Unanimously against Mandatory Reuse

21 German industry associations are pushing for changes to the EU packaging regulation (PPWR), which was approved by the EU Parliament on April 24 and is expected to come into force in summer 2026. In a written appeal to the head of the Federal Chancellery, Wolfgang Schmidt, the BDI, the BVE, the trade associations for viticulture, wineries, and the dairy industry as well as many packaging industry organizations, among others, oppose a comprehensive reusable packaging obligation for industrial and commercial packaging.

The mandatory quotas enshrined by the EU legislator in the PPWR relate to sleeves and containers that are intended for the transportation of goods between company locations within the EU member states as well as logistical exchanges between locations in different countries.

From 2030 onwards, only reusable solutions will be permitted within the EU, meaning that the one-way solutions traditionally used by almost all economic segments will be de facto completely banned in five and a half years. Such blanket bans “endanger all supply chains in Europe”, warns the economic alliance in its fire letter. The associations refer to a market analysis according to which reusable transport packaging is either not available at all due to technical hurdles or only in “neither ecologically nor economically sensible” versions.

Associations Criticize Mistakes in the Legislative Process

According to the industry organizations, the escalation of the quotas is not due to the EU's urge to regulate, but to a – literally – “mistake in the legislative process”. The changes – with the aim of making the regulations easier to understand – were made in February 2024, shortly before the end of the trilogue negotiations. When combining all reusable quotas for industrial, commercial, and horticultural packaging, not only the quotas themselves but also the scope of application were “drastically expanded” compared to the EU Commission’s proposal, according to the letter.

The industry is asking the head of the Chancellery to lobby the EU Commission and the other member states to rectify the criticized “error” in the so-called corrigendum version of the PPWR, with the aim of restoring “the necessary legal and planning certainty for all supply chains”. Specifically, the reusable packaging requirements for industrial and horticultural transport and sales packaging listed in Article 29 should not just be lowered, but completely removed from the regulation until further notice.

According to the complainants' proposal, the EU Commission should then make a new proposal, but first examine on the basis of a scientific analysis and impact assessment whether reusable alternatives “exist at all and – if so – whether they are more sustainable”.

Legal Regulations Miss the Mark in Practice

The appeal to politicians cites pallet wrappings and straps as striking examples of the negative consequences of the current Article 29. These “indispensable” plastic securing devices for almost all goods moved on pallets would have to be able to be used multiple times and “for the same purpose” as of 2030, without exception. According to the alliance of associations, this is “technologically impossible.” Therefore, both pallet protectors were being recycled.

The materials contained are also necessary to meet current recycling targets and future recyclate usage quotas. Furthermore, without such one-way solutions, transport safety in the EU would no longer be guaranteed. The development of innovative, new types of reusable wrapping is not discussed in the letter addressed to the Chancellery.

For reasons similar to those listed, the industry also believes that 100 percent reusable quotas for the use of canisters, tubs, and trays are not possible and/or not sustainable. The problem with these formats is exacerbated by the extension of the reusable quotas to “sales packaging for the transportation of products”, which was only added in the provisional trilogue compromise. The reason for this is that sales packaging, unlike packaging for transportation, has direct contact with the contents and is, therefore, more susceptible to contamination by the previous contents in terms of multiple use.

Regulations Contradict Internal Market Principles

The associations also complain that the current Article 29 contradicts core principles of the EU domestic market. For example, the increase in reusable quotas to 100 percent due in 2030 only affects the movement of goods within individual countries. Because international trade is excluded from this, companies in smaller countries with an above-average number of cross-border transports would be given an advantage over companies in larger countries.

The Alliance also criticizes the fact that EU member states can publish the packaging quantities to be reported by companies. According to the criticism, this allows conclusions to be drawn about business activities. Finally, the petitioners doubt that the EU legislator has the power to ban certain single-use packaging at all. They point out that, according to ECJ case law, such bans are only permissible to eliminate barriers to trade or distortions of competition