EU PPWR Packaging Non-Compliance Risks and Controls

Packaging non-compliance is becoming a significant market access risk for companies placing packaging or packaged products on the European Union market.

Under the EU Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation, known as the PPWR, businesses must manage more than packaging waste reporting. They must also address packaging composition, substances, recyclability, recycled content, labelling, digital data carriers, minimization, restricted formats, reuse, refill, technical documentation, and conformity assessment.

Regulation (EU) 2025/40 entered into force on 11 February 2025 and generally applies from 12 August 2026. Different obligations have their own application dates, transition periods, delegated acts, and implementing measures, so companies must assess each requirement separately rather than treating August 2026 as the deadline for every PPWR obligation.

The risks are not limited to administrative errors. When market surveillance authorities identify non-compliant packaging, they can require corrective measures. If the business does not act adequately or the issue continues, authorities may prohibit the packaging from being made available, withdraw it from the market, or recall it. Corrective measures may also need to cover all affected packaging made available throughout the EU.

Packaging compliance should therefore be managed as a controlled business process involving regulatory affairs, product compliance, packaging engineering, procurement, sustainability, quality, legal, logistics, sales, and data-management teams.

Packaging non-compliance occurs when packaging, its documentation, its information, or the business processes supporting it do not meet an applicable PPWR requirement.

The issue may relate to the physical packaging itself, such as:

• A packaging format that is not sufficiently recyclable
• Plastic packaging that does not meet an applicable recycled content target
• Packaging containing restricted substances above an applicable limit
• Excessive packaging or prohibited packaging formats
• Reusable packaging that does not meet the required conditions

It may also relate to evidence or administration, such as:

• No EU Declaration of Conformity
• An incorrectly prepared declaration
• Missing or inaccurate technical documentation
• Incorrect manufacturer or importer information
• A QR code that does not provide the required information
• Missing producer registration or reporting data
• Unsupported packaging claims

A company can therefore face non-compliance even where the packaging appears acceptable visually. If the business cannot demonstrate conformity with reliable records, authorities, customers, marketplaces, or retailers may still question whether the packaging is compliant.

Article 62 of Regulation (EU) 2025/40 identifies specific cases of formal non-compliance. When a Member State becomes aware of one of these situations, it must require the relevant economic operator to bring the non-compliance to an end. 

Formal PPWR non-compliance categories

These categories cover both evidence failures and performance failures. Some issues can be corrected by updating documentation or information. Others may require packaging redesign, material changes, operational changes, or withdrawal of affected packaging.

The PPWR distinguishes between formal non-compliance and packaging that presents a risk to the environment, human health, or another protected public interest.

A formal issue may involve a missing document, an incorrect declaration, or incomplete information. A packaging risk may involve a more substantive problem, such as packaging that fails an applicable sustainability requirement or creates an environmental or health risk.

The regulation also recognises that packaging can present a risk even where it appears to comply with Articles 5 to 12. In such circumstances, authorities may still require the economic operator to remove the risk, bring the packaging into conformity, withdraw it, or recall it.

Why the distinction matters

Companies should therefore assess both documentary compliance and the real environmental, safety, and operational performance of the packaging.

Packaging non-compliance can affect far more than the packaging team. It can disrupt product launches, sales, supplier relationships, marketplace access, logistics, finance, and customer confidence.

Potential consequences

Where market surveillance authorities find non-compliance, they can require appropriate and proportionate corrective measures. If adequate measures are not completed within the prescribed period, authorities may prohibit the packaging, withdraw it, or recall it.

The PPWR requires Member States to establish rules on penalties by 12 February 2027. These penalties must be effective, proportionate, and dissuasive. The regulation specifically requires penalties for failures relating to Articles 24 to 29 to include administrative fines, subject to the structure of the relevant national legal system.

This means the exact fine levels and enforcement processes can differ between Member States. Businesses should avoid relying on a single EU-wide penalty figure because the national penalty frameworks may not be identical.

Areas requiring country-level monitoring

• Competent and market surveillance authorities
• National penalty legislation
• Corrective-action deadlines
• Producer registers and EPR enforcement
• Local inspection practices
• Recall and withdrawal processes
• Language and documentation expectations
• Reporting and record-retention requirements

Companies selling in several EU countries need both an EU-level PPWR control framework and a process for monitoring national enforcement requirements.

The EU Declaration of Conformity is the formal statement that the packaging complies with the applicable PPWR requirements.

A declaration creates risk when it:

• Has not been prepared
• Uses an incorrect template or structure
• Identifies the wrong manufacturer
• Does not clearly identify the packaging
• Refers to incorrect legislation or standards
• Is unsigned or signed by an unauthorised person
• Does not match the technical documentation
• Has not been updated after a packaging change

The declaration should be the result of a completed conformity assessment. It should not be drafted first and then supported with evidence later.

