The PPWR in Practice: One EU Law, 27 Registration Realities

The Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation has applied in principle throughout the European Union since 12 August 2026. For businesses selling across borders, this marks the start of a new operational reality: registration, EPR, authorised representatives and platform checks are interconnected, while national registers, procedures and enforcement practices continue to diverge.

Executive summary:

The PPWR harmonises the legal framework. It does not provide for central EU registration. Producers generally have to register in each Member State in which they first make packaging or packaged products available. For cross-border direct sales, Article 45(3) currently generally requires an EPR authorised representative in the destination state. The EU-wide harmonised implementing act on registers remains outstanding, as do many national implementation details. The Commission has recognised the burden as a barrier to the single market and proposed suspending the representative requirement for EU-established producers. The proposal is undergoing the legislative process. Operational planning must follow current law while monitoring forthcoming changes in parallel.

12 August Marks the Start of Application; Implementation of the Systems Continues

Regulation (EU) 2025/40 entered into force on 11 February 2025 and has applied in principle since 12 August 2026. It covers packaging regardless of material or origin. Its obligations take effect in stages. Some already apply; others depend on delegated or implementing acts and take effect later. Robust planning therefore assigns each obligation to the relevant location, packaging and business role. [1]

This is particularly true of extended producer responsibility. The PPWR gives Member States an EU legal framework for registration, reporting, financing and control. The practical infrastructure – registers, competent authorities, approved producer responsibility organisations (PROs), fee models, forms, languages and enforcement processes – initially remains national. Under Article 44(14), the Commission was to establish the required register formats by 12 February 2026. At the time of this article, the harmonised implementing act remains outstanding. [1] [6]

On 6 August 2026, the Commission published a draft of harmonised registration and reporting formats for public feedback. The draft gives more detail on the planned register architecture. Formal adoption is still pending; national registers continue to operate and will gradually be adapted to the future framework. [6]

Registration Follows the Destination State

Article 44 links registration to the Member State in whose territory a producer first makes packaging or packaged products available, or unpacks packaged products without being the end user. Before first making them available, the producer may operate there only if it, or its EPR authorised representative where applicable, is registered. Registration is therefore part of market access and must be completed before the first supply. [1]

For businesses with their own webshop, determining the correct role is demanding. The relevant factors are the specific supply chain, the first act of making products available in the Member State and the company’s role under Article 3(1)(15). The location of the shop or packaging supplier alone does not provide a reliable answer. When supplying directly to consumers in another Member State, the business may itself qualify as the producer in that target market. With imports, intermediaries, fulfilment and unpacking, roles vary according to the flow of goods.

The PPWR does not provide for a general EU-wide exemption for small businesses. It establishes simplified reporting requirements for small quantities and requires PROs to treat small quantities proportionately. This does not remove the registration obligation. The microenterprise provision within the manufacturer definition is narrowly limited and does not constitute a general EPR exemption. [1] [2]

The economic criticism is well documented. A 2025 Eunomia study commissioned by Ecommerce Europe examined packaging, batteries and electrical equipment in seven Member States. Businesses reported markedly different registration, reporting and payment procedures; some respondents cited more than 4,000 working hours a year for EPR compliance. The study examined the EPR systems then in place, thereby describing the operational baseline encountered by the new Regulation. [10]

Authorised Representatives: Current Law and the Proposed Political Change

Article 45(3) requires producers falling under Article 3(1)(15)(c) and (d) to appoint an authorised representative for extended producer responsibility in every Member State where they first make packaging or packaged products available, except the Member State in which they are established. The mandate must be in writing. The precise scope and national formalities are currently implemented differently. For third-country producers, Article 45(3) additionally allows Member States to require an authorised representative. [1] [2] [6]

This explains why an Austrian or German online seller must organise several national registrations when selling into multiple EU countries. For France and Italy, the requirements applicable in each country and, where necessary, separate authorised representatives must be assessed. A business with its own establishment in the destination state is not subject to the EU requirement under Article 45(3) for that state; local EPR and registration obligations remain.

