The current debate surrounding the PPWR definition of a manufacturer may, at first glance, appear to be a classic dispute over interpretation. In reality, however, it concerns the allocation of key responsibilities within the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) framework under European packaging law. This is precisely why, in our view, the clarification is not only reasonable but also long overdue.
VERE does not expect any fundamental changes to this legal interpretation in the short term. The position was developed at EU level and, in Germany, closely coordinated by the Central Agency Packaging Register (Zentrale Stelle Verpackungsregister – ZSVR) with the German Environment Agency and the Federal Ministry for the Environment. It is therefore not a temporary interpretation but a robust foundation for the implementation of the PPWR across the market.
Own-brand products as a source of conflict: Operational uncertainties in the implementation of the PPWR
In the retail sector in particular, this clarification continues to generate uncertainty. The main source of concern is the interpretation of the definition of ‘manufacturer’ in relation to own-brand products. Differing interpretations of the legislation and varying views on the allocation of responsibilities along the supply chain continue to fuel debate across the sector. In particular, there are conflicting positions on how PPWR obligations for own-brand products should be allocated between retailers and suppliers. VERE welcomes the clarification of responsibilities, as it strengthens legal certainty and, in particular, provides small and medium-sized suppliers with a reliable basis for fulfilling their respective obligations.
In practice, however, operational issues remain. Against the backdrop of the PPWR, different approaches are still being taken to involving suppliers in fulfilling requirements relating to declarations of conformity, technical documentation, and traceability. The confirmed legal interpretation is intended to provide a clearer allocation of these obligations. In addition, differing interpretations persist regarding specific PPWR requirements, including batch or serial numbers, PFAS and heavy metal limits, and the progressive improvement of recyclability. Although the fundamental allocation of responsibilities is now clearer, these differences continue to complicate practical implementation.
Stability over legal uncertainty
This clarification strengthens the Extended Producer Responsibility system by enhancing legal certainty and reducing ambiguity surrounding the implementation of PPWR obligations. As a result, short-term changes to the legal interpretation appear unlikely; instead, a gradual adjustment by the market can be expected. Clearly defined responsibilities benefit all companies, particularly small suppliers, by making it more difficult to shift regulatory obligations through contractual arrangements. This supports a more consistent implementation of the PPWR's objective of establishing a uniform system of product responsibility.
You can discuss the current legal interpretation and its practical implications directly with representatives of the Packaging Register at this year's VERE panel event on 9 September in Hamburg. Attendance is free for VERE members. Join the discussion: Programme | 9th VERE e.V. Panel Event.
If, based on this legal interpretation, you are considered a manufacturer within the meaning of the PPWR and require support with implementation, Magdalena Barylska from trade-e-bility will be happy to assist you.
VERE e.V. remains in close contact with the relevant stakeholders and will continue to keep its members informed of further developments via the “VERE Insider”.
Not yet a VERE member? Become a VERE member today!
