PPWR from 12 August 2026: Is Your Food Packaging Really Compliant for Market Placement?

PPWR from 12 August 2026:

Is Your Food Packaging Really Compliant for Market Placement?

Executive summary:

Regulation (EU) 2025/40 on packaging and packaging waste—the Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation, or PPWR—generally applies from 12 August 2026. Not all targets take effect on that date. However, immediately relevant provisions include the PFAS restriction for food-contact packaging, identification of the ‘manufacturer’ responsible under product law, the obligations of other economic operators, and evidence of compliance with requirements already applicable in technical documentation and an EU declaration of conformity. For PFAS-containing packaging, the manufacturing date alone does not establish protection for existing stock: what matters is whether the packaging was first made available on the Union market before the cut-off date. [1][2]

12 August is not a blanket replacement deadline

The PPWR entered into force on 11 February 2025 and, under Article 71, generally applies from 12 August 2026. It covers packaging regardless of material and combines requirements for substances, recyclability, compostability, minimisation, reuse and labelling with a product conformity system. It also contains numerous later dates and powers to adopt further legal acts. Harmonised sorting labels, for example, begin no earlier than 2028, while specific design-for-recycling grades and many recycled-content or reuse targets apply only from 2030 or later. [1]

This phasing is crucial in practice. The PPWR should neither be reduced to ‘everything applies from August’ nor postponed until 2030. According to the European Commission’s interpretation, the basic Article 6 requirement that all packaging placed on the market must be recyclable applies from 12 August 2026. Detailed design-for-recycling criteria, however, apply only from 2030 or 24 months after the relevant delegated acts enter into force, whichever is later. [2] Approval must therefore identify, for each packaging format, which provisions apply on the relevant date and which later requirements should already inform development and purchasing.

This follows the approach described in the introductory article ‘Regulatory by Design’: regulation does not constrain only the finished artwork. It must already guide material selection, contractual evidence, production timing and release of new batches.

PFAS becomes an immediate approval gate for food-contact packaging

From 12 August 2026, Article 5(5) PPWR prohibits placing food-contact packaging on the market where it contains PFAS at or above any of three limits: 25 µg/kg for any PFAS measured by targeted analysis, excluding polymeric PFAS; 250 µg/kg for the sum of PFAS measured by targeted analysis, where applicable following degradation of precursor compounds and again excluding polymeric PFAS; or 50 mg/kg for PFAS including polymeric PFAS. This applies insofar as placing packaging on the market at such concentrations is not already prohibited under another Union legal act. [1]

Total fluorine content must not be equated with PFAS content. Where total fluorine exceeds 50 mg/kg, the PPWR provides for evidence showing the proportion measured as PFAS or non-PFAS fluorine. For enforcement, Commission guidance recommends a staged analytical approach: total fluorine first; where it exceeds 50 mg/kg, differentiation between organic and inorganic fluorine; followed by further PFAS analysis. The Commission also clarifies that there is currently no EU-harmonised test method for PFAS in food-contact packaging. The guidance therefore supports application but neither changes the Regulation nor replaces product-specific assessment. [2]

Existing stock is a particularly critical issue. The PPWR provides no general depletion period for PFAS-containing packaging manufactured before the cut-off date. According to Commission guidance, packaging already placed on the market before 12 August 2026 may remain there; packaging first placed on the market after that date must comply with the limits. [2] ‘Manufactured before the cut-off date’ and ‘placed on the market before the cut-off date’ are therefore not synonymous. Placing on the market means the first making available of empty or filled packaging on the Union market. For imports, the guidance identifies release for free circulation under customs law as decisive.

For long-life foods, food supplements and private-label production, this can become a firm release gate. What matters is not only when film, cups, lids, coatings or labels were manufactured, but the circumstances in which the actual packaging or packaged product is first made available. Purchased stock, contract filling, transfer of possession, imports and planned batch dates must therefore be assessed together.

Three typical practical cases

The following simplified examples do not replace case-specific assessment. They illustrate where the PPWR’s abstract concepts directly affect purchasing, production and approval.

