US EPR Packaging Compliance Guide (2025): What Brands Must Do & How Zenpack Helps

1. What is EPR?
2. Is My Brand Covered by EPR?
3. What is my EPR obligation as a Producer?
4. How Zenpack Helps Brands Stay Ahead
5. FAQ

1. What is EPR?

Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) is a policy approach that shifts the responsibility for managing products at the end of their life—such as collection, processing, and recycling—from local governments to the companies that place these materials on the market. In most cases, this applies specifically to packaging and paper products.

The purpose of EPR laws is to reduce waste and support a more sustainable system by holding producers financially and operationally accountable for the waste their products generate.

2. Is My Brand Covered by EPR?

EPR Applicability Overview

The flowchart below helps brand owners quickly determine whether their packaging is covered under U.S. EPR laws. By checking where your products are sold, the materials you use, and whether your company meets a state’s “small producer” criteria, you can understand your reporting obligations and whether fees apply.

2.1 States Where EPR Applies

To determine whether your company is subject to EPR (Extended Producer Responsibility) packaging regulations, first confirm if your products are sold or distributed in states that have enacted EPR laws—currently California (CA), Colorado (CO), Oregon (OR), Minnesota (MN), Maryland (MD) and Washington (WA). Only companies operating in these states fall within the scope of the packaging EPR framework.

2.2 Covered Materials

Next, assess whether your product is covered by EPR regulations (“Covered Products”). These typically include consumer-facing packaging and paper products.
Certain materials and product categories are excluded or exempt, depending on the state (e.g., Maryland and Oregon). Common exclusions include:

• Beverage containers regulated under bottle deposit or container redemption laws (“Bottle Bills”).
• Medical and pharmaceutical products such as pesticides, drugs, medical devices, biologics, diagnostics, and dietary supplements regulated under federal law.
• Hazardous material packaging, such as refillable LPG containers.
• Industrial-use packaging used solely in manufacturing or distribution processes (e.g., pallets, cores, and wraps).
• Specific paper products, including bound books, napkins, tissues, and absorbent papers.

State	Covered Materials	Sectors	Full or Partial Recycling System Funding
California	Packaging / Plastic foodservice ware	Consumer Packaging / B2B	Partial (new or incremental)
Oregon	Packaging / Printing and writing paper / Foodservice ware	Consumer Packaging / B2B*	Partial (capital for collection; MRF payments and operation of PRO depot network)
Colorado	Packaging / Paper products / Foodservice ware	Consumer Packaging / Limited B2B*	Full (100% of the net cost of recycling services)
Minnesota	Packaging / Paper products / Foodservice ware	Consumer Packaging / Limited B2B**	Partial (but increasing)
Maryland	Packaging / Paper products / Foodservice ware	Consumer Packaging / Limited B2B**	Partial (but increasing)
Maine	Packaging / Some foodservice ware	Consumer Packaging / Limited B2B**	Full
Washington	Packaging / Paper products / Foodservice ware	Consumer Packaging / Limited B2B**	Partial (but increasing)

2.3 Producer Definition

Under EPR regulations, a “Producer” is typically defined as the brand owner or manufacturer responsible for introducing the product and its packaging into the market.

If a brand is not based in the U.S., the importer or distributor who first places the product on the market within an EPR state is generally considered the Producer.

2.4 Exemption and Obligations

Determine whether your company meets the small producer threshold based on each state’s threshold—commonly calculated by annual revenue or total packaging weight placed on the market.

• If your company meets the small producer threshold: you may be exempt from paying fees or can use simplified reporting requirements, but you must still file a report.
• If your company does not meet the small producer threshold: your company must register with the designated PRO (Producer Responsibility Organization), submit required reports, and pay annual fees based on packaging volume and material types.

