Development and Potential of Extended Producer Responsibility in the Textiles Sector
This blog was originally posted on 18th February, 2025. Further regulatory developments may have occurred after publication. To keep up-to-date with the latest compliance news, sign up to our newsletter.
AUTHORED BY HANNAH JANKNECHT, REGULATORY COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST, COMPLIANCE & RISKS
The use of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes to keep materials in the loop and improve their reusability and recyclability goes as far back as 1990, when the ‘Green Dot’ scheme for packaging waste was first introduced in Germany.
EPR aims to internalize the environmental impact of products by making producers responsible for the organization and cost of waste management. Through so-called ecomodulation fees, the schemes furthermore create incentives for a more efficient and environmentally friendly design.
EPR has come a long way since 1990, both with regard to the covered geographies and products. In the EU, extended producer responsibility schemes for packaging are now mandatory under the Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive. Similarly, waste electrical and electronic equipment, batteries and vehicles are subject to extensive EPR schemes.
What About Textiles?
As of 2025, only a handful of countries are operating EPR schemes for textile products.
France
France was the first country worldwide to introduce Extended Producer Responsibility for textiles in 2007. The system was significantly expanded with the entry into force of the AGEC law in 2020 (Anti-Waste for a Circular Economy Law), and now covers a wide range of textiles, including clothing, shoes, and household linen (Article L. 541-10-1).
Based on the volume and type of sold textiles, companies pay fees to the eco-organization Refashion, which manages the EPR scheme for textiles in France. The fee calculation also includes an eco-modulation fee to incentivize sustainable practices, such as the inclusion of recycled materials and the use of materials that are easier to recycle or reuse. In order to create a higher level of transparency, companies must report data on the volume of textiles placed on the market, recycled content, and end-of-life management and provide consumers with sorting information through the Triman Logo. France furthermore operates an extensive network of collection points where consumers can drop off used textiles.
Netherlands, Latvia and Hungary
In the same vein, the Netherlands introduced Extended Producer Responsibility for textiles with effect from 1 July 2023. Producers and importers placing textiles on the market for the first time are required to register with Rijkswaterstaat within 6 weeks after the EPR enters into force and annually disclose the amount of textiles sold in kilos. The scheme sets objectives for the reuse and recycling of textiles. By 2025, at least 50% of the textiles that are placed on the market must be prepared for reuse or recycled, increasing to 75 % in 2030. Unlike France, there is currently no labeling requirement to inform consumers about the management of textile waste.
Since 1 July 2024, Latvia operates a system to finance the collective disposal and recycling of textiles through the collection of a Natural Resource Tax for all textiles placed on the Latvian market. Instead of paying the natural resource tax, companies can join a national EPR organization.
Similarly, Hungary introduced detailed EPR rules for a broad range of products, including textiles, in Decree 80/2023. Based on this, textile manufacturers must meet EPR requirements either on their own or by joining a producer responsibility organization.
European Union
The EU Commission proposed an amendment to the Waste Framework Directive in July 2023, which, if enacted, would oblige member states to introduce Extended Producer Responsibility for textiles within 30 months after its entry into force (or 18 months, as proposed by the EU Parliament). Similarly to what is already in place in France and the Netherlands, the EU scheme would entail eco-modulation fees, requiring higher fees for companies following ‘fast fashion’ industrial and commercial practices. Based on the current Waste Framework Directive, EU member states are obliged to introduce separate collection systems for textiles waste by 1 January 2025, even though many member states are still in the process of setting them up.
California
Outside of the EU, California is currently the only jurisdiction that has a mandatory textiles EPR system in place. California’s Responsible Textile Recovery Act, signed into law on 28 September 2024, establishes a statewide EPR program, covering clothing, accessories and household textiles. Sellers of secondhand textiles and sellers with less than one million dollars annual turnover are exempt from the obligations. The Act requires producers to join a producer responsibility organization (PRO) by January 1, 2026, or form their own CalRecycle approved PRO. Producers must then comply with the PRO’s stewardship plan, which sets out recycling targets and fee payments, including eco-modulation fees.
Other jurisdictions, including Australia, Colombia, the United Kingdom and South Korea, have plans to implement textiles EPR or are currently piloting voluntary schemes. In addition, Bills for a mandatory textile EPR scheme were recently proposed in Washington and New York.
Are Textile EPR Schemes Holding What They Promise?
A working paper on EPR in the textiles sector, published by the OECD in December 2024, examines the contribution of EPR to a more circular economy in the textiles sector1.
Given the small number of textile EPR schemes implemented globally as of 2025, the analysis presented in the paper can only draw from a limited set of available data and practical experience. The available data however shows that textile EPR schemes have the potential to improve collection rates and incentivize environmentally friendly design. The French approach in particular is considered quite successful, achieving a 60% re-use and recovery rate of collected and sorted material compared to a European average re-use rate of 8% of collected post-consumer textiles.
At the same time, the paper points out that implementing EPR on its own will not be sufficient and schemes will have to be accompanied by other regulatory approaches and economic incentives. In terms of suitable complementary policies, the paper suggests banning the disposal of textiles by households into mixed waste collection, raising the cost of textile waste incineration, investments in sorting and recycling technologies, improvements in the composition of textiles fibres and economic incentives to encourage demand for recycled content.
Footnotes
- It is important to note that the working paper does not constitute the official views of the OECD or of its member countries ↩︎
Stay Ahead Of Regulatory Changes in Extended Producer Responsibility for Textiles
Want to stay ahead of these regulatory developments?
Accelerate your ability to achieve, maintain & expand market access for all products in global markets with C2P – your key to unlocking market access, trusted by more than 300 of the world’s leading brands.
C2P is an enterprise SaaS platform providing everything you need in one place to achieve your business objectives by proving compliance in over 195 countries.
C2P is purpose-built to be tailored to your specific needs with comprehensive capabilities that enable enterprise-wide management of regulations, standards, requirements and evidence.
Add-on packages help accelerate market access through use-case-specific solutions, global regulatory content, a global team of subject matter experts and professional services.
- Accelerate time-to-market for products
- Reduce non-compliance risks that impact your ability to meet business goals and cause reputational damage
- Enable business continuity by digitizing your compliance process and building corporate memory
- Improve efficiency and enable your team to focus on business critical initiatives rather than manual tasks
- Save time with access to Compliance & Risks’ extensive Knowledge Partner network
Bird’s Eye View of Global AI Regulations: US, EU, UK, Singapore and China
Gain insights into how different jurisdictions are addressing AI-related challenges and what these developments mean for businesses, policymakers, and compliance professionals.
Edited by Compliance & Risks
Close