Case 1: the pouches are already in the warehouse, but filling takes place after the cut-off date

A manufacturer purchased printed composite pouches in July 2026. However, the food supplements are not filled until 18 August, after which the pouches are sealed. Early purchasing or the manufacturing date of the empty pouches alone does not automatically establish protection for existing stock. Under Commission guidance, food-contact sales and grouped packaging is generally placed on the market only after filling where final processing steps such as sealing may affect conformity. The specific supply and possession arrangements and the date of first making available on the Union market remain decisive. Before batch release, it must therefore be established whether the packaging used is covered by reliable PFAS evidence. [2]

Case 2: a contract manufacturer fills the product, which carries the retailer’s brand

A contract manufacturer produces gummies in a plastic container for a retailer’s own brand. The fact that it fills and seals the product does not conclusively determine the PPWR role. Where the packaged product is designed or manufactured under the retailer’s name or trade mark, the brand owner may be responsible as the PPWR ‘manufacturer’; a narrowly defined exception applies to micro-enterprises. Contracts can determine who obtains specifications or files test reports. They cannot freely reassign the statutory role or responsibility for technical documentation and the EU declaration of conformity. [1][2]

Case 3: the supplier confirms only ‘no intentionally added PFAS’

A supplier certifies that no PFAS are intentionally added to coated paper packaging. This may be important evidence, but does not establish whether the specific packaging complies with Article 5(5) limits. Unintentional inputs, processing aids, the layers and components covered, and the analytical basis may remain unresolved. A risk-based approval process would therefore first clarify the specification, material structure, supply chain and scope of the statement, then determine whether testing is needed and which analyses are appropriate. [1][2]

A general supplier declaration is not yet proof of conformity

The PPWR supplements existing food-contact material law; it does not replace it. Packaging must still comply, in particular, with Framework Regulation (EC) No 1935/2004, good manufacturing practice under Regulation (EC) No 2023/2006 and relevant material-specific provisions. Regulation (EU) No 10/2011 generally applies to plastics. Restrictions on bisphenol A and other bisphenols under Regulation (EU) 2024/3190 also apply in parallel, with their own transitional provisions. [3][4][5]

This creates two connected but non-identical evidence requirements. A plastics declaration of compliance under food-contact law does not automatically demonstrate PPWR compliance. Conversely, a blanket ‘PFAS-free’ statement does not identify the substance definition used, the material layers and components covered, whether unintentional inputs are included, or whether the statement rests on formulation knowledge, supply-chain declarations or analysis.

Established legal position: suppliers must provide the manufacturer with the information and documents needed to demonstrate PPWR conformity. The manufacturer nevertheless remains responsible for packaging conformity and the EU declaration of conformity. [1]

Company statement: packaging supplier claims such as ‘PPWR-ready’, ‘no intentionally added PFAS’ or ‘below the limit of quantification’ are initially company statements. Their value depends on definition, test scope, method, sampling, date and an unambiguous link to the packaging specification supplied.

Food Essentials’ assessment: risk-based evidence need not apply the most extensive analytical programme indiscriminately to every package. It must, however, explain transparently why material composition, manufacturing knowledge, supply-chain evidence and, where applicable, analysis are sufficient for the specific format. The higher the technical risk—for example with grease- or water-resistant papers, barrier coatings, mould-release agents, printing inks, adhesives or fluoropolymer-containing processing aids—the less reliable an unspecified blanket declaration becomes.

Brand owners and fillers can themselves be ‘manufacturers’

The German PPWR distinguishes ‘Erzeuger’ from ‘Hersteller’, corresponding to ‘manufacturer’ and ‘producer’ in the English text. These are different roles. The manufacturer bears product-law responsibility for compliance with the sustainability and labelling requirements of Articles 5–12. The producer, by contrast, is the person identified in each Member State for extended producer responsibility, registration, reporting and financing of waste management. [1][2]

Under Commission guidance, the manufacturer of sales and grouped packaging is generally the economic operator carrying out final processing steps, such as filling and sealing, and placing the packaged product on the market. Where a company has packaging or a packaged product designed or manufactured under its own name or trade mark, the brand owner is generally considered the manufacturer. A narrowly defined exception applies to micro-enterprises where the packaging supplier is established in the same Member State. For private label, co-branding and contract manufacturing, the role must therefore not be inferred solely from physical production or a contract heading. [2]

The manufacturer must conduct, or commission, the conformity assessment procedure, prepare the technical documentation under Annex VII and, following a successful assessment, issue the EU declaration of conformity under Article 39 and Annex VIII. Documentation must generally be retained for five years after market placement for single-use packaging and ten years for reusable packaging. Importers and distributors have their own verification, information and response obligations; where they have reasonable doubts, they must not continue to place packaging on the market or make it available. [1]

Particularly in a private-label supply chain, it should therefore be expressly recorded who holds each PPWR role, who supplies material and component data, who commissions necessary tests, who signs the declaration and how changes to material, plant, formulation or process are reported. A private-law contract cannot freely reassign a statutory role.

