Packaging EPR: from uncertainty to action

John Redmayne, Managing Director at ERP UK, explores how confirmed base fees and recyclability requirements will reshape packaging decisions across industries after seven years of uncertainty

John RedmayneManaging Director at ERP UK | 20 August 2025

John Redmayne ERP

After years of waiting, stalling, and second-guessing, the UK’s Extended Producer Responsibility policy for packaging (pEPR) has finally crossed a critical threshold. The government has now confirmed the 2025/6 base fees, and for the producers who’ll be footing the bill, this is the moment everything starts to get real.

Plastic will come in at £423 per tonne, aluminium at £266, paper and card at £196, among other materials. These long-awaited figures offer clarity to producers, many of whom have spent the last seven years navigating shifting timelines and uncertainty since the original Resources & Waste Strategy was announced back in 2018. The first invoices are now expected in October 2025. PackUK will collect fees from obligated producers and distribute funds to local authorities.

The situation for companies who fall into the scope of pEPR hasn’t been easy. With critical cost information only landing in August 2024, and the scheme’s launch delayed by a year, it’s no surprise that patience has worn thin in many boardrooms. But here we are: base fees in hand, and the next stage coming into focus.

The first key adaptation for most companies has therefore been to understand the scale of these new costs. Packaging compliance schemes – which support over 95 per cent of large producers – have been central in helping many thousands of businesses navigate, plan ahead and understand the finer details of the EPR changes.

Confirmation of the Recyclability Assessment Methodology (RAM) and approach to modulation of the base fees for 2026/7–2028/9 is a big part of that. From 2026, packaging rated as ‘Red’ – the least recyclable – will attract higher fees, rising to double the base rate over time. Recyclable packaging – rated as ‘Green’ will have lower fees. That gives recyclability a financial weight it has never had before, putting it on equal footing with cost, product protection and shelf appeal in packaging decisions.

Producers using non-recyclable materials will be redesigning formats and switching materials. Packaging tweaks are already appearing on supermarket shelves.

Remember though, EPR isn’t purely a packaging issue. It’s a business-wide challenge. Companies will need solid data systems to track materials accurately, new ways of assessing recyclability, and more collaboration across departments. Procurement, marketing, compliance – they’ll all need to be aligned. And closer working relationships with packaging suppliers, compliance schemes, and waste contractors will be essential.

Yes, the road to this point has been long and winding, and the system isn’t flawless. But this is a moment worth recognising. EPR represents a fundamental shift in how we handle packaging waste; away from councils and taxpayers, and onto the companies who create it. With an estimated £1.5 billion a year changing hands, it’s no small step.

This new phase is about more than just paying a bill. It’s about embracing a packaging system that’s smarter, cleaner, and better funded. The producers who take this moment seriously and see recyclability as an opportunity, rather than a burden, will be the ones who thrive in the years ahead.

Time’s up for waiting. Now it’s about doing.

More articles

resource.co article ai

User Avatar

How will the government and DMOs address the challenges of including glass in DRS while ensuring a level playing field across the UK?

User Avatar

There's no easy solution to include glass in the DRS while maintaining a level playing field. Potential approaches include a phased introduction of glass, potentially with higher deposits to reflect its logistical challenges. The government and DMOs could incentivise innovation in glass packaging design and subsidise dedicated return points for glass-handling. Exemptions for smaller businesses unable to handle glass might also be necessary. Any successful solution will likely blend several approaches. It must address the differing priorities of devolved administrations, balance environmental benefits with logistical and cost implications, and be supported by robust consumer education campaigns emphasizing the importance of glass recycling.