EPR in seven states, PFAS and the chasing-arrows rule: what a brand owner needs from a packaging supplier in 2026

1. 1Seven US states have enacted packaging EPR laws: California, Colorado, Oregon, Maryland, Minnesota, Washington and Maine. Legal sources describe 2026 as the first year several state programs impose registration and reporting deadlines at the same time.
2. 2Each state program names one responsible company for each item sold there, requires an annual report of what was supplied by material and weight, and charges a fee against it. The compliance guides sum it up: if your brand name is on the package, it is probably you.
3. 3California’s SB 54 sets a civil penalty of up to US$50,000 per day per violation, US$25,000 for qualifying small businesses, after a 30-day notice to correct. SB 343 was due to restrict the chasing-arrows symbol on packaging made from 4 October 2026 that does not meet the state’s recyclability criteria. On 14 July 2026 a federal court in California barred the state from enforcing it while the case is decided.
4. 4Oregon is described as the most active enforcer in 2026, publicly listing non-compliant producers.

• Industry sources describe choosing a packaging supplier as cross-functional, touching every part of the organization. The practice they recommend: shortlist three to five suppliers and have them all quote against the same brief, judging capacity, quality system, communication, lead time and ability to scale, not only price.

• Samples and pilots: a pilot run large enough to exercise the process, often a few hundred units for standard packaging, more for custom tooling.
• MOQ and tooling: new mold tooling has to be recovered over a minimum run, so the question is whether the supplier supports launch volume now and growth later without an unrealistic minimum.
• Lead time: domestic folding cartons in about one to four weeks. Offshore adds six to twelve weeks of ocean transit and customs, before artwork revisions and structural samples.
• Switching: a new supplier is tested in parallel with a small but real order, not by moving all production at once.

Packaging suppliers tend to sell look and unit price. The brand owner in 2026 is managing EPR deadlines in seven states, PFAS restrictions, a chasing-arrows rule that a court has put on hold but not struck down, and penalty exposure in California. Marketing that does not talk about material and weight data is talking about something else. Our reading, not a measured finding.

• Marketing operations

  A pipeline that shows which accounts came in through a compliance question and which through price.

• Brand and content

  Content on EPR, PFAS and labeling rules that a brand owner’s compliance lead can use, in English and Portuguese.

• Digital presence

  Pages for the regulatory questions brand owners are working through this year, dated so they can tell how current they are.

• Strategy

  Positioning around what the brand owner has to report, not only around what the package looks like.

The Section 232 revision names aluminum lithographic plates among the new derivative products subject to tariff, which matters for packaging print. Rates and scope are on the dated trade page.

1. O’Melveny: 2026 plastics EPR and packaging rules update
2. California Public Resources Code §42081 (SB 54 civil penalties)
3. Morgan Lewis: federal court blocks enforcement of California’s truth-in-recycling law (SB 343), July 2026
4. Faegre Drinker: packaging sustainability and compliance, including EPR
5. Certivo: US state packaging EPR laws, 2026
6. Arkay: packaging procurement
7. QinPrinting: packaging procurement guide
8. Sourcify: vetting a packaging supplier before you switch

Research reviewed 25 September 2026. The SB 343 paragraph was corrected on 1 October 2026: the 25 September review missed the court order of 14 July. The SB 54 penalty sentence was corrected on 2 October 2026 against the statute (PRC §42081). Figures marked as sourced come from the documents listed here; statements introduced as our reading are ours.