Prevention controls

A declaration that does not match the packaging currently placed on the market can create the same practical risk as having no valid declaration.

Technical documentation is the evidence base supporting the company’s conformity decision.

Article 62 treats technical documentation as formally non-compliant when it is unavailable, incomplete, or contains errors.

A packaging technical file may need to contain:

• A general packaging description
• Intended use and packaging level
• Material and component composition
• Drawings, dimensions, and design information
• Supplier declarations
• Substance compliance evidence
• Recyclability assessment
• Recycled content calculations
• Compostability evidence where relevant
• Minimization and empty-space evidence
• Reuse or refill documentation
• Packaging artwork and QR-code records
• Standards and assessment methods
• EU Declaration of Conformity
• Change history and approvals

Common technical-file failures

The technical file should be treated as a living compliance record that changes with the packaging.

QR codes and digital data carriers may be used to provide required packaging information, including information concerning reusability or other PPWR labelling requirements.

A digital carrier creates risk when:

• The link is broken
• The content is missing
• The wrong packaging information is displayed
• The content is outdated
• The information cannot be accessed in the target market
• The QR code on old packaging points to a page updated for a different version
• Required information is hidden behind unnecessary registration or navigation
• No team is responsible for maintaining the digital content

Article 62 expressly identifies a QR code or data carrier that does not provide access to required information as formal non-compliance.

Digital carrier controls

A QR code should be managed as regulated packaging information, not as a marketing feature.

Manufacturers and importers must provide required identification and contact information. Missing, false, or incomplete details are listed as formal non-compliance under Article 62. 

Problems can arise when:

• The wrong legal entity appears on the packaging
• An old company address is used
• Importer information is missing
• Trade names and legal names are inconsistent
• Contact information is no longer active
• Packaging is reused after the responsible entity has changed
• Digital information differs from the printed packaging

Prevention controls

• Maintain a controlled master list of legal entities
• Link each packaging version to the responsible manufacturer and importer
• Require legal review before artwork approval
• Trigger label review after corporate or distributor changes
• Verify contact details at defined intervals
• Ensure declarations, technical files, packaging, and databases use consistent information

Economic operator information supports traceability. It should never be treated as a minor artwork field.

Packaging labels can create non-compliance when required information is missing, inaccurate, misleading, unreadable, or inconsistent with technical evidence.

High-risk areas include:

• Material composition and sorting labels
• Reusability labels
• Recycled content labels
• Biobased plastic information
• Compostability labels
• Deposit-return system markings
• Manufacturer or importer information
• QR codes and digital information
• Environmental claims

Common label failures

The PPWR prohibits labels, marks, symbols, or inscriptions that are likely to mislead or confuse users regarding sustainability characteristics or waste-management options where harmonised information requirements exist.

Claims such as “recyclable,” “reusable,” “compostable,” “made with recycled content,” or “sustainable packaging” can create enforcement and reputational risk when they are not supported.

Packaging claims should clearly identify:

• Which packaging unit or component the claim covers
• The methodology used
• The calculation or assessment result
• The evidence supporting the claim
• Any relevant conditions or limitations
• The packaging version to which the claim applies

High-risk claims and required evidence

A useful control rule is: every packaging claim should have a matching evidence record in the technical file.

Packaging can be non-compliant when it uses unnecessary weight or volume, contains excessive empty space, or includes design features intended mainly to make the product appear larger.

Risk areas include:

• Oversized e-commerce boxes
• Excessive void fill
• False bottoms
• Unnecessary double walls
• Decorative layers without a functional purpose
• Oversized inserts
• Unjustified grouped or transport packaging

Article 62 specifically includes non-compliance with excessive-packaging restrictions under Article 24.

Prevention controls

Minimization evidence should demonstrate that the packaging protects the product without using more material or space than necessary.

Certain packaging formats and uses are restricted under the PPWR, including specified single-use formats subject to Article 25 and Annex V.

Risk can arise when companies:

• Continue using restricted retail multipack formats
• Use affected packaging for fresh fruit and vegetables without a valid justification
• Use prohibited on-premises HORECA formats
• Continue using affected condiment portions
• Use restricted hotel miniature formats
• Misapply an exemption
• Fail to distinguish take-away from on-premises use

Article 62 identifies breaches of Article 25 packaging-format restrictions as formal non-compliance. If persistent, the relevant Member State penalty rules apply.

Prevention controls

• Build a packaging-format inventory
• Map formats to product category and use case
• Identify applicable restrictions and application dates
• Record the legal basis for any exemption
• Test alternatives before the deadline
• Control remaining stock and phase-out dates
• Update procurement specifications and supplier contracts

A recyclable packaging format may still be restricted because recyclability and format restrictions are separate requirements.

Reusable packaging is not compliant simply because it is physically capable of being used again.

