EPR packaging laws are spreading across the United States, and if your brand sells into states like New Jersey, New York, or Massachusetts, the regulatory landscape you plan around today could look very different within a year or two. Here is what you need to know about the next wave of states considering extended producer responsibility for packaging, where each bill stands, and how to prepare before deadlines arrive.
As of mid-2026, seven states have enacted packaging EPR programs, while New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts, Illinois, Rhode Island, Hawaii, and North Carolina are the most closely watched pending states.
New Jersey currently shows the strongest active momentum, with its Packaging and Paper Product Stewardship Act re-filed in January 2026 and advancing through committee.
New York's ambitious Packaging Reduction and Recycling Infrastructure Act is stalled for the 2026 session, but is very likely to resurface, given that it passed the Senate twice.
Several states, especially Rhode Island and Hawaii, are conducting needs assessments to study recycling systems before finalizing EPR programs.
Brands in pending states should start preparing now. Paper Tube Co.'sEPR Packaging Compliance Checklist offers a practical first step.
Extended producer responsibility, often shortened to EPR, refers to laws that make companies financially and operationally responsible for managing their packaging at the end of life. Instead of leaving the cost of collection, recycling, and disposal to local governments and taxpayers, EPR laws shift waste management responsibility to producers. In 2018, the U.S. generated 82.2 million tons of packaging waste, a figure that underscored the strain on municipal systems and helped fuel legislative momentum.
Under most EPR laws, a "producer" typically means a brand owner, manufacturer, importer, or sometimes the first distributor who places a packaged product on the market. Some small businesses may be exempt depending on revenue or tonnage thresholds, so producer status varies.
According to theNational Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL), EPR laws are designed to reduce packaging waste, increase recycling rates, and incentivize more sustainable packaging design, especially for single-use packaging and paper products. Terms like "packaging EPR laws," "state EPR laws," and "state EPR programs" all describe this same basic concept, though each program can differ significantly in scope, covered materials, fee structures, and timelines.
EPR legislation impacts packaging design and procurement strategies for businesses. For brands already thinking about sustainability, these trends are pushing toward recyclable, compostable, and fiber-based formats, such as FSC-certified paper tubes, rigid boxes, and pouches.
As of mid-2026, seven states have enacted EPR programs for packaging: California, Colorado, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Oregon, and Washington. Each operates under its own regulations, covered products, and timelines. Oregon began collecting fees from producers on July 1, 2025. Colorado's first producer registration deadline was October 1, 2024, with first fee invoices due January 1, 2026.
There is still no national standard for U.S. packaging extended producer responsibility EPR laws, so compliance is determined on a state-by-state basis. This creates a patchwork that complicates planning for any brand owner selling across state lines into multiple states. Companies that ship into several states must track, register, report data, and pay fees separately under each applicable state EPR program.
Nearly half of U.S. states have at least considered some form of packaging EPR or related waste-reduction legislation, even if many bills have not advanced. The focus from here is on the next likely states to adopt packaging EPR laws, where their bills stand, and what brands should do right now.
New Jersey is the most advanced pending state for EPR legislation in 2026, based on recent committee activity and law-firm tracking. PerProskauer Rose, the state's Packaging and Paper Product Stewardship Act (S673 / A3744) advanced through the Senate Environment and Energy Committee in February 2025 and was re-filed in both chambers on January 13, 2026.
The bill covers packaging and paper products broadly and is expected to include:
Requirements for producers to develop stewardship plans or join a producer responsibility organization pro
Eco-modulated fees that reward easily recyclable packaging materials
Targets for reducing plastic packaging over a ten-year horizon
Municipal reimbursement mechanisms for collection and processing costs
Penalties for noncompliance and oversight by New Jersey's DEP
Details may change as the bill is negotiated, but the direction is clear. Brands selling into New Jersey should map their potential producer status, catalog all packaging by material type, and evaluate transitions toward recyclable or fiber-based formats. Custom paper tubes and FSC-certified cartons are examples of packaging that tend to fare well under eco-modulated fee structures.
New York's Packaging Reduction and Recycling Infrastructure Act (S1464 / A1749A) is considered one of the most consequential U.S. packaging EPR proposals due to its ambitious scope. According toEY's 2026 analysis, the bill includes packaging reduction targets, post-consumer recycled content requirements, recyclability criteria, and restrictions on certain materials, echoing elements of California's SB 54 but going further on source reduction.
S1464 passed the New York Senate in both 2024 and 2025. However, EY reports that the bill failed to advance in the Assembly before the 2026 legislative session adjourned, leaving it stalled for 2026 despite strong environmental backing. Business opposition, particularly around cost impacts and design mandates, has been the primary barrier.
