With the EU Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR) set to apply from 12 August 2026, the European Commission released the second edition of its PPWR Frequently Asked Questions on 1 August 2026.
The updated guidance introduces more than 30 new or substantially revised clarifications, covering manufacturer and producer responsibilities, substances of concern, legacy stock, traceability, conformity assessment, enforcement, and Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR).
While the new guidance provides useful clarification for businesses across the packaging supply chain, its publication only eleven days before the PPWR application date leaves companies with very limited time to adjust their compliance programmes.
Manufacturer vs. Producer Responsibilities
One of the most important clarifications concerns the distinction between a manufacturer and a producer under the PPWR.
In general, the manufacturer is the entity that first places packaging on the EU market and is responsible for the relevant obligations under Article 15.
Producer responsibilities, particularly those relating to EPR, are determined separately in each Member State where a packaged product is made available for the first time.
The updated FAQs provide additional examples for transport packaging, branded packaging and private-label arrangements. These clarifications should help businesses operating across multiple EU countries better determine which entity is responsible for compliance in each market.
However, some complex supply-chain structures, including certain cross-border triangulation arrangements and online-platform scenarios, remain insufficiently addressed.
Substances of Concern and Heavy Metals
A particularly significant change concerns the use of EN 13428:2004.
Earlier guidance suggested that the standard would no longer provide a presumption of conformity after 12 August 2026. The latest FAQs now state that businesses may continue using EN 13428:2004 until an updated harmonised standard becomes available.
This gives packaging manufacturers a more practical reference point when assessing substances of concern under Article 5(1).
For heavy metals, the Commission also recommends CEN Report CR 13695-1/2000 as a method for demonstrating compliance with Article 5(4).
The FAQs additionally clarify that, where EU safety legislation imposes packaging requirements incompatible with PPWR heavy-metal limits, the applicable safety legislation may take precedence. The example provided relates to refillable steel gas cylinders covered by ADR-related rules.
One important uncertainty nevertheless remains: businesses still lack a fully harmonised EU methodology for demonstrating compliance with the PFAS limits under Article 5(5).
Legacy Stock and Article 15 Compliance
The updated FAQs provide welcome clarification for packaging produced before the PPWR application date.
Packaging manufactured before 12 August 2026 but not yet placed on the market does not automatically need to be destroyed, remanufactured or relabelled.
Certain identification requirements may instead be fulfilled through accompanying documentation. Packaging already placed on the EU market before the application date may also remain on the market even if it does not comply with the new requirements.
For packaging manufactured after 12 August 2026, however, accompanying documentation may generally be used only where the packaging’s size or nature makes direct identification impractical.
The Commission also confirms that traceability does not require every individual packaging unit to have a unique identifier. Identification at type, batch or serial-number level can be sufficient.
For packaging consisting of several separable components, identification of one representative component may also satisfy the relevant requirement.
Technical Documentation and Conformity Assessment
Another important clarification concerns technical documentation.
Responsibility for preparing and maintaining the technical documentation required under Annex VII remains with the manufacturer and cannot be delegated to a third party, including an authorised representative.
This may require multinational businesses to review compliance structures where documentation responsibilities have previously been centralised elsewhere.
The FAQs also clarify that conformity assessment should generally apply to the complete packaging unit rather than each individual component. For example, a bottle, closure and label can be covered by one conformity assessment and one Declaration of Conformity identifying the relevant components.
In addition, compliance with existing food-information legislation does not automatically satisfy PPWR identification requirements. Businesses must assess compliance with the two regulatory frameworks separately.
Transit Through the EU
The Commission confirms that goods merely passing through the EU without being released for free circulation are outside the scope of the PPWR.
This clarification is particularly relevant to international manufacturers, exporters and logistics providers whose products may transit through EU territory without actually being placed on the EU market.
A More Supportive Approach to Early Enforcement
The new FAQs introduce a dedicated chapter addressing enforcement immediately after the PPWR becomes applicable.
The Commission encourages national market-surveillance authorities to take a supportive and corrective approach rather than immediately imposing sanctions.
Under this approach, businesses may first receive a warning and a reasonable opportunity to correct non-compliance before stronger measures such as withdrawal, recall or prohibition are considered.
However, this guidance is not legally binding.
Enforcement remains the responsibility of individual EU Member States, meaning that implementation and enforcement practices may vary across the EU. Companies should therefore not assume that the Commission’s recommendation provides protection against enforcement action in every Member State.
EPR and Reuse Systems
The updated guidance also provides further clarification regarding Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR).
Member States may request additional information or documentation during producer registration where such requirements are necessary and proportionate for monitoring EPR compliance.
The Commission also confirms that qualifying Deposit and Return Systems (DRS) may, under certain circumstances, register and report on behalf of participating producers.
These clarifications should help businesses better understand how national registration and reporting systems may operate alongside the PPWR’s broader harmonised framework.
What Businesses Should Take Away
The second edition of the PPWR FAQs resolves several practical uncertainties that have concerned packaging manufacturers, brand owners, importers and distributors.
Key clarifications include:
- clearer allocation of manufacturer and producer responsibilities;
- continued use of EN 13428:2004 pending an updated harmonised standard;
- practical treatment of legacy packaging stock;
- simplified traceability requirements;
- confirmation that technical documentation remains the manufacturer’s responsibility;
- exclusion of goods merely transiting through the EU;
- clarification of conformity assessment for multi-component packaging; and
- guidance encouraging a corrective approach during the initial enforcement period.
Nevertheless, significant uncertainties remain, particularly regarding PFAS testing and conformity assessment, as well as the treatment of certain composite packaging formats.
Conclusion
The latest FAQs provide much-needed practical guidance just before the PPWR begins to apply on 12 August 2026.
For businesses operating in or exporting packaging and packaged products to the EU, the update offers greater clarity on several immediate compliance questions and may simplify certain aspects of implementation.
At the same time, the timing presents a challenge. Many companies have already invested substantial resources in adapting packaging, documentation and compliance systems based on earlier interpretations.
The change in position regarding EN 13428:2004 and the clarification concerning legacy stock demonstrate how late regulatory guidance can materially affect compliance decisions that businesses have already made.
As the PPWR enters its implementation phase, companies should therefore continue reviewing both EU-level guidance and Member State requirements, particularly as enforcement practices begin to develop across different national markets.
The coming months will show whether the Commission’s call for a pragmatic and supportive enforcement approach results in consistent implementation across the European Union.