The Commission itself has described this burden as a significant obstacle to the single market. Its proposal COM(2025) 982 would suspend the application of Article 45(3) until 1 January 2035 where the producer is established in the Union. Those businesses could then continue using an authorised representative voluntarily or fulfil their EPR duties themselves. The possibility of national representative requirements for third-country producers is to remain. [8]

The proposal has not yet changed the law. Legislative procedure 2025/0395/COD remains pending on 23 August 2026. Planning on the assumption that the requirement will soon be abolished therefore relies on a political expectation. A two-track approach is appropriate: meet existing obligations while keeping transitional and amendment options open in country and contract planning. [9]

Marketplaces and Fulfilment Providers Become Access Gatekeepers

The PPWR shifts part of the practical control into sales infrastructure. Under Article 45(4), before enabling a producer to use their services, online platforms must obtain registration details and confirmation that EPR requirements are met in the consumer’s state, among other information. The platform must make its best efforts to assess the completeness and reliability of that information. If deficiencies persist, use of the service to offer the packaging or packaged products concerned must be suspended. Comparable checking and corrective mechanisms apply to fulfilment service providers. [1]

Retailers therefore face a second compliance route alongside the authority. A marketplace may require evidence, a registration number or confirmation of an authorised representative even before registers are fully harmonised. Incorrect or inconsistent country allocation may then cause a listing to be blocked before a formal administrative procedure in the destination state has concluded.

The Commission: Interpretation, Enforcement Guidance and Outstanding Secondary Rules

The Commission is responding through several instruments at once. Guidance C/2026/3702 and the second FAQ edition dated 3 August 2026 aim to promote consistent application. Both are interpretative instruments. The Regulation itself remains decisive; an amendment requires an appropriate legal act. Binding interpretation of EU law remains the prerogative of the Court of Justice of the European Union. [2] [3]

This distinction matters for enforcement. For certain formal infringements, Article 62 first requires the Member State to demand that the non-compliance be ended. If an infringement listed in Article 62(1)(a) to (f) persists, measures must follow to prohibit making the products available or to ensure their recall or withdrawal. The updated Commission FAQ sets out a clear sequence for the initial enforcement period: the authority should first identify the deviation and require correction; immediate prohibitions, withdrawals or recalls should follow where correction is not made. This indicates a restrained, implementation-focused enforcement approach. The FAQ creates neither a statutory waiver of penalties nor a general grace period. Registration duties remain; national fines depend on the relevant provisions and the specific authority decision. For registration infringements, Article 44 and the relevant national law are decisive. [1] [3]

In parallel, a joint document from several Member States dated 24 June 2026 calls for further clarification. Czechia, Bulgaria, Italy, Latvia, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia consider the interpretation provided so far insufficient to ensure legal certainty and consistent application. They refer to missing delegated and implementing acts, diverging national approaches, burdens on SMEs and the risk of fragmentation of the single market. Their requests include a consolidated timetable, faster adoption of legal acts, updated operational FAQs and structured dialogue with national market surveillance authorities. [4]

The statement that the EU is dissatisfied with its own rules is therefore too simplistic. The Commission has expressly recognised the costs to the single market and presented an amendment proposal. At the same time, it is using guidance, FAQs, register formats and enforcement coordination while legislation remains in progress. In the material reviewed, criticism of insufficient legal certainty comes principally from a Member State paper in the Council and from industry studies. Reporting should keep these levels distinct.

