US packaging EPR landscape expands as states move beyond California’s SB 54

While California’s new SB 54 and New York’s stalled EPR legislation have dominated packaging headlines, packaging EPR laws are expanding elsewhere across the US, with seven states now adopting laws that shift the cost of waste management to producers. 

Maine became the first state in the country to adopt EPR for paper and packaging waste, its Stewardship Program for Packaging, in 2021, followed by the Oregon legislature, which also passed the Recycling Modernization Act (Senate Bill 582) during the 2021 legislative session.

In early 2024, Minnesota signed its EPR bill for packaging and paper products into law. The Washington legislature passed the Recycling Reform Act in 2023 to create an EPR program for residential packaging and paper products. This April, Maryland adopted new implementing regulations related to its packaging EPR.

Sahar Mehrabzadeh, chief revenue officer at Bay Cities, a packaging solutions company based in California, US, tells Packaging Insights that Georgia and New Jersey are “close behind” and that she is optimistic about the progression of New York’s EPR. However, the bill recently stalled for a third consecutive year.

“Beyond California, the map keeps growing. Georgia introduced a bill in February 2026, and New Jersey is progressing.” 

“With one in five US Americans already living in an EPR state, these rules are steadily reshaping how brands think about materials, package design, labeling, and end-of-life responsibility,” she asserts.

Phased implementation across states 

One lesson emerging from the early EPR states, as spotted by Mehrabzadeh, is the value of phased implementation, particularly for smaller producers that may not have dedicated compliance resources.

Sahar Mehrabzadeh, chief revenue officer at Bay Cities.“Because California’s requirements are among the most stringent, many of the packaging changes brands make today will position them well as additional states adopt similar frameworks.”

Following SB 54’s approval in May, the focus is shifting from registration to execution, she argues, with a “clear sequence of deadlines.” Source reduction plans are due August 1, 2026, the producer responsibility organization has been approved, and fee collection starts on January 1, 2027, with a market-access ban for anyone unregistered, she outlines. 

“Full eco-modulated, material-specific fees take effect around 2029. Then come the milestones: 20% plastic reduction by 2030, and by 2032, a 25% reduction, a 65% recycling rate, and a requirement that all packaging be recyclable or compostable, with non-qualifying materials banned from the state.”

EPR laws are also being tested in court, she points out. “Oregon’s program was paused by a federal injunction in early 2026, and SB 54 is widely expected to draw challenges of its own, which adds some uncertainty as the rules roll out.”

Why SB 54 shapes conversations

While packaging EPR laws have spread across the US, California's SB 54 continues to command more significant attention within the packaging industry.

“California took an unusually comprehensive approach,” explains Mehrabzadeh. “It covers consumer and B2B packaging, a 25% source reduction mandate, and a US$5 billion fund, each with its own requirements.”

She says that the data “burden” created by the SB 54 has “overwhelmed” many producers, especially smaller and mid-market ones without dedicated compliance teams. She adds that the broad “producer” definition in the law includes companies that do not manufacture packaging materials. 

Source reduction adds another wrinkle, since it must come from elimination, right-sizing, or reuse, bioplastic substitution doesn’t count, and recycled content can cover at most 8%, she explains.

Mehrabzadeh says EPRs can improve recycling infrastructure if producer fees fund collection and processing.“Inaction also carries real exposure too: eco-modulated fees, penalties up to US$50,000 per day, a market-access ban for unregistered producers, and retailers like Target, Walmart, and Costco now building EPR into their vendor requirements.”

EPR opportunities ahead

Mehrabzadeh further highlights the opportunities that she sees emerging from EPRs, namely stronger recycling infrastructure through the EPR cycle, where producer fees fund collection and processing, capacity grows, recycled-content supply rises, and future fees fall. 

“Brands that move early have more flexibility in how they adapt and avoid making costly changes under tighter timelines later. The direction is clear: California is prioritizing waste reduction and producer responsibility, and we see that as a chance to make packaging part of the solution.”

She concludes that EPRs are inevitably going to reshape the packaging industry. “My advice to brands is simple: don’t wait for perfect certainty before taking action. The companies making progress today are the ones investing now in understanding their packaging data, evaluating materials, and identifying opportunities to reduce complexity.”

“Compliance is the immediate challenge, but there’s also a significant opportunity. Brands that start early will be better positioned to reduce costs, improve sustainability, and build packaging strategies that are more resilient for the long term.”