Thank you for being here this morning. I’m Dan Felton, President and CEO of the Flexible Packaging Association (FPA). I’ll spend about 20 to 25 minutes sharing information about FPA, the flexible packaging industry, and several key initiatives we’re working on, and then I’ll leave time at the end for questions.
I like to move around rather than stand behind a podium, so I’ll do my best to manage that while we go through the presentation. I’m here to talk about flexible packaging, and I never want to assume everyone fully understands what that means. Many people think of stand-up pouches and food packaging, and that’s certainly a major part of the industry, but flexible packaging also has many other applications. For example, the industry plays a significant role in the medical market, including pharmaceuticals, medical devices, surgical settings, and emergency rooms. I like to highlight this to emphasize the breadth of the flexible packaging industry.
FPA is the trade association representing the flexible packaging industry in the United States, and to some extent North America, though our primary focus is the U.S. Our membership includes converters and manufacturers of flexible packaging, which make up about 50% of our members. We also have a large group of suppliers to converters, including machinery suppliers and resin and material suppliers. In addition, we have other membership categories such as international members, supporting members, and vendors. Most recently, we’ve invited brand owners who use significant amounts of flexible packaging to join FPA.
We are primarily an advocacy organization, and much of my discussion today will focus on our work in public policy. We also provide networking opportunities, conduct extensive market and data research, and publish industry reports. Overall, our mission is to represent and advance the flexible packaging industry in the United States.
Each year we publish a State of the Industry report. We are close to releasing our 2025 report, a comprehensive document of about 100 pages covering many aspects of the industry. Flexible packaging accounts for about 20% of the total U.S. packaging market, which is approximately 21 million tons. Corrugated packaging currently leads the market, but flexible packaging consistently follows closely behind. One of my goals on behalf of our members is for flexible packaging to surpass corrugated as the most used form of packaging in the United States within the next five years. The data in our report helps illustrate where flexible packaging fits within the broader packaging landscape.
Looking at who uses flexible packaging, it’s no surprise that food manufacturers account for the largest share—between 45% and 50% of the market. Medical and pharmaceutical uses make up another significant portion, roughly 10% or more. There are many additional applications as well, including pet food and other non-food uses. Our State of the Industry report provides detailed breakdowns across food, agriculture, medical, pharmaceutical, and other sectors, demonstrating the depth of the data we collect and analyze.
We also recently released an updated economic impact report. The flexible packaging industry supports approximately 98,000 direct manufacturing jobs across about 1,200 facilities in the United States. These are jobs at converter and manufacturing facilities. The wages associated with these jobs and the broader economic activity they generate represent a substantial contribution to the national economy. When you include indirect impacts—such as suppliers—and induced impacts—such as spending by employees in their local communities—the total economic impact grows significantly. This highlights the value of the industry at the national, state, and local levels.
As we turn to public policy, it’s important to begin with the value flexible packaging provides. Policymakers and companies alike are increasingly focused on sustainability. If we are not actively engaged in these policy discussions, decisions may be made that negatively affect our industry. Flexible packaging offers significant sustainability benefits, including reduced greenhouse gas emissions, lower transportation costs due to lighter weight, reduced material use, and reduced food waste. I never disparage other packaging formats, but it is important to emphasize the advantages flexible packaging brings to the sustainability conversation.
At the same time, we face challenges. Flexible packaging can be more difficult to manage at end of life compared with materials like glass, metal, or corrugated. Addressing these challenges is a key focus for FPA. Our public policy efforts concentrate on several major areas: extended producer responsibility (EPR), advanced and mechanical recycling, labeling, recycled content mandates, and certain federal priorities.
Extended producer responsibility is not new globally—it has existed for over 30 years and is implemented in more than 40 countries—but it is relatively new in the United States. In just the past four years, seven states have enacted EPR laws for packaging. Oregon and Colorado are already implementing their programs, while other states are moving forward. These laws aim to increase recovery rates for packaging and shift costs from local governments to producers, typically brand owners.
Not all EPR programs treat materials the same way. In Oregon, for example, there is a pathway to increase recycling of flexible packaging and films through depot systems and store drop-off programs, with the goal of eventually being included on the state’s Universal Statewide Collection List. In contrast, California has established performance targets that could result in certain flexible packaging being restricted or even banned by 2032 if requirements are not met. That presents a significant challenge for our industry. We are working to ensure flexible packaging is treated fairly and that there are viable pathways for compliance.
Most action on EPR is happening at the state level, and while there may be opportunities for federal alignment on definitions and standards, the current political environment makes federal legislation unlikely in the near term. We expect additional states to adopt EPR laws over the next few years, and we are actively engaged in those discussions.
Recycling policy is another major focus. Mechanical recycling has traditionally been the dominant method in the U.S., involving collection, sorting, processing, and remanufacturing. However, advanced recycling—also referred to as molecular, chemical, or non-mechanical recycling—is emerging as an important complement. For flexible packaging, advanced recycling is critical, particularly for applications requiring food-contact materials and recycled content. We strongly support policies that recognize advanced recycling as a manufacturing process rather than solid waste management. Currently, 25 states have enacted laws enabling advanced recycling, and we continue to advocate for broader acceptance at both state and federal levels.
Labeling is also a key issue. California has enacted restrictions on recyclability labeling, and we are working to avoid a patchwork of inconsistent state requirements. At the federal level, the Packaging and Claims Knowledge Act was introduced to establish uniform standards for labeling recyclability, compostability, and reusability. We believe a federal standard would provide greater clarity and consistency.
Recycled content mandates are another area of focus. We support the use of recycled content in flexible packaging and recognize brand owners’ goals to reduce virgin material use. However, mandates must be reasonable and achievable. Overly restrictive requirements could create supply challenges and unintended consequences.
At the federal level, we also support additional funding for recycling infrastructure. Approximately $350 million was allocated in 2021, and we would like to see continued investment. We are also monitoring proposals such as tax credits for recycled content and paying close attention to tariff discussions, which affect our industry as well.
In closing, flexible packaging recovery remains a challenge. Whether through curbside collection or store drop-off programs, we need more data, more pilot programs, and more proof points to demonstrate viable pathways—particularly in states like California. There are significant opportunities to improve consumer and policymaker understanding of flexible packaging and its benefits. A circular economy depends not only on collection and processing but also on end markets that can use recycled materials, whether back into packaging or into durable products.
FPA is not working on these issues alone. We collaborate with a wide range of stakeholders across the packaging value chain. Together, we are working to address challenges, strengthen the industry, and ensure that flexible packaging continues to provide economic and sustainability benefits well into the future.
I’m happy to take your questions.
