Textile EPR is set to become a defining regulatory issue for European producers. On 8 June 2026, EURATEX published a position paper urging the EU to adopt a coordinated, harmonised approach to Extended Producer Responsibility under the ongoing revision of the Waste Framework Directive. The association warns that divergent national frameworks will raise compliance costs, distort competition, and burden SMEs across the Single Market. Follow the latest EU textile policy updates at textilezon.com's Info Center.
The Risk of Fragmented Textile EPR Frameworks
A fragmented approach to textile EPR creates real competitive risks. Companies operating across multiple EU countries — including SMEs, online sellers, and cross-border operators — would face differing compliance obligations in each jurisdiction.
EURATEX argues this inconsistency would increase administrative burdens and distort competition within the Single Market. Without a unified framework, compliance costs could fall unevenly across producers, undermining the level playing field that European manufacturers depend on.
EURATEX's Demands for a Harmonised System
The position paper sets out a clear agenda for harmonised textile EPR. EURATEX supports a digital one-stop shop for registration and reporting, designed to provide harmonised data formats and eliminate administrative duplication across Member States.
Producer Responsibility Organisations (PROs) are identified as central implementing bodies. They would manage EPR compliance collectively on behalf of affiliated producers, while enforcement against non-compliant actors remains the responsibility of competent national authorities.
On eco-modulation, EURATEX calls for science-based, transparent criteria aligned with the Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation (ESPR). These criteria must be technically feasible, economically viable, and co-developed with manufacturers — particularly SMEs — to ensure practical implementation.
Scope, Reporting, and Enforcement Priorities
Consistent scope definitions are central to the EURATEX proposal. The association calls for clear EU-wide implementation of the Waste Framework Directive and warns against divergent national interpretations. Personal protective equipment (PPE) and medical textiles should be explicitly excluded, as they are governed by separate EU regulations.
Reporting requirements should follow a “report once, use multiple times” principle, ensuring interoperability with tools such as the Digital Product Passport. Simple, proportionate reporting reduces compliance costs without compromising data integrity.
Effective enforcement is also critical, particularly for e-commerce platforms and third-country sellers. Consistent oversight prevents non-compliant imports from gaining an unfair competitive advantage over EU producers. A producer-driven, SME-friendly framework remains the core of EURATEX's vision for textile EPR in Europe.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is textile Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)?
Textile EPR requires producers and importers to fund the collection, sorting, and recycling of end-of-life textile products. It transfers waste management costs from public bodies to the companies that place textiles on the market.
Why does EURATEX support a harmonised EU approach to textile EPR?
Fragmented national EPR systems increase compliance costs and create competitive imbalances that are especially harmful to SMEs. EURATEX argues that only a coordinated EU framework can meet circularity targets while maintaining a level playing field in the Single Market.
Which textile products would be excluded under the EURATEX proposal?
EURATEX calls for personal protective equipment and medical textiles to be excluded from the textile EPR framework. These categories are already governed by separate EU regulations and require distinct compliance approaches.