State	Exemption Criteria
California	Exemptions apply to companies with annual state revenues under $1 million
Colorado	Exemptions apply to companies with annual state revenues under $5 million or companies that used less than one tonne of the covered packaging materials in the previous calendar year
Maine	Exemptions apply to companies with annual state revenues under $2 million or companies that used less than one tonne of the covered packaging materials in the previous calendar year
Minnesota	Producers are exempt if they introduce less than one ton of in-scope material into the state annually or their global revenues are below $2 million

3. What is my EPR obligation as a Producer?

	California	Colorado	Oregon	Maine	Minnesota	Maryland	Washington
Join Approved PRO + Collect Data	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔
Report Data to PRO	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔
Pay Fees / Dues based on Data	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔
Potential Redesign of Materials / Delivery Models	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔
Source Reduce Plastic (incl. SR Plan)	✔	NA	NA	✔*	NA	NA	NA
Ensure Materials are Recyclable or Compostable	✔	NA	NA	NA	✔	✔	✔

Based on the EPR obligations you have compiled, here is a comprehensive breakdown of the related requirements in English, supported by the provided source materials:

The framework of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) legislation shifts the financial and operational burden of managing post-consumer packaging from municipalities and taxpayers onto the producers of packaged goods. These laws introduce a new era of accountability for brands.

3.1 Join Approved PRO

Producers (generally the brand owner, manufacturer, or importer) are typically required to join a Producer Responsibility Organization (PRO). The PRO acts as a centralized compliance vehicle to implement, fund, and manage waste management programs on behalf of its members.

3.1.1 Producer Responsibility Organization (PRO)

A PRO is a producer-led nonprofit organization that provides producers with compliance services to help producers meet EPR obligations. A PRO is responsible for developing a program plan to manage covered products.

3.1.2 Circular Action Alliance (CAA)

• Circular Action Alliance (CAA) is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit PRO dedicated to implementing EPR regulation.
• CAA is funded by companies from food, beverage, consumer goods, and retail industries, such as Amazon, CocaCola, Walmart, Starbucks, PEPSICO, etc. 
• CAA has been approved to be the single PRO in California, Colorado, Minnesota, Oregon, and Maryland. Maine has yet to select its designated SO.

3.1.3 Registration for CAA

• Only producers who register with the Circular Action Alliance (CAA) will gain access to the Producer Portal and the associated compliance resources.
• Registration link: Circular Action Alliance

3.2 Collect Data and Report to PRO

Producers are required to submit detailed packaging data annually to the PRO. This data is essential for calculating compliance fees and tracking progress. The required data varies depending on the state and can be summarized by certain categories.

Catagories	Data
Supply, Weight, and Sales Data	• Total Weight/Volume of Covered Material • State-Specific Sales Data
Packaging Data	• Reporting categories for all materials in scope (For instance, Oregon utilizes a detailed fee structure encompassing 60 material categories) • Recyclability/Compostability Status: Producers must report data detailing the packaging’s recyclability characteristics • Proportion of post-consumer recycled content (PCR) • Source Reduction and Reuse/Refill Metrics: Data must support progress toward waste reduction and alternative delivery systems. 。Source Reduction Goals 。Reusable/Refillable Systems • Life Cycle Environmental Impacts: For Oregon compliance, producers should collect data for Life Cycle Assessments (LCA), which are used to evaluate environmental impacts 。Product-to-Package Ratio 。Producer’s Choice of Material 。Impact Reduction
Administrative and Auditing Data	• Brand Identification • Legal Structure and Affiliation • Methodology and Documentation • Record Retention

• Required Data Elements: Reports must detail the covered materials introduced into the state, typically including: weight, material type, recyclability characteristics, recycled content, and volume sold. There are specific reporting categories for all materials in scope.
• Reporting Deadlines (Examples):
  • Oregon: Producers submitted initial reports by March 31, 2025.
  • Colorado: 2024 packaging data reports were due by July 31, 2025.
  • California (SB 54): The reporting deadline for 2023 packaging and sales data is November 15, 2025.
  • New Jersey: PCR (Post-Consumer Recycled content) reports were due by July 18, 2025.
• Compliance Systems: Organizations like rePurpose Global offer streamlined EPR reporting solutions to help brands navigate compliance mandates.

3.3 Pay Fees / Dues based on Data

Producers must pay fees or annual dues to the PROs, proportional to the amount and type of packaging material they introduce into the state. These funds are used by PROs to implement responsibility plans and finance waste management programs.

