With EPR expansion, labeling scrutiny, and chemical regulations advancing nationwide, 2026 is shaping up to be a pivotal year for packaging policy. AMERIPEN’s new policy director and general counsel, Danielle Waterfield, explains what’s coming and why early engagement matters.
Packaging World:
As we head into 2026, how would you characterize the overall packaging policy landscape at the state level?
Danielle Waterfield:
Danielle Waterfield, Policy Director and General Counsel, AMERIPENAMERIPEN
Which states are shaping up to be the biggest battlegrounds for packaging EPR in 2026?
New York is clearly a critical state considering EPR in 2026. The primary legislation under debate there, the Packaging Reduction and Recycling Infrastructure Act (S.1464/A.1749), would create the most restrictive and unworkable packaging EPR law in the country. It would set the most stringent source reduction mandate (30%) in the country, impacting all packaging, not just plastic, like in California. While the Assembly bill narrowly failed in 2025, it will pick up in 2026 right where it ended, and the Senate bill will re-enter the process. The question is whether lawmakers pursue compromise or continue advancing a proposal that raises serious concerns for businesses in New York and across the country.
Massachusetts is another state to watch. Regarding EPR, while two packaging EPR bills moved forward in 2025, the state’s EPR Commission indicated that further study is needed before proceeding. As such, we will be looking for a potential needs-assessment approach and activity from the newly recommended solid waste subcommittee. In addition, a recyclability labeling bill, in the newly amended form of HB 4810, moved forward in December and is now in the House Ways and Means Committee. This bill would prohibit misleading or deceptive claims about product recyclability in advertising and on packaging. Companies using terms like “recyclable” or the “chasing arrows” symbol would be required to maintain documentation proving the recyclability of their products in Massachusetts and meet Federal Trade Commission guidelines.
New Jersey has been active on packaging policy in recent years. What’s the outlook there?
New Jersey is unique in that its current legislative session doesn’t formally end until January 12, 2026. While we don’t anticipate passage of one of the most problematic EPR and labeling bills this session, we expect some version of them to be reintroduced in the 2026–27 session. The question is whether those proposals come back unchanged and include unworkable elements such as the highest source reduction mandate (50%) for plastic packaging in the country and the ability for the state to direct EPR revenues to other programs during tough economic times or reflect more moderate, workable approaches that could gain broader support by industry.
Are there other states where new packaging policy proposals are likely to emerge in 2026?
Absolutely. On the legislative and regulatory fronts, states such as California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Vermont, and Virginia could become active, depending on political will and legislative interest. AMERIPEN is already engaged in coalition-building and monitoring efforts in many of these states, so we’re ready to respond quickly if proposals gain momentum.
Beyond legislation, what trends are you seeing on the regulatory side of packaging policy?
Regulatory activity continues at a steady pace, particularly in states that have packaging EPR laws and are further along in the implementation process. Regulations for California’s EPR law (SB 54) are nearing adoption, with supply reporting deadlines and early program fees rolling out early this year. Moreover, Colorado will become the second state with an active EPR program in mid-2026, following approval of its program plan. States such as Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Oregon, and Washington are at different stages of EPR rulemaking or implementation. What’s consistent across states is the complexity of these regulatory processes and the importance of stakeholder engagement to ensure rules are practical, flexible, and grounded in real-world operations.
There are also several regulatory matters other than EPR on the horizon. For example, in California, the state’s recyclability claim requirements (SB 343) are set to take effect in October 2026, absent any rule corrections or enacted federal preemption. New Mexico is undergoing a rulemaking to implement the PFAS Substances Protection Act (H.B. 212). In a similar fashion, Minnesota will implement the final rules adopted in December 2025 under Amara’s Law, which describe what manufacturers using PFAS will report. The rules also authorized the agency to establish more details in the future. This is in addition to undergoing the final review of its PFAS Reporting Information System for Manufacturers, which will launch for reporting on July 1, 2026.
Having spent many hours in state houses discussing the nuances of EPR for packaging over the last several years, has AMERIPEN changed how it thinks about and advocates related to EPR?
Yes, I’d say we have. While seven states have enacted EPR so far, we haven’t seen the outcomes from those laws yet. We really need to understand what’s working and what’s not if we want effective and efficient programs that truly drive a circular economy. For that reason, we recommend that proper time is needed to evaluate implementation in these states and develop lessons learned before other states adopt new laws.
California has long been a bellwether for packaging regulation. What’s on the horizon there?
While California’s 2025 session ended without major changes to existing packaging-related laws, several issues are likely to resurface in 2026. Proposed reforms to the rigid plastic packaging container law and legislation restricting certain chemicals in food packaging are both expected to return.
Turning to federal policy, what are AMERIPEN’s priorities heading into 2026?
A major priority is advancing the Packaging and Claims Knowledge Act, or PACK Act (H.R.6832) which was introduced by Rep. Randy Weber (R-Texas) in December. The goal is to create a national framework under the FTC for recyclable, compostable, and reusable claims on consumer packaging, addressing the growing patchwork of state laws and reducing confusion for consumers and businesses alike. If organizations are interested in learning more about this critical bill, and showing their support, I invite your readers to visit ameripen.org/pack-act.
We’re also closely tracking federal recycling and reuse legislation, including bills focused on improving data collection, expanding recycling access through tax credits, and evaluating reuse and refill systems. These efforts reflect a growing recognition that strong data and infrastructure investment are essential to improving packaging recovery nationwide.
What advice would you give packaging companies preparing for 2026?
Engagement is more important than ever. Companies should monitor both legislative and regulatory developments. Understanding where proposals are headed and engaging early can make a meaningful difference in shaping workable outcomes. AMERIPEN’s role is to bring the full packaging value chain perspective into these conversations, and 2026 will be a critical year for doing just that.
Additionally, it’s imperative that companies collaborate internally to prepare for what’s to come, given that policy is driving many trends in the packaging industry today. Whether you’re a CEO, packaging engineer, marketer, procurement officer, or have other responsibilities that touch packaging, there’s a good chance that packaging policy is, or will be, impacting your company. Understanding policy is a crucial risk management strategy these days.
AMERIPEN, a material-neutral trade association for the packaging industry, is focused on the intersection of packaging policy and the environment, and educates the industry on the value of packaging.
