US House subcommittee advances Pack Act to standardize claims

A US House of Representatives’ Energy and Commerce subcommittee has advanced H.R. 6832, the Packaging and Claims Knowledge (Pack) Act, on September 1, 2026. The Pack Act aims to establish a national framework for recyclable, compostable, and reusable packaging claims. 

“The Pack Act codifies existing federal guidelines on how to label packaging, giving the Federal Trade Commission authority to enforce the law under existing consumer protection statutes,” Lynn Dyer, president of the American Institute for Packaging and the Environment (AMERIPEN), tells Packaging Insights.

US Congressman Randy Weber, who introduced the Pack Act on December 17, 2025, comments: “Whether you’re making a product, stocking a grocery store, or trying to figure out what in the world a label even means, you shouldn’t need fifty different rulebooks. The Pack Act cuts through the confusion and brings some good old-fashioned common sense back to the process.”

“If a business chooses to make a recyclable, compostable, or reusable claim, they should have one clear, voluntary federal framework to follow, not a regulatory maze that changes from state to state. That means more certainty for businesses, clearer information for consumers, and fewer costs passed down to hardworking families. The momentum is building, and we’re going to keep pushing until we get this across the finish line.”

The Subcommittee adopted an amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by Congressman Russ Fulcher, a co-sponsor of the legislation. Fulcher says: “It ends the confusion consumers face when going to the store and seeing different and conflicting environmental claims about the goods they buy, and the resultant lower costs for goods and families.”

“I’m proud to co-sponsor this bipartisan bill, along with my friend Mr. Weber of Texas.”

Building support 

AMERIPEN’s Dyer argues that replacing guidelines with an enforceable federal statute will replace the emerging “patchwork” with a consistent federal framework for specific voluntary packaging claims. 

“Companies would not be required to make a recyclable, compostable, or reusable claim, but if they choose to do so, the claim would have to meet federal requirements that reflect real-world conditions and are independently certified.”

The president of the policy and advocacy organization representing the packaging value chain asserts that the goal is a framework for labeling that consumers can trust and businesses can apply consistently across the national marketplace.

“Today’s subcommittee markup is an important step, but it is not the end of the process. The next objective is consideration by the full House Energy and Commerce Committee, followed ultimately by House consideration, while continuing to build the bipartisan support necessary for Senate action.”

AMERIPEN notes that it is working to ensure lawmakers understand the consumer-protection case for accurate claims and the practical consequences of requiring nationally distributed products to navigate conflicting state standards.

Diverging state requirements

Companies that sell the same packaging nationwide are “increasingly” confronting different state standards for what they can label recyclable, compostable, or reusable, according to AMERIPEN.

“That can mean redesigning labels, conducting multiple legal and regulatory reviews, changing production processes, and maintaining different packaging and inventories for the same product depending on where it is sold,” Dyer explains. “Beyond the added complexity and cost, it can also make it harder to give consumers clear, consistent information about how to manage packaging after use.”

Discussing if a federal framework would override existing state requirements, she says that for recyclable, compostable, and reusable claims covered by the bill, the Pack Act would establish one national framework governing these claims that will preempt conflicting state standards.

“This is a very limited and targeted preemption of packaging claims covered by the bill, and states would retain their authority over areas outside this defined federal framework.”

Environmental claims

The Pack Act would safeguard the accuracy of the environmental claims it covers by guaranteeing they reflect real-world collection, processing, composting, or reuse conditions, Dyer continues.

Claims related to the environmental effects of packaging also need to be supported through independent certification, and remain subject to Federal Trade Commission enforcement against unfair or deceptive practices, she adds.

“If a company chooses to make one of the covered claims, the claims would need to be certified by an accredited independent third party demonstrating that the claim satisfies the applicable federal criteria. That assures the consumer can trust the claim is valid. It also gives responsible businesses a clearer process for substantiating their claims rather than leaving them to navigate different requirements from state to state.”

“Consumer protection is at the heart of the legislation,” Dyer states.

“The combination of substantive standards, independent verification, and federal enforcement is designed to give consumers greater confidence that a claim on a package is meaningful and substantiated.”

The push for greater consistency comes amid an increasingly fragmented US packaging EPR landscape. Seven US states have enacted packaging EPR laws, with industry experts expecting further state-level developments.

Meanwhile, the US Plastics Pact non-profit updated its guidance for recyclable, reusable, and compostable packaging, including recommendations around certification and labeling.

The debate over packaging claims also comes amid wider concerns about disparities in access to recycling infrastructure in the US. A University at Buffalo study found that wealthier and more educated communities are more likely to recycle plastic packaging, while recycling rates vary between regions despite similar levels of plastic waste generation.