Basic Concept: 

Total EPR Fee = Base Fee ( Based on reporting catagories) +  Graduated Fee / Eco-modulation

3.3.1 What is the Base Fee?

The Base Fee (or Base Fee Rate) is a material-specific standardized fee rate calculated by the PRO to determine a producer’s contribution to the statewide recycling system. The fee schedule will be provided by the PROs. Different fees will apply based on the reporting categories.

• Purpose: The fees remitted by producers cover the costs associated with collecting, recycling, and managing covered packaging waste. This includes funding for infrastructure improvements, education/outreach, compensation to local governments for managing packaging material, and covering the administrative and operating expenses of the PRO.
• Structure: The final Base Fee Schedule includes fee rates for specific materials (e.g., 60 material categories in Oregon). Producers generally pay fees proportional to the amount and type of packaging material they introduce into the state.
• Low-Volume Producers: Producers with lower volumes (e.g., those below specific tonnage and revenue thresholds in Oregon) may opt for a simplified tiered flat fee structure instead of the material-specific Base Fee calculation.

What are Reporting Categories?

Reporting Categories are a standardized classification system, also referred to as Product Speciation for the Fee Structure, that producers must use when reporting their packaging data to the PRO.

• Classification: These categories encompass all materials within the scope of the program, irrespective of whether they are currently determined to be recyclable.
• Scope: The PRO’s (CAA) proposed list for Oregon, based on state requirements (like the USCL and PRO Accepted Material Lists) and experience in other jurisdictions, includes 60 material categories grouped by eight material classes.
• Data Submission: Producers must report the type and weight of their covered materials into these defined categories.

What is the Logic Behind the Base Fee Algorithm?

At its core, the fee structure is designed so that materials that create more environmental impact and cost more to manage will pay more. It’s a fairness-based model.

Here’s the simplified logic:

1. Cost Reflects Impact: Each packaging material is assigned a fee based on how difficult and expensive it is to collect, sort, and recycle.
   
   • If a material is harder to recycle or causes contamination → its fee is higher.
     
   • If it’s easier to recycle and has more stable processing markets → its fee is lower.
     
2. Cost + Volume Matter: Materials that appear in large volumes or create greater system burden pay a larger share of the total program costs.
   
3. Recycling Value Can Reduce Fees: If a material can be sold at positive commodity value (example: clean aluminum or certain grades of cardboard), that revenue reduces the final fee for that material category.

In simple terms: the more a material costs the system and the environment, the higher the fee — and if a material helps bring revenue back into the system, its fee goes down.

3.3.2 What is the Graduated Fee / Eco-modulation?

Eco-modulation is a key component of modern Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) systems. It adjusts a producer’s packaging fees based on how environmentally responsible their packaging design is.

• How it works: Each producer starts with a base fee for their packaging materials. That fee can then be adjusted up or down depending on the packaging’s environmental performance.
  
• Why it exists: The goal is to reward packaging that is easier to recycle, uses more recycled content, or has a lower overall environmental impact, while charging higher fees to packaging that is harder to recycle or more resource-intensive.
  
• Policy direction: States like Oregon and Colorado include eco-modulation requirements in their EPR laws, and Colorado began stakeholder work on the rules in 2025.

In short:

Eco-modulation makes sustainable packaging cheaper and unsustainable packaging more expensive.

How the Graduated Fee Bonus System Works

To apply eco-modulation in practice, the Circular Action Alliance (CAA) uses a graduated bonus system. These bonuses are tied to the Life Cycle Evaluation (LCE) of the packaging. Initially, two bonuses will be available, with a third to be added later.

Bonus Type	Purpose	What You Need to Do	Maximum Award
Bonus A — Voluntary Disclosure	Encourages producers to measure and report impacts.	Conduct an LCE on a SKU or group of SKUs and submit the results in a project report.	10% of base fees, up to $20,000 per SKU/batch.
Bonus B — Substantial Impact Reduction	Rewards real improvements in packaging sustainability.	Conduct a before-and-after LCE showing measurable impact reduction (e.g., weight reduction, switching to PCR, material change).	Higher than Bonus A; capped at $50,000 per SKU/batch, based on impact reduction tier.
Bonus C — Reusable / Refillable (Future)	Will encourage shifting from single-use to reuse systems.	To be defined in future rulemaking.	Details to come in a future plan amendment.