New York should not be described as having an active EPR bill for 2026, but it remains highly influential. Observers widely expect some version to be reintroduced in a future session. Because New York is such a large market, many multi-state companies are already redesigning packaging to meet likely requirements, making low-impact formats like custom paper tubes a strategic hedge.
While New Jersey and New York draw the most attention, several other states are steadily laying the groundwork for future packaging EPR legislation through studies and commission work. Several states are considering or drafting new extended producer responsibility legislation.
Massachusetts: Two bills (S.571 and H.926) remain pending in Ways and Means committees. Per Proskauer Rose, a state EPR Commission issued a final report on January 15, 2026, recommending further study rather than endorsing a specific bill. Movement is likely, but not immediate.
Illinois: Policymakers have shown interest in packaging EPR concepts, including producer-funded recycling improvements. A recycling needs assessment advisory process is underway, and HB 4064 was introduced in May 2025, though it remains in early stages.
Rhode Island: Broad EPR bills introduced in 2025 were narrowed. The amended H 6207, signed into law on June 30, 2025, directs a needs assessment due December 1, 2026, making Rhode Island a "study now, legislate later" state.
Hawaii: HB 750, signed May 27, 2025, directs the Department of Health to conduct a statewide needs assessment for a potential packaging EPR program, with the report due December 31, 2027. The state's focus on marine litter and public health makes it a logical future candidate.
North Carolina: H 882, filed in April 2025, proposes a packaging producer responsibility act framework together with toxic restrictions and is pending in the House Rules Committee, per Proskauer Rose. This illustrates that EPR interest extends beyond traditionally coastal states. Even New Hampshire has seen early discussion of related waste-reduction concepts.
A needs assessment in the EPR context is a formal study of a state's current recycling and waste management systems for covered materials, including performance gaps, cost drivers, and infrastructure capacity.
Rhode Island's H 6207 is the clearest example: the law requires a comprehensive assessment, due December 1, 2026, to inform whether and how the state should adopt a packaging EPR program. Other states, such as Hawaii and Massachusetts, are engaged in similar data-gathering exercises through commissions and task forces.
These assessments matter to brands because they typically examine which materials are most costly or difficult to recycle. Findings often translate directly into higher EPR fees for hard-to-recycle formats versus lower fees or incentives for easily recyclable, fiber-based packaging. Producers can participate constructively by providing accurate packaging data, highlighting successes with recyclable paper packaging, and advocating for eco-modulation that rewards truly circular designs. Eco-modulated fees incentivize producers to reduce the use of hard-to-recycle packaging.
Unlike enacted EPR programs with fixed compliance key dates, pending bills do not yet impose fee payments or reporting obligations. But they do have important legislative milestones that producers should track.
|
State |
Milestone |
Key Dates |
|
New Jersey |
S673/A3744 re-filed; committee hearings expected |
Late 2026–2027 sessions |
|
Rhode Island |
Needs assessment due |
December 1, 2026 |
|
Massachusetts |
S.571/H.926 in Ways & Means; commission report issued |
January 15, 2026 (report) |
|
Hawaii |
Needs assessment due |
December 31, 2027 |
|
Illinois |
Advisory process findings due |
December 1, 2026 |
For context on enacted program implementation timelines: producers must report supply data by July 31, 2025, in Colorado. Minnesota's PRO Stewardship Plan is due in 2028, and producers in Minnesota must cover 50% of program costs by 2029. California's producer participation must be approved by January 1, 2027, via an approved plan or approved individual plan through a designated pro or approved pro.
Many state legislatures operate on two-year cycles. If a packaging EPR bill fails in one year, as with New York's repeated Assembly roadblocks, it may be carried over or reintroduced in the next biennium. Building an internal EPR calendar that tracks both enacted program key deadlines and legislative watchpoints in pending states is essential for any brand owner selling across multiple states.
The spread of state programs is influenced not just by environmental quality goals and plastic pollution prevention efforts, but also by litigation risk, business pushback, and political dynamics.
Even enacted EPR programs can face legal challenges. As we explored in our analysis ofwho the Oregon EPR injunction actually affects, the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality's program is under a preliminary injunction, raising questions about fee structures, authority delegated to a stewardship organization, and program implementation timelines. Producers face penalties up to $50,000 per day for noncompliance in some states, including California.
