Navigating the new wave of packaging regulations

The landscape of packaging regulations is shifting rapidly, and food and dietary supplement companies need to prepare. States across the U.S. are adopting Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) laws that shift the burden of packaging waste management from municipalities and taxpayers to the producers themselves.

This evolving regulatory landscape poses both challenges and strategic opportunities. Complex packaging formats, inconsistent state-level rules, and eco-modulated fee structures make compliance complicated. Yet, for brands that engage early, EPR offers the chance to improve supply chain transparency, cut long-term costs, foster sustainable innovation, and build stronger consumer loyalty.

What Is Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)?

EPR laws require companies to take financial and operational responsibility for the packaging they place on the market. That means:

• Registering with a designated Producer Responsibility Organization (PRO)
• Collecting and reporting detailed packaging data
• Paying tiered fees based on the material type, weight, and recyclability
• And in many cases, redesigning packaging to meet strict sustainability criteria

The goal? To reduce landfill waste and reward sustainable design.

Though EPR may seem like a new regulatory wave, its roots trace back decades to successful take-back programs for hard-to-manage products like batteries and tires. These early initiatives laid the groundwork for holding producers accountable for end-of-life product management. Today, that principle is being urgently applied to consumer packaging, as modern challenges—including pandemic-driven surges in residential waste, China’s National Sword policy restricting recyclables, and shrinking municipal budgets—have exposed the gaps in waste management systems and accelerated momentum toward EPR.

States like Oregon, California, Colorado, Maine, and Minnesota have already passed EPR laws, while others—including New York, Illinois, and Washington—are considering similar measures. Though the core concept is consistent (i.e., producers pay), implementation details vary widely.

Why This Matters for Food and Dietary Supplement Brands

From protein powders in plastic tubs to botanicals in glass jars and supplements in blister packs or flexible pouches, food and dietary supplement packaging spans a wide spectrum. Many of these formats involve mixed materials, small components like foil seals or plastic scoops, and non-recyclable elements that make waste recovery difficult.

EPR programs are designed to push producers toward better design decisions. Under these laws, brands must:

• Report packaging data down to the component level (jars, lids, labels, seals)
• Pay fees based on the environmental impact of their packaging, and
• Redesign packaging to meet recyclability or compostability mandates in certain states

Who Is the “Producer” Under EPR?

In the context of EPR, the “producer” may be the brand owner, the manufacturer, or even the distributor. States use a tiered framework to define responsibility. Generally, the hierarchy is as follows, but it’s important to clarify with each state’s laws:

It’s essential for food and dietary supplement companies to identify where they fall in this hierarchy for every state where they sell products.

What Food and Dietary Supplement Brands Should Do Now

To stay ahead of EPR compliance deadlines—and avoid costly surprises— brands should take the following steps:

1. Confirm Producer Status: Review your supply chain and distribution model to determine who the obligated party is under each state’s law.
2. Check for Exemptions: Assess whether your company qualifies for exemption based on revenue or packaging volume thresholds. Note: some states still require registration or annual declarations.
3. Register with a PRO: Sign up with the designated Producer Responsibility Organization (e.g., Circular Action Alliance) in each applicable state.
4. Map Your Packaging: Identify all packaging elements per SKU—including jars, labels, scoops, sachets, and outer cartons. Record material types and weights.
5. Collaborate with Suppliers: Ask contract manufacturers and packaging vendors for detailed specs and recyclability data. This is often the hardest part, so its recommended brands start early.
6. Redesign for Sustainability: Switch to mono-materials (made from a single type), reduce weight, eliminate small non-recyclable parts, and increase recycled content where feasible.
7. Estimate and Budget for Fees: Use current sales data to model likely EPR costs under each state’s program. Design updates now can help offset fees later.

The Cost of Non-Compliance

Failure to comply with EPR laws can result in:

• Fines of up to $50,000/ day (California)

• Loss of market access in key states

• Enforcement actions or brand exposure

• Potential liability under consumer protection or greenwashing laws if packaging claims (e.g., ‘recyclable’) are found to be misleading or unsubstantiated.

For food and dietary supplement companies, EPR isn’t a passing trend—it’s a regulatory and business reality. It marks a fundamental shift in how products are designed, packaged, and sold. The sooner nutraceutical companies adapt, the better positioned they’ll be to manage costs, meet regulations, and stand out in a crowded market.

About the Columnists

Ashish R. Talati is one of the industry’s foremost experts on FDA regulatory matters. He has gained an exceptional reputation for his successful results at the cutting edge of FDA and regulatory law, where he has responded nimbly to changes in the regulatory climate and the marketplace, guiding clients through some of our industries’ most complex issues. If you have any questions about the nuances of these rules with regard to your product, contact Talati Law Firm PLLC at ashish@talati-law.com.

Niyati Patel is an associate at Talati Law Firm and is licensed to practice in California, with a focus on FDA regulatory compliance and advertising law. She assists clients in navigating complex regulatory requirements from agencies such as the FDA, FTC, and USDA, while also addressing the unique nuances of California’s regulatory landscape.