Abstract
Anyone running a small e-commerce business who wants to sell in France, Germany or other European Union Member States must also consider the environmental obligations relating to packaging. Even a limited number of shipments can trigger registration requirements, financial contributions and the obligation to appoint a local representative. On 21 October 2026, the Council of the European Union adopted its negotiating position on a proposal that would suspend only the obligation to appoint a local representative for producers established in the EU who make available less than 1,000 kg of packaging per calendar year in each other Member State. But would this really amount to an exemption for small online retailers?
Why should even a small e-commerce business be concerned about packaging?
Imagine a small Italian company selling cosmetics through its own website. After establishing a solid customer base in Italy, it decides to start shipping to France and Germany as well. The products are already packaged, the labels are ready, and deliveries are entrusted to an international courier.
The order reaches its destination. But there is one detail we may have overlooked: along with the face cream, we have also introduced packaging into the French market that will eventually become waste. And the law may hold us responsible for managing that waste.
In our previous article on ultra-fast fashion and emerging environmental responsibilities, we examined how France has begun linking environmental costs to the characteristics of business models, introducing measures that also affect online sales strategies.
Packaging raises a similar issue, but one that concerns a much broader range of businesses: not only major fashion platforms, but potentially any company selling packaged products across borders.
The main legal reference is Regulation (EU) 2025/40, which generally applies from 12 August 2026 and governs packaging and packaging waste. At the heart of this legislation lies the principle of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR).
The underlying concept is straightforward: those who place packaging on the market must contribute to the costs of managing the waste it generates.
But who is responsible when the product is Italian, the customer is French, and the shipping box was purchased from another supplier?
Who pays for packaging: the manufacturer or the seller?
The company that physically manufactures packaging is not necessarily the one responsible for fulfilling the associated environmental obligations.
The European regulation distinguishes between the manufacturer, who is responsible for ensuring that packaging complies with regulatory requirements, and the producer for EPR purposes, who must contribute to waste management. Identifying the latter depends primarily on who introduces the packaging into the relevant national market and how the products are marketed.
The manufacturer may also be a company that has packaging or packaged products designed or manufactured under its own name or trademark. For micro-enterprises, under the conditions set out in Article 3(1)(13)(b), the packaging supplier established in the same Member State is instead considered the manufacturer. Under the regulation, an importer is a person who places packaging from a third country on the EU market.
Let us return to our cosmetics e-commerce example. If we sell a face cream directly to a French consumer, we may be considered responsible for EPR obligations relating to the packaging we introduce into France, even though we manufactured neither the jar nor the shipping box. If, instead, we sell the creams to a French distributor who subsequently resells them on the local market, responsibility for the product packaging may fall on that distributor. However, the packaging used for transportation must also be assessed separately.
Selling to another business does not, in itself, exclude EPR obligations: a business customer can also qualify as an end user if it does not make the product available on the market again in the form in which it received it.
But what happens if we sell through Amazon or another marketplace?
Using an online platform does not automatically transfer all environmental obligations to that platform. In particular, Article 45(4) requires the platforms concerned to obtain producers’ registration details in the consumer’s Member State and a self-certification confirming compliance with EPR obligations before allowing them to use their services.
The real issue, therefore, is not simply identifying who manufactures or sells the product, but establishing which operator is responsible for the different types of packaging and in which country.
This distinction can prove decisive when a business chooses between direct sales, local distribution and online marketplaces.
If I comply with packaging rules in Italy, can I sell throughout the rest of Europe?
One of the defining features of the European single market is that businesses can sell products in several Member States without having to establish a separate company in each country. However, this does not mean that environmental obligations are identical or administered through a single system.
Complying with Italian packaging rules does not necessarily mean that a business can sell packaged products in France or Germany without further obligations.
In Germany, for example, anyone classified as a producer for EPR purposes must register with the national LUCID system. For packaging subject to mandatory participation in a waste management scheme, the producer must also join that scheme, finance the recovery of packaging waste and report the relevant quantities.
Since 12 August 2026, foreign businesses selling directly to German end users without a relevant local establishment must also appoint an authorised representative. This representative can handle environmental compliance obligations, but registration with LUCID remains the producer’s personal responsibility.