Technical documentation must describe the actual packaging

The EU declaration of conformity is the outcome of assessment, not a substitute for it. Annex VII requires technical documentation enabling the competent authority to assess conformity. This includes a description of the packaging and its intended use, design and material information, applied standards or specifications, and the tests, calculations, studies or other evidence used. The Annex VIII declaration must identify the packaging unambiguously and state the applicable legislation. [1]

For a food product, this PPWR evidence should be linked to the product and packaging dossier. A practical file assigns each approved packaging version at least its material structure and individual components, supplier and manufacturing plant, relevant specifications, food-contact and PFAS evidence, test reports, approval date, and the products and production batches covered. Lids, seals, closures, labels, printing inks and adhesives must not disappear behind the term ‘cup’ or ‘bottle’.

This linkage also underpins change management. If a supplier changes a coating, adhesive, masterbatch, manufacturing site or test method, it must be clear which existing assessment is affected. A changed filling temperature, shelf life or food matrix can also trigger reassessment of food-contact compliance even where the packaging material code remains unchanged.

What should be resolved before the first batch after the cut-off date

Companies now need reliable approval of the packaging actually affected, rather than abstract PPWR documentation covering every target year. Six points should be resolved:

• The packaging portfolio is classified into sales, grouped, transport and service packaging, and by food-contact status; all relevant components and packaging versions are identified.
• For each format, the manufacturer responsible under product law, the PPWR producer in each Member State, importer, distributor and operational contacts are identified.
• The date of placing on the market and treatment of existing stock are documented; PFAS assessment does not rely on the manufacturing date alone.
• Supplier statements on materials, PFAS and other substances have been checked for definition, scope, method, currency and specification reference; missing evidence is recorded as an approval gate.
• Technical documentation and the EU declaration of conformity reflect only requirements already applicable, while including a roadmap for later labelling, recycled-content, minimisation and reuse requirements.
• Product approval and change management ensure that a batch is released only where its actual packaging version is covered by the documented evidence.

The PPWR applies directly in Germany and Austria; national provisions remain relevant particularly for responsibilities, enforcement and extended producer responsibility systems. The Austrian federal ministry expressly refers to the transitional phase pending national accompanying legislation; Germany’s Bavarian Environment Agency explains the relationship with implementing legislation. [6] Switzerland is outside the PPWR’s territorial scope. Nevertheless, Swiss companies supplying the EU must clarify roles and the date of placing on the market in their EU supply chain. A Swiss marketability or self-monitoring assessment does not replace EU packaging clearance.

Conclusion

The PPWR makes packaging a compliance subject requiring its own documentation. The immediate challenge for food businesses is not to anticipate every target through to 2040. Rather, by 12 August 2026, they must correctly identify immediately applicable requirements, clarify responsible roles and link evidence to the packaging and batch actually used.

The PFAS rules illustrate this most clearly. Neither an early manufacturing date nor a general supplier declaration removes the risk. Only the combination of a legally correct determination of market placement, sound material knowledge, risk-based assessment, technical documentation and controlled batch release makes the decision traceable.

Food Essentials helps companies interpret regulatory requirements, review supplier and packaging documents, and build PPWR and product documentation suitable for approval. This includes linking regulatory requirements to packaging specifications, manufacturing processes and a transparent approval approach.

If you have outstanding packaging evidence, unclear private-label roles or stock not yet assigned a status before 12 August, Food Essentials can use a focused Packaging Readiness Check to prioritise critical formats and structure the approval gates for upcoming production batches.

Wishing you a pleasant Sunday, Andreas Gebhart

Latest update

• 21 August 2026: Read the current article ‘PPWR Needs a Pause’ by Hanno Bender, Head of Legal and Political Affairs at Lebensmittel Zeitung.

References

All sources last checked and accessed on 1 August 2026.

1. PPWR – Verordnung (EU) 2025/40, konsolidiert, insbesondere Art. 3, 5, 6, 15–21, 38, 39 und 71 sowie Anhänge VII und VIII.
2. Kommissionsleitlinien zur PPWR, C/2026/3084, insbesondere Rollen, PFAS, Bestände und Recyclingfähigkeit.
3. Lebensmittelkontaktmaterialien – Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1935/2004, konsolidiert.
4. GMP – Verordnung (EG) Nr. 2023/2006; Kunststoff-VO (EU) Nr. 10/2011, jeweils konsolidiert.
5. Bisphenol-VO (EU) 2024/3190, konsolidiert; Übergangshinweise C/2025/6721.
6. BMLUK: PPWR-Merkblatt Österreich; LfU Bayern: PPWR-Überblick.

Note: This article provides professional information and does not constitute legal advice. The specific product, target market and legislation in force at the time of the decision are decisive. Image: AI-generated.