Risk arises where:

• No functioning reuse system exists
• Packaging is not designed for repeated use
• Collection arrangements are missing
• Cleaning or reconditioning is inadequate
• Trips and rotations are not tracked
• Consumers do not receive required refill information
• Refill stations do not meet applicable requirements
• Reuse or refill targets are missed
• The required reusable take-away option is not provided

Article 62 expressly covers reuse-system failures, refill-information failures, non-compliant refill stations, missed reuse targets, and failure to fulfil refill or reusable-offer obligations.

Reuse and refill controls

Reuse compliance requires operational evidence, not only a packaging label.

Recyclability becomes a central market-access requirement under the PPWR.

A packaging unit may create risk when:

• It is not designed for material recycling
• Components interfere with sorting or recycling
• It fails the applicable recyclability performance threshold
• Recyclability-at-scale requirements are not met when applicable
• The company cannot provide an assessment
• The recyclability claim does not reflect the complete packaging unit

Article 62 includes failure to meet Article 6 recyclability requirements among the listed non-compliance cases.

Recyclability risk factors

• Incompatible multilayer materials
• Difficult-to-remove sleeves
• Problematic labels or adhesives
• Coatings that reduce recyclability
• Pigments that interfere with sorting
• Closures incompatible with the main material stream
• Small components lost during sorting
• Substances that reduce secondary-material quality

The PPWR’s recyclability framework is phased, with design-for-recycling requirements and performance grades becoming important from 2030 and recyclability-at-scale requirements later.

Companies should start redesign work before the legal milestone because supplier qualification and packaging-line changes can take time.

Plastic packaging may be subject to minimum recycled content requirements, depending on its category and application.

Risk arises when:

• The packaging category is classified incorrectly
• The recycled content percentage is below the applicable target
• Supplier claims are not verified
• Post-consumer recycled content cannot be demonstrated
• A calculation uses the wrong methodology
• An exemption is applied without evidence
• The label does not match the actual percentage
• Supplier or material changes are not reflected in the records

Article 62 lists failure to meet Article 7 minimum recycled content requirements as non-compliance.

Prevention controls

• Classify plastic packaging by PPWR category
• Maintain supplier declarations and verification evidence
• Link material data to packaging versions
• Review exemptions formally
• Control recycled content claims through artwork approval
• Monitor methodology and secondary legislation
• Track 2030 and 2040 readiness gaps

Recycled content should be managed as verified compliance data, not simply a sustainability target.

Packaging may contain regulated substances through materials, inks, coatings, adhesives, pigments, barriers, and recycled inputs.

The PPWR includes substance-related requirements, including limits for specified heavy metals and PFAS restrictions for food-contact packaging from the relevant application date. Compliance with applicable sustainability requirements must be supported through technical documentation.

Common substance risks

Prevention controls

• Maintain a packaging bill of materials
• Request packaging-specific supplier declarations
• Identify high-risk materials and components
• Define when testing is required
• Require supplier change notification
• Link substance evidence to exact packaging versions
• Review food-contact and other sector-specific legislation in parallel

Packaging substance compliance should never be assumed from the compliance status of the product itself.

Packaging Extended Producer Responsibility can create non-compliance when a producer:

• Is not registered in a required Member State
• Uses an incorrect legal entity
• Does not appoint a representative where required
• Reports incorrect packaging quantities
• Uses estimated rather than verified weights
• Classifies materials incorrectly
• Misses a reporting deadline
• Fails to update registration information
• Cannot provide registration numbers to a marketplace
• Does not maintain evidence of PRO participation or fee payment

Although these issues may also arise under national EPR systems, they can affect PPWR market access and online sales readiness.

EPR risk controls

EPR should be integrated with packaging master data rather than managed as a separate annual exercise.

Many packaging compliance problems originate in the supply chain.

A company may approve packaging based on one material specification, while the supplier later changes:

• Resin grade
• Recycled content percentage
• Coating
• Adhesive
• Ink formulation
• Closure
• Label material
• Production site
• Sub-supplier
• Test method

Without effective change control, the company’s technical file and declaration may no longer reflect the packaging placed on the market.

Supplier controls

• Detailed packaging specifications
• Exact material and component identification
• Supplier compliance declarations
• Required test reports and certificates
• Contractual change-notification clause
• Reapproval before material changes
• Expiry and renewal dates for evidence
• Supplier risk classification
• Periodic document review
• Incoming-material verification where appropriate

Supplier evidence should identify the exact material, packaging code, version, and production scope. Generic statements create weak audit evidence.

Version control is one of the most common causes of packaging documentation errors.

Typical failures include:

• Old artwork used after a label change
• A declaration linked to the previous packaging design
• An updated QR page used for older packaging
• Supplier evidence linked to the wrong material grade
• Different teams using different packaging weights
• Multiple spreadsheets containing conflicting information
• Obsolete stock entering the market after a transition date

Minimum version-control data

No packaging change should be released until its compliance impact has been assessed.