How the Five Statutory Metrics Influence These Bonuses

Oregon’s EPR law requires the PRO to consider five specific design factors when structuring fees. These are incorporated through the LCE methodology, which translates packaging design changes into measurable impact scores.

Required Factor	How It Connects to the Bonus System
1. Post-consumer recycled (PCR) content	Increasing PCR typically reduces environmental impact in the LCE score — helping producers qualify for Bonus B.
2. Product-to-package ratio	Using less packaging lowers weight-based fees and improves LCE performance, improving eligibility for Bonus B.
3. Material choice	Switching to a lower-impact material can improve LCE results — another pathway to Bonus B.
4. Life-cycle environmental impacts	This is the core of the bonus system. All bonuses are determined through LCE scoring.
5. Material recycling rate	Higher recycling rates may result in environmental benefit, but CAA will only award Bonus B if the LCE shows a real net reduction in impacts, not just a higher recycling rate on paper.

Key Takeaway

The graduated fee and eco-modulation system financially rewards packaging designs that genuinely reduce environmental impact — and charges more for packaging that increases system and environmental costs.

This approach creates a market-based incentive for brands to redesign packaging toward lighter, recyclable, reusable, and lower-impact solutions.

3.4 Potential Redesign of Materials/Delivery Models

The requirement to evaluate and potentially redesign packaging materials and delivery models is a central element of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) legislation. This obligation reflects the shift in responsibility from consumers and municipalities to producers, who now assume both the financial and operational accountability for the end-of-life management of packaging.

Purpose and Compliance Context

Under EPR, producers are responsible for contributing to the costs associated with the collection, sorting, processing, and disposal of packaging waste. By tying these costs directly to packaging design choices, EPR programs create financial incentives to improve packaging recyclability and reduce environmental impact. This is achieved through eco-modulation (or graduated fee) structures, where packaging that is easier to recycle is charged lower fees, and packaging that is harder to recycle or manage incurs higher fees.

How Redesign Functions as a Compliance Strategy

Producers can manage long-term compliance obligations and reduce future EPR costs by making strategic updates to packaging formats and supply systems. Common redesign strategies include:

1. Source Reduction
   Reducing packaging weight or eliminating unnecessary components.
2. Material Simplification
   Transitioning away from multi-layer or mixed materials to more mono-material formats that are easier to recycle.
3. Increased Recycled Content
   Incorporating post-consumer recycled (PCR) content to improve circularity and reduce reliance on virgin materials.
4. Reuse and Refill Systems
   Introducing returnable, reusable, or refillable packaging models where operationally feasible.
5. Alternative Delivery Models
   Shifting to distribution formats that inherently require less packaging (e.g., concentrates, bulk dispensing, or subscription return systems).

Redesign as a Pathway to Graduated Fee Bonuses

In addition to supporting compliance, packaging redesign can also lead to direct financial benefits through Graduated Fee Bonuses offered under eco-modulation frameworks. In many states, including Oregon, producers may qualify for fee reductions or bonuses when packaging demonstrates measurable environmental performance improvements based on Life Cycle Evaluation (LCE) criteria.
Examples include:

• Lightweighting to reduce material volume
• Increasing PCR content
• Switching to higher-recyclability materials
• Implementing reusable or refillable packaging formats

When these improvements result in better LCE outcomes, producers may qualify for Bonus A (Disclosure) or Bonus B (Impact Reduction), thereby reducing overall EPR payment obligations.

Redesign is therefore both a sustainability strategy and a cost-reduction strategy.

Integration into Strategic Planning

Because many EPR performance requirements are phased in over several years, producers are now incorporating packaging redesign roadmaps into annual product planning cycles. This often involves evaluating cost impacts, redesign feasibility, supply chain implications, and brand positioning on a SKU-by-SKU basis to ensure both compliance and cost efficiency over time.

