The Flexible Packaging Association (FPA) has voiced opposition to proposed extended producer responsibility (EPR) legislation in New York, citing concerns over feasibility, cost implications and potential impacts on packaging supply and recycling systems. 

The FPA maintains that the legislation (A.1749/S.1464), also known as the Packaging Reduction and Recycling Infrastructure Act includes amendments, contains key provisions that remain impractical. Among the concerns highlighted is a mandated 75% recycling rate for plastic packaging by 2055, paired with restrictions on advanced recycling technologies such as chemical recycling, which the association says are necessary to meet those targets. 

FPA also pointed to requirements for a 30% reduction in plastic packaging and provisions that would limit post-consumer recycled content sourcing to domestic suppliers. According to the association, these measures could create supply constraints and complicate compliance for packaging producers. 

The organization further noted potential cost impacts tied to the bill’s funding structure. Under the proposed legislation, producers would be responsible for covering the full cost of the state’s recycling system, including disposal costs in areas without local services. FPA indicated that these requirements could lead to increased costs across the supply chain, potentially affecting pricing for consumer goods. 

In addition, the association expressed concern about how changes to packaging formats could affect product protection, particularly for food and other essential goods that rely on flexible packaging for safety and shelf life. 

FPA stated it supports efforts to improve recycling systems and reduce waste but is advocating for policy approaches that incorporate a broader range of recycling technologies, infrastructure investment and cost-sharing models. 

The association continues to call for a science-based approach to EPR policy development that balances environmental goals with supply chain stability and consumer affordability.