Proposed Canadian EPR changes could inform US plans

Ontario, Canada’s most populous province, is looking to make adjustments to its signature law for extended producer responsibility in packaging, in response to producer feedback about costs and other program concerns. 

With nine of its 13 provinces and territories in varying states of EPR implementation, Canada’s experience could help provide lessons to U.S. states that are moving rapidly toward their own laws. Nearly 90% of Canadian residents live within about 100 miles of the U.S. border, according to Statista, and numerous companies conduct business and even own facilities on both sides of the border. 

Of the provinces, British Columbia implemented packaging EPR in 2014, while Alberta and Quebec began rollouts in early 2025. Ontario began transitioning its “blue box” program for collecting printed paper and packaging to a producer responsibility model July 1, 2023, and plans to complete the shift by Dec. 31, 2025. 

In a recent newsletter, while applauding the accelerating transition toward circular packaging in North America, Canada-headquartered EFS-Plastics added that “as provinces phase in EPR, recyclers are seeing sudden drops in post-consumer plastic supply. Centralized control by stewardship agencies is disrupting feedstock flow, creating volume shortages and pricing pressure, which is problematic for recyclers relying on consistent supply.”

The company also noted that in the absence of a federal framework, the fragmented nature of state-level EPR legislation in the U.S. is already “creating compliance challenges and hindering consistent investment in recycling infrastructure.” EFS operates facilities in Ontario, Alberta and Pennsylvania. 

Citing these types of higher-than-expected costs, Ontario is proposing amendments to the 2016 Resource Recovery and Circular Economy Act (RRCEA), with public comment due by July 21. The province is home to about 40% of Canada’s 41.5 million residents, according to Statistics Canada. 

The RRCEA holds producers responsible for operating and collecting “blue box” programs for collecting end-of-life paper, packaging and single-use items. Producers are defined as brand owners, importers and retailers. The provincial government also is seeking comment on proposed changes to the blue box regulation by July 4. 

The changes are meant to improve transparency, cost disclosure and materials collection, and allow the producer responsibility framework to be more responsive to business needs and reduce program costs, the RRCEA proposal said. 

Under the proposed amendments, the government could direct the Resource Productivity and Recovery Authority (RPRA) to gather information to help assess program effectiveness and provide transparency to producers. To ensure that proprietary information remains confidential, this information would not be subject to the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

The amendments also would:

• Require PROs to provide more information to producers on bills, invoices and other documents, and require improved annual reporting to RPRA on system design, operation and costs;
• Enable the government to require PROs to make an offer to municipalities to service small businesses that may lose recycling service as the blue box transition to producer responsibility is completed in 2026.

Blue box regulation changes proposed

Producers also have requested changes to the RRCEA’s blue box regulation to help contain costs, improve implementation and clarify requirements. 

Under the current regulation, producers are responsible for operating and collecting blue box programs, but “unanticipated cost increases for blue box collection and recycling services are creating real affordability concerns,” the proposal said. 

The current law: 

• Adds requirements to current services starting in 2026, such as setting recovery targets and expanding collection to more apartments, schools and long-term care facilities;
• Expands regulated recovery targets for beverage containers beyond residential locations, to include commercial settings;
• Expands public space collection beyond municipal offerings, which may require bins to be placed where collection is not cost-effective.

To help manage the added costs, the blue box amendments would:

• Delay recovery targets for paper, metal, glass, rigid plastics and beverage containers by five years to 2031;
• Remove the planned expansion to multi-family structures, schools and long-term care facilities;
• Limit producer responsibility for beverage containers to those collected in residential blue boxes;
• Remove the provision for producers to expand collection in public spaces.

Easing stance on waste-to-energy

Stakeholders in Ontario also cited infrastructure, technology and processing challenges in managing collected materials and meeting recovery targets, especially for flexible plastics. 

As a result, the government is proposing that waste-to-energy processes count toward diversion goals. “Energy recovery does not replace or displace recycling but could be used to divert non-recyclable materials from landfill,” the proposal said. 

The amendment would:

• Reduce the recovery target for flexible plastic to 5% and delay the recovery target by five years, to 2031;
• Allow energy recovery to contribute to recovery targets, up to 15% of a single material category.

In recent policy statements regarding chemical recycling, several U.S. organizations excluded waste-to-energy policies from their definition of recycling. However, the recycling council in the Canadian province of Alberta reframed its R-Ladder hierarchy to reflect the nuances of its stance on waste-to-energy processes.

Yukon Territory nears EPR implementation 

On the opposite side of Canada, the Yukon Territory implemented EPR at the beginning of 2024, and in February 2025 approved a stewardship plan for packaging from PRO Circular Materials. The program is scheduled to start Nov. 1, while the three programs for batteries and other materials start between late June and this fall.

However, in February 2025, the Yukon Party requested a delay in implementation, citing business owners’ concerns that consumers will have to assume the added costs. Several other organizations, including the Yukon Chamber of Commerce and the Canadian Federation of Independent Businesses, also have asked that the program rollout be delayed until 2026, pending further impact analysis. 

In contrast to the province of Ontario, the Yukon Territory has a total population of less than 50,000 people — making it the most populated of Canada’s three territories, which combine to host about 3% of the country’s population. 

A version of this story appeared in Resource Recycling on June 24.