Strong industry opposition contributed to New York's Assembly resistance to S1464, as noted by EY. Debates over program costs, mandates on food service ware and single-use formats, and wholesaler distributors' obligations can delay otherwise popular proposals. Some states choose incremental steps like needs assessments, pilot programs, or narrower plastic bans before committing to full packaging EPR. The statewide recycling act approach in some states reflects this cautious trajectory.
Despite these headwinds, the overall direction remains toward more, not fewer, state EPR programs. As early-adopter states begin implementation and fund visible recycling upgrades, the case for broader adoption strengthens. The recycling modernization act concept continues gaining traction across legislatures as a way to increase recycling rates using producer funding.
Companies in New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts, Illinois, Rhode Island, Hawaii, North Carolina, and other watch-list states do not need to wait for final laws. Extended producer responsibility applies state by state in the United States, and the smartest brands are already building readiness.
Start with a packaging inventory. Data on packaging weight, material type, and composition is required for compliance under virtually every enacted and proposed EPR program. List all packaging formats, materials, weights, and volumes by state. These data points form the backbone of most reporting requirements once laws pass. Producers must register for packaging EPR programs and report packaging data, so having this information organized saves significant time. A brief overview of your packaging portfolio can reveal quick wins.
Shift packaging portfolios toward materials that tend to fare better under EPR fee structures. Recyclable paper, FSC-certified board, and compostable substrates generally attract lower fees than mixed or hard-to-recycle plastics. Cross-functional alignment is critical: legal, sustainability, procurement, and marketing teams should work together to set packaging reduction targets, evaluate plastic-to-paper transitions, and plan for eco-modulated fee scenarios to reduce waste.
For a step-by-step guide, use Paper Tube Co.'sEPR Packaging Compliance Checklist to build an internal readiness plan and begin implementation of compliant, customer-friendly packaging.
Paper Tube Co. is a sustainable packaging partner for brands that want to get ahead of permanent regulations rather than scramble once legislation passes. We design and manufacture eco-friendly packaging, including custom paper tubes in virtually any size or finish, rigid and folding boxes, paper pouches, envelopes, and select tin and glass options, all optimized to reduce plastic use.
Our structural engineering and R&D services help brands meet potential EPR-driven requirements, such as source reduction, recyclability criteria, and increased recycled fiber content, without sacrificing shelf impact or the unboxing experience. We use biodegradable and compostable materials, FSC-certified papers, and vegetable-based inks, aligning your packaging choices with extended producer responsibility incentives that reward low-impact materials. This approach also supports statewide recycling goals and helps brands begin implementation of future-ready designs.
If you sell into states with pending or likely EPR packaging legislation, reach out to Paper Tube Co. to prototype EPR-ready packaging designs you can roll out nationally as state programs come online. The national association of sustainability-focused brands is growing, and getting ahead of the curve matters.
Pending or stalled bills, such as New York's S1464/A1749A or New Jersey's S673/A3744, do not yet impose legal obligations. However, once enacted, they often include tight producer registration and reporting timelines. If you sell packaged products into a state considering packaging EPR and exceed common thresholds for revenue or tonnage, you are likely to be covered. The safest approach is to prepare in advance so you can begin implementation quickly when permanent regulations take effect.
Yes. In most state EPR frameworks, companies that place covered products on the market via e-commerce are treated the same as those selling through physical retail, as long as they meet the definition of producer. Direct-to-consumer brands should map online sales by state and track packaging tonnages, since EPR reporting is typically based on where packaging is sold or distributed, not where it is filled.
Not universally, but many early programs use eco-modulation that rewards widely recyclable, low-impact materials. In practice, this often means lower fees for certain paper and cardboard formats compared with mixed or hard-to-recycle plastics. Well-designed paper tubes, boxes, and pouches can reduce or eliminate plastic components like shrink wrap or foam, which may lower both EPR fees and overall environmental footprint.
General recycling mandates typically require municipalities or consumers to separate recyclables. Packaging EPR laws specifically make producers pay fees based on packaging volume and material, and they help manage the end of life of their packaging through a producer responsibility program. EPR programs often include a producer responsibility organization, eco-modulated fee payments, and detailed reporting requirements that go far beyond basic recycling rules.
Realistic lead times for custom, EPR-aligned packaging range from several weeks to several months, depending on complexity, supply chains, and testing needs. Working now with partners like Paper Tube Co. on recyclable, fiber-based designs allows brands to move faster when new state EPR packaging laws are enacted and to roll out compliant packaging across all markets efficiently.
What is a "global PRO," and why are brands so cautious? Explore how organizations like the Circular Action Alliance are shaping cross-border EPR laws and how to adapt your packaging.
