Breadcrumbs
Butzel Legal Corner
Authors: Mitchell Zajac, Shareholder and member of Automotive Industry Team, Butzel, Samantha Luckham, Summer Associate, Butzel and Sabrina Yono, Summer Associate, Butzel
Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) packaging laws have become a rapidly expanding policy approach to reduce the environmental impact of packaging and paper waste. These laws shift the responsibility for managing waste from consumers and local governments to producers, requiring them to take accountability for the impact of their waste. The overarching goals of EPR policies include reducing landfill waste, improving recycling systems, and encouraging more sustainable product design.
While EPR laws differ from state to state, they share several key similarities. Most programs focus on single-use packaging along with paper products. Producers are generally required to join or form Producer Responsibility Organizations (PROs), which oversee recycling, reporting, and fee collection. Common obligations include meeting packaging reduction targets, using more post-consumer recycled content, labeling products with environmental information, and participating in community outreach. Advisory boards are also created to advise on the development and implementation of these programs. Additionally, nearly all states with EPR laws include enforcement mechanisms, ranging from fines and penalties to potential bans on product sales for noncompliance.
Despite these shared features, EPR programs vary significantly in their structure and implementation. California, for example, has adopted one of the most aggressive approaches, setting ambitious targets for recycling and plastic reduction, imposing eco-modulated fees that increase with the use of unsustainable packaging, and mandating Producer Responsibility Organizations (PROs) to contribute $500 million annually to communities affected by plastic pollution. Additionally, California enforces one of the strictest penalty regimes in the nation, with fines reaching up to $50,000 per day for each violation. In contrast, Maine’s model focuses solely on financial reimbursement. Producers pay into a fund that supports municipal recycling but are not subject to packaging design standards or specific penalties.
Currently, eight states have enacted EPR laws: California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Oregon, and Washington. While most of these EPR laws passed are comprehensive, Hawaii’s law includes no obligations for producers but rather focuses on requiring and funding a statewide assessment to determine requirements for an EPR program. These states are setting the pace for EPR policy nationwide, each with its unique approach based on local environmental priorities, infrastructure, and stakeholder input.
Beyond these states, several others have introduced EPR legislation in recent years. Active proposals are currently under consideration in states like North Carolina, Rhode Island, Illinois, Tennessee, Connecticut, Nebraska, Massachusetts, and New Jersey. Notably, New York’s Packaging Reduction and Recycling Infrastructure Act has garnered widespread support from local governments and environmental groups, but it has stalled in the legislature for the second consecutive year. States such as Michigan, Vermont, and New Hampshire have introduced EPR bills in the past, but have not proposed any new legislation in 2025.
As EPR laws continue to evolve, understanding both their core principles and the differences in how states design and enforce them is essential. These policies are reshaping waste management nationwide with real-world consequences for product design, environmental health, and consumer costs. Producers must be ready to adapt, comply, and support effective solutions.
Butzel is proud to be a Strategic Partner of MEMA’s Center for Sustainability.
We’re THE Automotive Supplier’s Law Firm.
Butzel has always been headquartered in Detroit. Throughout our 171-year history, our attorneys have counseled the industry leaders that transformed Michigan from the home of the Motor City into the epicenter of the global automotive industry it is today. With offices located throughout Michigan, in Washington, D.C., and with global alliance offices throughout the world through our affiliation with Lex Mundi, a global association of 160 independent law firms, across the country, our clients know they can depend on the depth and breadth of our firm to navigate nearly every type of legal service an automotive supplier requires—whether pertinent to day-to-day operational matters or global issues affecting the entire industry.
What differentiates us from many of our competitors is that we’ve served a portfolio of thousands of automotive supplier clients—experience which informs our overall competitive advantage. Because we won’t represent OEMs adverse to a supplier, our attorneys are accustomed to providing no holds barred advice to our supplier clients. We’re proud that Butzel is widely recognized across the automotive industry as the supplier’s firm. Butzel, we represent the industry and the supplier community—from global tier suppliers to local operations.