France also imposes specific identification and financial contribution requirements. Furthermore, Article L. 541-10-9-1 of the French Environmental Code (Code de l’environnement), introduced in July 2026, requires entities not established in France and subject to Extended Producer Responsibility to appoint a local representative in the circumstances specified by law.
The provision considers this appointment requirement to have already been fulfilled for products whose EPR obligations are handled by an operator of an online platform or another electronic interface established in France, under the conditions laid down in Article L. 541-10-9.
In practical terms, the representative is a person or entity established in the destination country who, under a formal mandate, handles the foreign company’s EPR obligations.
However, appointing such a representative may involve administrative costs in addition to the environmental contributions themselves.
For a large operator selling thousands of products, these costs may be absorbed by its sales volume. For a small e-commerce business making only a limited number of shipments, they could significantly affect the economic viability of selling abroad.
And it is precisely this imbalance that the European Union is seeking to address.
Must businesses selling small quantities abroad comply with the same obligations as large companies?
On 21 October 2026, the Council of the European Union approved its negotiating mandate on a proposal to simplify EPR requirements as part of the Omnibus VIII environmental simplification package.
The proposed changes are directly relevant to small businesses selling products in other Member States.
Under Article 2 of the Council’s mandate, producers established in the European Union could benefit from a suspension of the obligation to appoint an EPR representative in another Member State if they make available less than one tonne of packaging per calendar year in that country.
Let us return to our example. The Italian cosmetics e-commerce business sells products in two countries:
- In France, it introduces 800 kg of packaging per year.
- In Germany, it introduces 1,200 kg.
If the proposal were adopted in its current form, the company could benefit from the simplification in France, but not in Germany.
The 1,000 kg threshold refers to the weight of the packaging, not the weight of the products sold or the revenue generated.
Calculating this threshold therefore requires information about the quantities and materials used for product packaging and shipping packaging in each relevant market.
The proposed suspension would be temporary, remaining in place until 1 January 2032, with the European Commission required to review its duration by 31 December 2030.
It is important to emphasise that the proposal would not eliminate EPR obligations: it would only affect the requirement to appoint a local representative.
Even below the one-tonne threshold, a company could therefore still be required to register, report the packaging placed on the market and pay the relevant environmental contributions.
The mandate also provides that, in the event of a breach of EPR obligations, the competent national authority could nevertheless require the producer to appoint a representative.
Finally, it must be remembered that the simplification is not yet in force: the Council has adopted its negotiating position, but the proposal must still be discussed with the European Parliament. The relationship between the future EU provisions and existing national requirements will also need to be clarified.
The objective, therefore, is to reduce administrative costs for businesses selling limited quantities, not to release small operators from their environmental responsibilities.
What should you check before shipping to a new EU country?
Before starting deliveries to a new market, an e-commerce business should examine three key aspects.
The first is how much packaging is actually introduced into each country. Counting orders is not enough: the business needs to know the weight and composition of product packaging, shipping boxes and other packaging materials used for deliveries.
The second is who bears environmental responsibility. The answer may differ depending on whether products are sold directly to consumers or through a local distributor. Contracts should specify who provides packaging data, handles compliance requirements and bears the related costs. However, the allocation agreed between the parties does not, by itself, change who is legally responsible.
The third is the cost of complying with the applicable rules. A market may appear attractive in terms of potential customers, but become less profitable once environmental contributions, administrative requirements and possible representation costs are taken into account.
This is not simply about avoiding penalties. Failure to comply may also prevent products from being marketed or create difficulties when using online marketplaces.
Before entering a new market, businesses should therefore identify the legally responsible operator and verify the registration, representation, reporting and financial contribution requirements applicable in the destination country.
Reviewed by: Arlo Canella
Publication date: 29 October 2026
© Canella Camaiora S.t.A. S.r.l. - All rights reserved.
Textual reproduction of the article is permitted, even for commercial purposes, within the limit of 15% of its entirety, provided that the source is clearly indicated. In the case of online reproduction, a link to the original article must be included. Unauthorised reproduction or paraphrasing without indication of source will be prosecuted.
Margherita Manca
Avvocato presso lo Studio Legale Canella Camaiora, iscritta all’Ordine degli Avvocati di Milano, si occupa di diritto industriale.