UK regulators have moved to ease enforcement pressure in the packaging recycling evidence market after tighter accreditation and export rules reduced the supply of Packaging Waste Recycling Notes (PRNs) and Packaging Waste Export Recycling Notes (PERNs).
Regulatory Position Statements issued on 9 October allow regulators not to normally pursue enforcement action against producers and compliance schemes that fall short of certain 2026 recycling obligations, provided they meet reduced thresholds for three materials.
Reduced thresholds for plastic, steel and wood
Under the position, businesses must meet at least 83% of the statutory plastic recycling obligation, 92% for steel and 90% for wood. Full compliance is still required for all other packaging materials.
The Environment Agency's Regulatory Position Statement 383 states that the statutory obligations themselves have not been changed. Instead, businesses that satisfy the RPS conditions will not normally face enforcement action for missing the original targets in the three affected materials.
The regulator also said Certificates of Compliance will continue to record non-compliance where statutory recycling obligations have not been met, even if a business has met the reduced RPS thresholds. Companies relying on the position must keep supporting records for five years, meet their full obligations for other packaging materials and continue to comply with all other applicable requirements. The intervention applies only to the 2026 compliance year.
Why evidence supply tightened
The Foodservice Packaging Association said the intervention followed changes introduced during 2026 to strengthen the integrity of the PRN/PERN system. These included stricter accreditation requirements for reprocessors and exporters, a new fit-and-proper-person test, more enforcement activity and revised export rules under which PERNs can be issued only after packaging waste reaches an overseas reprocessing facility.
Defra said those measures had improved transparency and helped address fraud and error. However, they also reduced the number of accredited reprocessors and exporters and increased the time needed to issue PERNs, constraining the supply of recycling evidence.
2027 review and DRS impact
Defra described the circumstances as exceptional and committed to reviewing recycling targets for 2027. It said the review would take account of factors including the introduction of a deposit return scheme (DRS) and the delayed mandatory kerbside collection of plastic film in England.
The FPA said the DRS effect would be particularly significant. Under current arrangements, in-scope PET plastic bottles and aluminium and steel drinks cans collected through the DRS will no longer generate PRNs or PERNs. That means relatively high-quality material will be removed from the existing recycling evidence market even though it will continue to be recycled through the new scheme. Unless targets and obligations reflect the change, producers could face further difficulty securing enough evidence to demonstrate compliance.
The delayed introduction of mandatory kerbside collections for plastic film in England, now scheduled for April 2030, adds another consideration when assessing how much material is likely to be available for recycling and PRN generation.
Longer-term reform of the PRN/PERN system also remains under consideration following consultation on measures intended to improve transparency, reduce fraud and create a more level playing field between UK reprocessors and exporters.
FPA warns of mismatch
The FPA said regulators having to intervene to prevent enforcement action raised “serious questions” about how the system is managed and how future targets are set.
It said it fully supported efforts to eliminate fraud and error, and that stronger accreditation, more rigorous verification and greater transparency were essential to confidence in the system. But if improving integrity exposed a substantial shortfall in evidence availability, that should prompt a fundamental examination of the assumptions behind recycling targets, it added.
The association also drew a distinction between relief from enforcement and resolving the underlying compliance problem. Statutory obligations remain unchanged, and producers meeting the reduced thresholds may still have non-compliance recorded against them. Businesses need clarity on what this means in practice, including wider implications, it said.
According to the FPA, the review of 2027 targets must go beyond adjusting percentages. It should establish whether targets are supported by demonstrable domestic and overseas recycling capacity and reliable evidence supply, account for the DRS introduction in October 2027 and reflect the delayed plastic film kerbside collections. These assessments should be transparent and open to industry scrutiny, it said.
The FPA added that producers already face financial and administrative pressure from the wider packaging reform programme and should not also be exposed to unpredictable compliance costs caused by a mismatch between regulatory obligations and the evidence market. It said the test of the government’s response would be whether it delivers a more stable, credible and achievable system for 2027 and beyond.