A packaging issue can move through several stages.

Typical escalation path

1- Issue identified
An authority, customer, retailer, marketplace, internal audit, or supplier identifies a possible problem.

2- Regulatory evaluation
The market surveillance authority assesses the packaging against the relevant PPWR requirements.

3- Corrective action required
The economic operator must take appropriate and proportionate measures within the prescribed period.

4- EU-wide remediation where necessary
The operator may need to address all affected non-compliant packaging made available throughout the Union.

5- Restriction, withdrawal, or recall
If the company does not take adequate action or the problem persists, authorities may prohibit market availability, withdraw the packaging, or recall it.

6- Cross-border communication
Where the problem is not limited to one territory, authorities may inform the Commission and other Member States.

A fast and well-documented response can reduce disruption and demonstrate that the company has effective compliance controls.

Companies should have a packaging corrective-action procedure before an incident occurs.

Step 1: Contain the issue

Identify and hold affected packaging stock, finished products, artwork files, supplier orders, and marketplace listings where necessary.

Step 2: Define the affected scope

Determine:

• Packaging code and version
• Products and SKUs
• Production batches
• Suppliers and production sites
• Countries and customers
• Quantity placed on the market
• Relevant claims, labels, or digital information

Step 3: Identify the legal requirement

Confirm which PPWR article, national rule, standard, or related legislation is affected.

Step 4: Assess severity

Determine whether the issue is:

• Administrative
• Documentary
• Labelling-related
• Performance-related
• A market access issue
• An environmental or health risk
• Potentially Union-wide

Step 5: Correct the root cause

Correct the packaging, artwork, declaration, supplier data, technical file, QR content, reporting data, or operational process.

Step 6: Communicate as required

Notify authorities, customers, marketplaces, distributors, or system operators where legally or contractually required.

Step 7: Verify effectiveness

Confirm that the corrective action applies to all affected packaging and prevents the issue from recurring.

Step 8: Update the compliance system

Update records, procedures, supplier requirements, training, risk assessments, and approval workflows.

Companies can use a simple matrix to prioritise packaging risks.

Risk classification should consider legal severity, volume, number of markets, consumer exposure, possibility of recall, and the time required to implement a correction.

Step 1: Build a complete packaging inventory

Identify sales, grouped, transport, e-commerce, service, reusable, refill, and deposit-bearing packaging.

Step 2: Map applicable obligations

Connect each packaging item to the relevant PPWR requirements, application dates, countries, and business roles.

Step 3: Create packaging technical files

Maintain descriptions, specifications, supplier records, assessments, labels, declarations, and change histories.

Step 4: Validate supplier evidence

Check that declarations and reports identify the exact packaging material and version.

Step 5: Control artwork and digital information

Review every label, claim, QR code, DRS marking, and economic operator field before release.

Step 6: Assess high-risk performance requirements

Prioritise substances, recyclability, recycled content, restricted formats, excessive packaging, reuse, and refill.

Step 7: Integrate EPR and marketplace data

Maintain country registrations, reporting records, PRO evidence, and seller self-certification files.

Step 8: Establish change management

Require compliance reassessment after supplier, material, design, market, or standard changes.

Step 9: Audit regularly

Use risk-based internal audits to identify gaps before authorities, retailers, or marketplaces do.

Step 10: Prepare an incident-response plan

Define containment, escalation, authority communication, corrective action, withdrawal, and recall responsibilities.

Packaging compliance involves connected requirements across materials, components, suppliers, markets, documentation, labels, EPR systems, and reporting obligations.

ComplyMarket’s packaging compliance management services focus on connecting packaging requirements to packaging items and products, collecting supplier evidence, maintaining documentation, controlling versions, monitoring requirements, and supporting jurisdiction-based compliance reporting.

ComplyMarket can support companies by helping them:

• Build a structured packaging inventory
• Map packaging to products, suppliers, and target markets
• Identify applicable PPWR and country-specific requirements
• Collect and manage supplier declarations
• Maintain packaging material and component data
• Store technical documentation and conformity evidence
• Track recyclability and recycled content information
• Manage packaging artwork, labels, claims, and QR records
• Maintain EPR registrations and reporting evidence
• Track DRS, reuse, refill, and restricted-format obligations
• Control packaging and supplier changes
• Create audit-ready compliance records
• Monitor gaps and corrective actions across packaging portfolios

ComplyMarket positions packaging compliance as a market-access process that requires efficient management of regulations, documentation, supplier information, and packaging evidence across jurisdictions.

For companies with large product portfolios, multiple suppliers, and several markets, the main challenge is not identifying one packaging rule. It is keeping every requirement, document, label, supplier record, and packaging version aligned over time.