Extended producer responsibility (“EPR”) laws are rapidly expanding across the United States, impacting a broad range of producers who sell or distribute goods in states with such regulations. Companies such as those that produce food packaging, specific paper and cardboard products (newspapers, shipping boxes, etc.), cosmetic packaging and products, automotive product containers, or any single or short-term use consumer goods are affected. 

Producers can range from small brand owners that sell or distribute product within a particular state to international companies or distributors. Maine, Oregon, California, Colorado, and Minnesota have enacted or are developing EPR frameworks for consumer packaging. There are also several states that have introduced or are actively assessing EPR legislation.^[1] EPR laws require producers to take financial and operational responsibility for the collection, recycling, and disposal of their products and packaging after consumer use – often requiring producers to pay a fee for the product packaging they sell or distribute in a state – thereby shifting these obligations from governments to the companies that place goods in the market. The intent is to encourage product redesign, waste reduction, and more sustainable business models.

EPR statutes typically impose several core obligations on producers of designated products:

• Registration with state or national authorities
• Participation in or establishment of a producer responsibility organization (“PRO”)
• Payment of annual fees or assessments based on the quantity, weight, toxicity, or recyclability of covered products
• Submission of periodic reports on products placed on the market and recycling outcomes
• Consumer labeling or education requirements
• Third-party audits or certifications to verify compliance

Additionally, some laws also require producers to meet specific collection or recycling targets, with penalties for noncompliance.

A critical first step is determining whether a company qualifies as a “producer” under applicable state law. Producers often include manufacturers and brand owners, but can also extend to importers, exclusive distributors, or retailers selling products under their own brand names. Once producer status is established, companies must inventory their products and packaging, quantify them by material and weight, and determine if they fall within the law’s scope. Many EPR statutes exempt certain products or set thresholds based on annual tonnage or revenue, so a detailed product review is essential. Fee assessments are often lower for recyclable materials, so companies can reduce costs by using easily recyclable packaging and eliminating problematic components.

Most EPR laws offer two compliance pathways: joining a collective PRO or implementing an individual compliance plan. PROs are not-for-profit entities that manage collection and recycling for their members, offering economies of scale and reduced administrative burdens. Legislation typically requires that PROs be governed in part by producer members, which provides governance responsibilities and stakeholder interests for company representatives.

Jurisdictions usually require annual or semiannual reports detailing the tonnage of products sold, collected, and recycled, along with material-specific and geographic data. Penalties for underreporting can include fines, back fees, and reputational harm. Companies should establish robust compliance management systems, assign clear responsibilities, conduct regular internal audits to ensure data accuracy and stay abreast of developments in state laws.

Takeaway

EPR laws are expanding in both scope and stringency. Companies should proactively assess their producer status, conduct detailed product audits, engage with PROs, and develop integrated compliance and reporting systems to prepare for evolving requirements.

^{[1] A significant number of states have introduced or are actively considering EPR legislation for packaging and related materials. As of 2024–2025, these include: (i) New York; (ii) Illinois; (iii) Maryland; (iv) Massachusetts; (v) Connecticut; (vi) Rhode Island; (vii)_Tennessee; (viii) North Carolina; (iv) New Hampshire; and (x) Hawaii. The following are other states with recent or active EPR proposals: (i) Vermont; (ii) Michigan; (iii) Texas; (iv) Pennsylvania; and (v) South Carolina.}

* Special thanks to Summer Associate Carly Trebac for her contributions to this article.

_{This content is made available for educational purposes only and to give you general information and a general understanding of the law, not to provide specific legal advice. By using this content, you understand there is no attorney-client relationship between you and the publisher. The content should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state.}