State-Specific Redesign and Reduction Requirements

State	Key Requirements	Core Redesign Implications
California (SB 54)	25% plastic source reduction and 100% recyclable or compostable packaging by 2032; 65% recycling rate by 2032.	Major shift away from single-use plastics; strong incentives for PCR and reusable systems.
Minnesota	By 2032, all packaging must be refillable, reusable, recyclable, or compostable with functioning recovery systems.	Packaging must align with operational recycling or reuse infrastructure.
Maryland (SB 901)	Producer plans must define reduction, reuse, recyclability, recycling rate, and PCR goals; updated every 5 years.	Requires ongoing packaging improvement and reporting.
Oregon (RMA)	Eco-modulation tied to life cycle impact reduction; plastic recycling targets: 25% by 2028 → 70% by 2050.	Redesign that reduces LCE impact directly reduces EPR fees.
Washington (SB 5284)	Plastic PCR minimums, reuse infrastructure development, and waste reduction targets.	Encourages PCR content increases and reuse implementation.
Maine (LD 1541)	Fee reductions for packaging reduction and improved recyclability.	Direct financial incentive to simplify and improve materials.

Key Takeaway

Redesign is no longer optional—it is now a core compliance requirement and cost optimization strategy. Producers that proactively redesign packaging will reduce regulatory risk, lower EPR fees, and strengthen alignment with emerging circular economy expectations.

3.5 Source Reduce Plastic (incl. SR Plan)

The obligation to reduce the amount of plastic used in packaging is a core requirement within U.S. Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) legislation. This mandate supports the broader policy objective of transitioning toward a circular economy, where waste is minimized and materials are kept in use for as long as possible. By shifting end-of-life management costs to producers, EPR laws create direct financial incentives for companies to redesign packaging and reduce the amount of plastic entering the waste stream.

This requirement is implemented through statutory reduction targets and by requiring Producer Responsibility Organizations (PROs) to develop plans that actively drive packaging reduction and material efficiency.

Key Source Reduction Requirements by State

Several U.S. EPR laws contain explicit requirements for plastic source reduction, particularly for single-use packaging:

1. California (SB 54 – Plastic Pollution Prevention and Packaging Producer Responsibility Act)
   Source Reduction as a Cost Management StrategyCalifornia establishes the most specific and enforceable source reduction mandate to date:
   
   • Producers must achieve a 25% reduction in plastic packaging and plastic food service ware by 2032.
     
   • The reduction is measured against a 2023 baseline.
     
   • CalRecycle published the Plastic Source Reduction Baseline Methodology and Technical Report on December 31, 2024, detailing how reductions are calculated and verified.
     
2. Maryland (SB 901 – Producer Responsibility Program for Packaging Materials)
   Maryland requires reduction targets to be incorporated directly into the PRO’s Producer Responsibility Plan:
   
   • PRO plans must establish packaging reduction goals, including reducing packaging material waste by at least 25% within five years of plan approval.
     
   • The statutory intent emphasizes reducing the volume of packaging sold into the state, with a specific focus on plastic packaging.
     
3. Minnesota (Packaging Waste and Cost Reduction Act)
   Minnesota focuses on system-wide reduction and toxicity prevention:
   
   • The PRO must support redesign strategies that reduce overall packaging generation.
     
   • The state intends to phase down single-use plastics through elimination, material substitution, and reuse and refill system adoption.
     
   • The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) will set statewide requirements to define the percentage of packaging and paper products that must be reduced.

Source Reduction as a Cost Management Strategy

Because EPR fees are typically based on material type and weight, reducing the amount of plastic used in packaging has a direct and measurable financial benefit for producers.

Key financial impacts include:

Strategy	Benefit
Reducing packaging material (lightweighting, downsizing)	Lowers total EPR fees and material procurement costs.
Switching to reusable or refillable packaging systems	Reduces recurring single-use packaging fees and may qualify for Graduated Fee Bonuses.
Increasing recyclability or PCR usage	May qualify for eco-modulation fee reductions tied to environmental performance.

In addition, eco-modulation frameworks require PROs to design fee schedules that reward packaging that reduces environmental and human health impacts, including:

• Eliminating hazardous additives.
  
• Reducing the total volume of material used.
  
• Increasing compatibility with reuse or recycling systems.

Key Takeaway

Source reduction is both a regulatory obligation and a financial opportunity. Producers who actively reduce plastic use can lower compliance costs, enhance sustainability performance, and improve alignment with circular economy goals.

