PPWR's authorised representative rule: why SMEs want it paused

SMEunited, the European umbrella body for small and medium-sized businesses, has asked the EU to suspend and simplify the authorised representative obligation under the Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation, according to Packaging Europe and IndexBox. The request lands in the middle of a provision that is already under review in Brussels, and it sharpens a question that has been sitting unresolved since PPWR entered into force: who, exactly, has to appoint a representative, and when.

What the rule actually requires

PPWR, formally Regulation (EU) 2025/40, replaced the old Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive and has applied generally across the EU since 12 August 2026. Article 45(3) of the regulation requires economic operators established outside the EU, and in some readings certain operators placing packaging on the market without an EU presence, to appoint an authorised representative established in a member state. That representative takes on compliance duties: keeping technical documentation, cooperating with market surveillance authorities, and acting as the contact point if something goes wrong.

For a multinational with EU subsidiaries this is paperwork. For a small manufacturer or converter without an EU legal entity, it means finding and paying a third party to carry legal responsibility on their behalf, often with little clarity on what the role costs or who is qualified to do it.

What’s new: a suspension proposal already on the table, and SMEs pushing harder

The European Commission tabled a proposal, COM(2025) 982, on 10 December 2025. It would suspend the Article 45(3) obligation until 1 January 2035. As of early October 2026 this is a proposal, not adopted law. It needs agreement from the Council and the European Parliament before it takes effect, and nothing in the current leads confirms a vote.

Table.Briefings reports that the Council has resumed deliberations on the regulation, which suggests the file is moving again after a period of lower-profile technical work. SMEunited’s intervention, reported separately by Packaging Europe and IndexBox, asks for something slightly different from the Commission’s proposal: not just a suspension, but a simplification of how the rule applies to SMEs specifically, rather than a blanket delay for all affected operators.

In practice this probably means SMEunited is worried that even a 2035 suspension could later be replaced with a rule that still treats a five-person converter the same way it treats a packaging multinational. Their ask is for the eventual, permanent version of Article 45(3) to carry lighter obligations, or a different compliance route, for businesses below a certain size.

Why this matters beyond one article number

Authorised representative duties sit alongside two other obligations that took effect on the same date and get far less attention from the general press: the EU declaration of conformity and the technical documentation file that every item of packaging placed on the EU market now needs, in some form, since 12 August 2026. If a business has no EU representative, keeping that documentation current and accessible to authorities becomes harder, not just a formality.

This also interacts with scope questions the trade press has been raising all year. AD HOC NEWS reports that pallets, crates and containers, previously treated as logistics equipment rather than packaging in many compliance programmes, now fall inside PPWR’s definition of packaging and therefore inside the same documentation and representation requirements. Packaging Gateway separately reports that void fill is now assessed as empty space rather than as protective function, under the regulation’s space-ratio rules for grouped and transport packaging. Both signal the same pattern: PPWR’s scope is wider in practice than many compliance teams assumed when they first mapped their obligations in 2025.

A business that only now realises its pallets or its protective packaging fall inside scope may also only now be realising it needs an authorised representative it doesn’t have.

Open questions

The proposal’s own status is the biggest open question. A suspension to 2035 is a long way off, and nothing says the Council and Parliament will accept the Commission’s date unchanged. If today’s reporting elsewhere shows a vote or adoption, that is more recent than these background facts and should be treated as the current position.

It’s also unclear from the available reporting exactly which operators SMEunited believes are wrongly caught by the current rule. Authorised representative obligations under EU product law generally target non-EU manufacturers, but PPWR’s definitions of “producer” and “economic operator” are broad enough that converters, fillers and private-label brand owners can all find themselves in scope depending on their supply chain structure. Table.Briefings’ report that Council deliberations have resumed suggests there may be amendments addressing exactly this ambiguity, but the leads don’t specify what those amendments contain.

A further question is cost. No published fee schedule exists for authorised representative services, and the market for this role is new enough that pricing varies. Any SME budgeting for 2027 compliance is working with an estimate, not a confirmed figure.

What to watch next

Watch the Council and Parliament timetable for COM(2025) 982. Until it’s adopted, the Article 45(3) obligation remains in force as written, and the Commission has been clear elsewhere that it is not offering a stock-exhaustion grace period for other PPWR duties, which suggests it is unlikely to backdate relief here either.

Watch for amendments that address SME-specific thresholds, since that is the gap SMEunited is highlighting rather than the headline suspension date. Watch the Commission’s guidance channels too: it published PPWR guidance on 10 June 2026 and a second FAQ edition on 3 August 2026, and either could be updated again if the representative question is resolved politically before the legal text catches up.

What to do now

Confirm whether your business, or any non-EU supplier you rely on, currently needs an EU authorised representative under Article 45(3) as it stands today. Don’t assume a suspension is already in force.
Check your packaging scope against the broader PPWR definition, including pallets, crates, containers and void fill, not just primary consumer packaging.
If you’ve appointed or are negotiating with an authorised representative, get the scope of their responsibilities and fees in writing, since there’s no standard template across the EU yet.
Track the Council’s deliberations on PPWR amendments rather than relying on the original proposal text, since the final suspension date and conditions may change.
Treat this as a compliance question for legal advice, not a judgement call for a packaging or sustainability team alone.

PPWR’s authorised representative rule: why SMEs want it paused