Professional packaging: AIMCC, CGF and INOHA are asking public authorities to postpone the implementation of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR).

Despite repeated warnings to public authorities, the three professional organizations note that uncertainties persist and call for an essential postponement to allow for the effective implementation of the reform.

The rules are still too unstable to allow businesses to organize themselves.

To date, companies lack a sufficiently stable framework to anticipate their compliance. Significant uncertainties remain, particularly regarding the identification of producers and the interpretation of applicable regulations. Certain concepts introduced in the accompanying documents, which are absent from the European reference framework, further complicate the understanding of the system.

Indeed, the inventory of packaging and the identification of manufacturers and producers can be contradictory depending on the European text used (regulation, instructions, or FAQ). For example, for a given package, it is inconceivable that applying the provisions of the European regulation would lead to considering manufacturer A for that package, while applying a guide would lead to considering, for the same package, a different manufacturer B than manufacturer A.

Under these conditions, companies are unable to reliably assess their obligations or the associated financial impacts.

A timeline that does not allow for operational implementation

Furthermore, the eco-contribution rates will not be known until the eco-organizations are approved, which is expected at the end of May. Companies will then have only a few weeks to comply.

A clearly insufficient timeframe given the work to be undertaken: inventory of packaging, collection and verification of data, adaptation of information systems, contracting with an eco-organization and mobilization of financial resources.

However, this ambition requires realistic and secure implementation conditions. In this regard, AIMCC, CGF, and INOHA call for a sufficient notice period between the publication of the tariffs and their entry into force, to allow companies to adapt under sustainable operational and economic conditions. The organizations ask the government to apply a nine-month notice period to the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) scheme for the publication of upstream and downstream tariffs, as was the case for the reform of the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) scheme for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).

For Philippe Gruat, president of the AIMCC: "It is because construction product manufacturers are very aware of their responsibilities regarding circularity that they are calling on the government to postpone the implementation of the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) scheme so that it can ultimately be truly operational. We need this period of notice and clarification to adapt to it effectively under sustainable economic conditions."

According to Stéphane Antiglio, president of the CGF: “We have repeatedly raised concerns about the implementation conditions for this Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) scheme. Currently, businesses still lack the necessary visibility to prepare within a timeframe compatible with operational requirements. Under these circumstances, implementation on July 1, 2026, would expose the entire supply chain to difficulties that are both costly and avoidable. Nevertheless, our wholesale sector reaffirms its commitment to the circular economy and the success of EPR schemes.”

Illustrative image of the article via Depositphotos.com.