3.6. Ensure Materials are Recyclable or Compostable

The obligation to ensure packaging materials are recyclable or compostable is a foundational requirement under U.S. Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) legislation. This obligation is intended to shift packaging systems away from disposal-based models and toward circular packaging designs that maintain material value and minimize environmental impacts. The requirement is reinforced through state-level recyclability mandates, performance targets, truth-in-labeling laws, and standards to ensure materials reach Responsible End Markets (REMs).

3.6.1 Statutory Recyclability and Compostability Mandates

Many U.S. EPR programs establish firm deadlines by which packaging must meet recyclability, compostability, or reuse criteria.

State	Requirement	Compliance Year
California (SB 54)	100% of single-use packaging and single-use plastic food service ware must be recyclable or compostable	2032
Minnesota	All covered packaging must be refillable, reusable, recyclable and collected through a system, or compostable and collected through a system	January 1, 2032
New Jersey (Proposed S3398)	Would require full recyclability or compostability for covered materials	2034 (proposed)

These mandates require producers to transition away from materials that are difficult to recycle and toward packaging that has a feasible and established recovery pathway.

3.6.2 Performance Targets and Material Requirements

In addition to recyclability mandates, states are adopting recycling rate targets and post-consumer recycled (PCR) content requirements to accelerate circularity.

Policy Mechanism	Example Requirement
Recycling Rate Targets	California requires a 65% recycling rate for plastic packaging and food serviceware by 2032. Oregon sets plastic packaging recycling targets of 25% by 2028, 50% by 2040, and 70% by 2050.
Post-Consumer Recycled Content (PCR)	New Jersey’s Recycled Content Law requires producers to meet escalating PCR targets, with reporting to NJDEP beginning July 18, 2025. California’s AB 793 requires plastic beverage containers to contain 25% PCR by 2025, increasing to 50% by 2030.

These requirements push producers to shift from virgin materials toward circular feedstocks and recyclable packaging formats.

3.6.3 Truth-in-Labeling and Design Incentives

Regulations ensure that packaging labeled as “recyclable” or “compostable” genuinely meets recovery system criteria.

• Truth in Labeling (California SB 343 and AB 1201):
  Packaging may not use the chasing-arrows symbol (♻️) or claim recyclability or compostability unless the material meets state-defined systemwide recyclability or compostability criteria.
  Compliance deadlines: October 2026 (SB 343) and June 2027 (AB 1201).
  
• Eco-modulation Fee Incentives:
  Under EPR, producers pay lower fees for packaging that is widely recyclable and higher fees for packaging that is difficult to recycle, contaminated, or made of composite materials.
  
• Material Safety Considerations:
  Packaging may be exempt from recyclability/compostability requirements only if a health or safety regulation necessitates the material choice.

3.6.4 Ensuring Materials Reach Responsible End Markets (REMs)

Recyclability is defined not by the theoretical ability to recycle a material, but by whether it is collected, sorted, processed, and sold into real, functioning markets.

• Standardized Material Lists:
  States like Oregon use the Uniform Statewide Collection List (USCL) and PRO Acceptance List to define which materials are accepted for recycling.
  
• Responsible End Markets:
  The Producer Responsibility Organization (PRO) must ensure that collected materials are recycled at facilities that maintain environmental, worker safety, and public health protections.
  
• Performance Verification:
  PROs must track:
  
  • Material collection and processing yields
    
  • The portion of material actually turned into new feedstocks
    
  • Minimum recycling outcomes (e.g., Oregon requires >60% recovery yield for covered materials)

This ensures that materials are not merely collected, but meaningfully recycled into new products, closing the loop.

Key Takeaway

Ensuring packaging is recyclable or compostable is not just a labeling requirement—it must be supported by real recovery systems, verified end markets, and measurable recycling performance.
Producers are expected to redesign packaging accordingly and will be financially incentivized to do so under EPR fee structures.

4. How Zenpack Helps Brands Stay Ahead

At Zenpack, we help global brands future-proof their packaging through Compliance by Design.

Our team provides:

• Complete packaging data packages (material composition, recyclability grade, PCR 、%, certifications)
• Compliance-ready dielines with regional icons and QR/NFC integration
• Supplier declarations & FSC / MSDS documentation for audits
• EPR-ready reporting templates for the U.S. and EU
• Sustainable redesign consulting to reduce costs and improve recyclability

Speak with an Expert > >

5. FAQ