Germany and Austria Illustrate the Operational Range

Germany brought the VerpackDG implementing legislation into force on 12 August 2026. Foreign businesses without a German establishment that sell empty packaging or packaged products directly to end users in Germany must appoint an authorised representative and enter that representative’s details in the LUCID Packaging Register. Registration itself remains a personal obligation of the foreign business; the representative undertakes the other EPR tasks. The Central Agency Packaging Register requires a written agreement in German and confirms the appointment in the register. [5]

In Austria, existing systems initially continue to apply insofar as they are compatible with the PPWR. CMS Austria notes that the Waste Management Act and the Packaging Ordinance 2014 remain relevant while accompanying amendments are outstanding. Uncertainties include the definition of importer and whether existing advance licensing arrangements can continue under the new regime. The Austrian Federal Economic Chamber therefore describes its comparison of Member States, with differing national information and representation requirements, as ongoing work. [6] [7]

These examples coexist with the PPWR’s direct applicability. National registers, the organisation of authorities, fees and EPR systems remain national responsibilities where the Regulation leaves these matters open or dependent on further legal acts.

What Businesses Should Decide Now

For each sales route, the business must be able to show which packaging is first made available in which Member State, who qualifies as the producer there and how EPR duties are fulfilled. The following decision process has proved useful:

• Complete the sales map: record the destination state, sales through the company’s own shop or a platform, direct dispatch, imports, storage and fulfilment for each product group. Only destination states actually served belong on the EPR list; an open webshop configuration alone is not sufficient.
• Determine roles for each flow of goods: the producer under Article 3(1)(15), importer, distributor, fulfilment service provider and any authorised representative must be identified by name for each relevant flow. Contracts allocate tasks; a separate legal assessment remains necessary.
• Maintain a country matrix: manage registers, PROs, authorised representatives, fee models, reporting intervals, data fields, language, additional national duties and platform evidence in a version-controlled matrix. A status of ‘not yet published’ records an unresolved position; it does not grant clearance.
• Build reliable data once: record the packaging unit, material structure, weight, components, brand, product group and sales quantities so that they can be used consistently for registers, PROs, technical documentation and platform checks. For multilayer and composite packaging, derive the material breakdown from the technical documentation.
• Establish marketplace eligibility separately: registration numbers, self-certifications, mandates and contacts must match the data in the relevant registers. Changes to destination states, brands, packaging formats or fulfilment partners belong in the same change-control process as product and packaging changes.
• Make a commercial decision: for small sales volumes in individual destination states, lawfully restricting the delivery area, consolidating through a suitable service provider or using a local import and fulfilment model may make more sense than uncontrolled expansion. This is both a market and a compliance decision.

Conclusion

The PPWR creates a uniform European rulebook. A uniform administrative market remains absent in important areas. Since 12 August 2026, registration and EPR have been integrated more closely into market access, platform activation and supply chains. For SMEs, the burden mainly arises from the combination of destination state, national register, data requirements, authorised representatives, PROs and reporting arrangements.

The Commission has recognised the problem. Its proposal to suspend the representative requirement for EU-established producers remains in the legislative process. The parallel implementing act on registers is available in draft form. Until a binding amendment is adopted, the operational interim approach is therefore to implement the current legal position in each destination state, monitor outstanding legal acts and national guidance, and design data and contractual arrangements for later harmonisation.

Food Essentials helps businesses classify their roles under the PPWR, develop EPR and registration matrices, assess platform and fulfilment requirements, and connect packaging data, contracts and market entry decisions.

Wishing you a good start to the week,
Andreas Gebhart

References

All sources checked and accessed on 23 August 2026.

1. VO (EU) 2025/40, Art. 3, 44–46 und 62.
2. Kommissionsleitlinie C/2026/3702.
3. Kommissions-FAQ zur PPWR, Ausgabe vom 3. August 2026; PwC: Einordnung des neuen Vollzugsabschnitts.
4. Rat: ST-10712-2026 REV 1.
5. ZSVR: Bevollmächtigte Vertreter in Deutschland.
6. WKO: PPWR-Länderübersicht.
7. CMS Österreich: PPWR seit 12. August 2026.
8. Kommissionsvorschlag COM(2025) 982.
9. Gesetzgebungsverfahren 2025/0395/COD.
10. Ecommerce Europe/Eunomia: EPR Administrative Burden and One-Stop Shops.

Note: This article provides technical information and does not constitute legal advice. The specific flow of goods, the company’s role, destination state and law applicable at the time of the decision are decisive. Image: AI-generated.