UK regulators have moved to reduce the risk of enforcement action over packaging recycling evidence after changes intended to tighten the PRN/PERN system cut the supply of accredited evidence. Regulatory Position Statements were issued on 9 October, after concerns that some producers and compliance schemes could struggle to show compliance with their 2026 recycling obligations.
Under the position statements, regulators will not normally take enforcement action for plastic, steel or wood where businesses meet at least 83%, 92% or 90% of the respective statutory recycling obligation. Full compliance remains required for all other packaging materials. The Environment Agency’s Regulatory Position Statement 383 states that the statutory obligations themselves have not been amended; rather, businesses that satisfy the conditions will not normally face enforcement for falling short of the original targets in those three materials.
How the market tightened
The Foodservice Packaging Association said the intervention followed a series of 2026 changes designed to strengthen the integrity of the PRN/PERN system. These included tighter accreditation requirements for reprocessors and exporters, a new fit-and-proper-person test, more enforcement activity and altered export rules. Under the export changes, PERNs can be issued only after packaging waste reaches the overseas reprocessing facility.
Defra said those measures had improved transparency and helped tackle fraud and error. It also acknowledged that they had reduced the number of accredited reprocessors and exporters and increased the time needed to issue PERNs, constraining the supply of recycling evidence.
The relief is limited. Certificates of Compliance will still record non-compliance with statutory recycling obligations where those obligations have not been met, even if a business has satisfied the reduced RPS thresholds. Companies relying on the position statements must keep supporting records for five years, meet their full obligations for other packaging materials and comply with all other applicable requirements. The intervention applies only to the 2026 compliance year.
2027 review and DRS
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 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 will remove valuable, relatively high-quality material 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 for PRN generation. Longer-term reform of the PRN/PERN system also remains under consideration following a consultation on measures intended to improve transparency, reduce fraud and create a more level playing field between UK reprocessors and exporters.
The FPA said regulators having to intervene to prevent enforcement action raised “serious questions” about how the system is being managed and how future targets are set. It supported the drive to eliminate fraud and error and said stronger accreditation, more rigorous verification and greater transparency were essential to maintaining confidence. But it argued that if improving integrity exposed a substantial shortfall in evidence availability, that should prompt a fundamental examination of the assumptions behind recycling targets.
The association also drew a distinction between relief from enforcement and resolving the underlying compliance problem. It said statutory obligations remained unchanged and that producers meeting the reduced thresholds might still have non-compliance recorded against them, leaving businesses needing clarity about the practical and wider implications.
For the 2027 review, the FPA said adjusting percentages would not be enough. It called for an assessment of whether targets are supported by demonstrable domestic and overseas recycling capacity and reliable evidence supply, including the effect of the DRS from October 2027 and the delayed plastic-film collections. It said those assessments should be transparent and open to industry scrutiny.
Producers, the FPA added, are already facing financial and administrative pressure from the wider packaging reform programme. It warned that they should not also face unpredictable compliance costs from a mismatch between regulatory obligations and the evidence market. The test of the government’s response, it said, will be whether it delivers a more stable, credible and achievable system for 2027 and beyond.