration fees have been cited at EUR 200 to EUR 800 per country, and that some smaller sellers are withdrawing products from the EU market. Those figures are as reported by Packaging Europe, not from an official source, and fees vary by country and provider.
What stays uncertain
- The final threshold: company size, tonnage or a combination.
- The end date: 2032, 2035 or the entry into force of a Circular Economy Act.
- Entry into force: an amending regulation has to be agreed, adopted and published in the Official Journal. Until then the duty is live.
- Whether retroactive relief for mandates and fees already paid will be offered. Nothing in the sources addresses this.
Polygon One’s status tracker also records a paper from Austria, Czechia and Estonia at the 12 October Environment Council. It proposed a de minimis exemption, an EU registration portal and holding back the register implementing act. This is a member state suggestion only.
What to do now
- Map your first placements. List every member state where you or your fulfilment partner first make packaged products available to end users, and where your company is not established.
- Classify your position. Mark each market as EU-established or non-EU, and estimate tonnes of packaging per state per calendar year. That figure tests you against the Council approach; headcount and turnover test you against Parliament’s.
- Keep existing mandates and registrations valid. Don’t cancel anything on the strength of a negotiating position. Check whether new or renewed service contracts include a right to terminate if an exemption is adopted.
- Separate the two representative roles. Confirm who holds your Article 17 conformity mandate, if you have one, and who holds each Article 45(3) mandate.
- Check each national regime. Look at the producer register, fee schedule and any small-producer flexibility in every country. Use the Commission’s Green Forum to see which rules apply.
- Brief marketplaces and logistics partners. Ask which party reports your packaging data, and confirm the data matches what your representative files.
- Track the amending file. Procedure 2025/0395(COD) is the reference; follow the Council and Parliament announcements for a trilogue outcome.
This article is information, not legal advice. Where your obligations depend on the exact wording, read the Official Journal text of Regulation (EU) 2025/40 and the relevant national law, or take legal advice.
Sources
- Source: Regulation (EU) 2025/40 (PPWR), EUR-Lex
- Source: Simplification: Council agrees negotiating stance to cut red tape for small packaging producers, Council of the EU
- Source: EU Council agrees negotiating stance for small business EPR exemptions, Packaging Europe
- Source: EU Parliament votes to exempt small businesses from representative rules until 2035, Packaging Europe
- Source: EU Commission offers EPR guidance for small businesses under PPWR, Packaging Europe
- Source: European Parliament Backs Exemption for Small Businesses, Mundolatas
- Source: PPWR Authorised Representative: ENVI Draft Report and Vote, PAQR
- Source: PPWR current status: pending acts, drafts and updates 2026, Polygon One
- Source: EU Environmental Omnibus Package Impacts Packaging, Packaging Law
- Source: PPWR Authorised Representative: How to Choose One, EUVerify
- Source: PPWR Authorized Representative Deadline Guide for Non-EU Sellers, Certivo
- Source: EPR Simplification for SMEs: A French Representative Is Still Required, Ekovio
Header photo of Berlaymont building: Matthias v.d. Elbe, CC BY-SA 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons.