First off, let me say this is relatively new and evolving rapidly - it’s not something I am personally super knowledgeable on yet but I’ve seen enough to know that it is here to stay in some form. Hence, I feel it prudent to share the bones of it with you. Much of the information I share and links referenced will be from the Circular Action Alliance (CAA) who is the leading Producer Responsibility Organization (PRO) which is currently and likely will be managing the EPR laws in all or most participating states.

Extended Producer Responsibility or “EPR” is the shifting of responsibility for recycling and end-of-life management of packaging from the end-user & taxpayers to the “producer.” Without getting into the politics or theory behind it, the goal is two-fold: 1) Hold someone accountable for the cost of recycling and 2) encourage a circular economy vs. a linear one. Even shorter - protecting the environment and planet from harmful materials like plastics.

I cannot speak in absolutes here but there are two primary questions which will help determine if you are obligated by EPR laws.

1) Is the material associated with my products covered by EPR laws?

2) Is my business the responsible producer for these materials?

Beyond that, I would add: Do you ship to or sell product into a state with EPR laws?

Oregon (fee obligations started 7/1/2025) & Colorado (fee obligations started 1/1/2026) are the first two states to implement a program and collect fees related to EPR laws. You can find more information here.

A very rough summary of materials covered under EPR laws include any and all packaging that is not part of the product itself. This includes paper, corrugated cardboard, plastics of all kinds, lumber, and more. The harder the product is to recycle, the higher the associated fee. Unfortunately, each state will be defining “eligible” producers and materials differently….and will have their own unique fees accordingly.

Oregon was the first to start collecting fees. You can view their fee schedule here.

Colorado was the second to start collecting fees. You can view their fee schedule here.

California is on track to be the third. Their fee schedule is not finalized yet but if you wanted to dig into what it might look like, you can here.

Maine is tracking to be the fourth. By May 2027, producers will need to report their 2026 “usage” and pay subsequent fees by September 2027.

Beyond that, Maryland, New York, New Jersey, Washington, Illinois, and Minnesota are also working to either pass or implement recently passed EPR laws.

Quick note - we are in “Mega May” because of a consolidated May 31’st, 2026 deadline from CAA to submit reports for six states simultaneously. Oregon & Colorado - Full Annual Supply Reports. California - Baseline and Annual Supply Report. Minnesota, Maryland, & Washington - “Simplified” Supply Reports to help states collect baseline data.

Great question! I hate to say this but go into AI and type “Are there ongoing lawsuits regarding Extended Producer Responsibility laws?” It will give you a good run-down. I’ll give you a quick summary though and while I think the lawsuits have valid arguments, it would be naive to assume EPR will disappear regardless of lawsuit outcomes.

The most high-profile lawsuit happening right now is in Oregon. It was filed July 30th, 2025 by the National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors (NAW). There is currently an injunction against enacting fines against NAW members. Other organizations have been blocked from joining the lawsuit but will presumably file their own at some point pending the outcome of this current lawsuit.

Concerns about how EPR laws affect interstate commerce, massive regulatory powers granted to a PRO, and a lack of transparency are the biggest core arguments in the lawsuit.

While the outcome of this lawsuit later in 2026 may affect EPR in Oregon and other states, I think it prudent to plan that EPR, in some shape, is here to stay.

Yes, that is….correct. Let’s be honest, these costs are going to be passed on to the end-user at the end of the day. At least to some extent. And you won’t stand out for passing them on. You won’t stand out negatively….nor positively.

Simultaneously, we’re entering a time where sustainable packaging no longer has to be synonymous with “more expensive.” That was more or less the case a few years ago but there are products available now that are both sustainable and cost effective against the alternatives…..before factoring in EPR fees. My last newsletter highlighted a couple of them.

If fees and costs associated with EPR gets passed onto your customers and/or eats into your bottom line, it would stand that having fewer fees & costs than your competition would provide a market advantage. I see three buckets that companies will fall into regarding EPR.

1) Disregard and end up getting caught off guard - resulting in lost margin and/or forced to pass sudden & massive increases to their customers.

2) Plan ahead for potential fees so neither they nor their customers get taken off guard.

3) Plan ahead and proactively address their liable materials to increase their sustainability messaging in the market AND minimize their costs compared to competition. All with the benefit of time on their side.

If you have questions, want to learn more, or maybe you want to do a deep dive on your current EPR plan - reach out! You can reply to this email, book a conversation here, or reach out to me at the info below.

(812)244-9393 & [email protected]

If you found this insightful, please feel free to share with others - they can subscribe here. You can also view past newsletters at the same link.