BKV Englisch

Newsreader

AVU and bvse criticise draft for new packaging law

Both associations see a considerable need for correction, but for different reasons.

In its statement, the bvse Federal Association for Secondary Raw Materials and Waste Disposal warns of market imbalances and sees small and medium-sized enterprises in particular as being ‘existentially threatened’. The draft bill for the new Packaging Act Implementation Act (VerpackDG) ‘ would massively restrict entrepreneurial freedom’ and pushes small and medium-sized enterprises to the margins. The bvse's criticism focuses on the obligation planned in Section 32 that manufacturers must also join together in a central organisation for commercial packaging and guarantee free take-back. The association considers this to be an intervention in a system that has been ‘proven and functioning well’ up to now. Eric Rehbock, CEO of the bvse, speaks in this context of the risk of a ‘concentration that is problematic under antitrust law’. The planned extension to commercial packaging also harbours risks where manufacturer organisations already offer their own disposal services, according to Rehbock. Recycling streams and recycling rates could be mixed with those of packaging subject to system participation – with negative consequences for transparency and traceability, as the bvse points out. The bvse and the Allianz Verpackung und Umwelt (AVU) agree in their criticism of the ‘organisation for reduction and prevention measures’ provided for in the draft law, which is intended to finance measures to promote reusable, reuse and waste prevention structures. This had previously been rejected by other associations in the value chain, such as the BDE Federal Association of the German Waste Management, Water and Recycling Industry, the Markenverband (Brand Association) and the IK Industrievereinigung Kunststoffverpackungen (Plastics Packaging Industry Association). The proposal created additional bureaucracy and burdens manufacturers with disproportionately high costs – ‘without any discernible added value,’ according to bvse and AVU. The latter sees the planned national implementation as creating additional bureaucracy and considerable additional costs for companies, as well as the risk of new legal uncertainties, without solving the structural problems of the recycling markets. The association is against changing the definition of manufacturer in the current 2026 financial year and recommends postponing this until 1 January 2027 and continuing the previous obligations in full until the end of 2026. According to the AVU's statement on the draft, re-licensing during the year would be technically difficult to implement. In addition, there is a risk of significant financing gaps if manufacturers who are currently obligated could terminate their contracts prematurely. Further points of criticism raised by the AVU concern, for example, the lack of financial incentives for particularly recyclable packaging and for the use of recycled materials, the planned expansion of the obligations of dual systems to collect packaging waste in public spaces, and the planned financing of new tasks for the Central Agency Packaging Register (ZSVR).
 
Sources:

Go back