It is two questions, not one

Working out whether U.S. packaging EPR reaches you breaks into two separate tests, and most confusion comes from running them together. First, are you the producer for a given item in a given state. That turns on a statutory cascade, and the cascade is different in each state. Second, if you are the producer, are you above the small-producer threshold. That is a separate question with its own numbers, covered on the de minimis thresholds page.

This page is the first test. A company can be plainly the producer and still be exempt on volume, and a company can be under a threshold in one state and over it in another. Run them in order and per state.

Want the answer rather than the rules? The Scope Screener asks seven questions and returns a per-state read, with the rule behind each answer and a label showing whether that rule was read in the primary text. Free, no signup.

The general principle

The obligation follows the brand on the package, not the factory that made it. Your packaging manufacturer is generally not the obligated producer, though every state gives suppliers data duties, because a brand owner cannot file without component data it does not hold. If your brand appears on packaging sold into an enacted state, start from the assumption that you are the producer and work the cascade to see whether anything displaces that.

Beyond that shared principle the states diverge, and the differences are large enough to change who files.

Colorado and Oregon: three tiers, importer last

Colorado (C.R.S. 25-17-703(30)(a)) and Oregon (ORS 459A.866(1)(a)) use structurally identical cascades for packaging. Each stops at the first tier that applies.

  1. The manufacturer of the packaged item, where the item is sold under the manufacturer's own brand, or in packaging that carries no brand at all.
  2. The licensee of the brand or trademark, where the item is manufactured by someone other than the brand owner.
  3. The importer into the United States, but only if there is no person in either tier above within the United States.

Note what the importer tier actually keys on. It is import into the United States, not import into that state, and it only engages when the first two tiers are empty domestically. A U.S. brand owner never pushes the obligation down to its importer.

California: four tiers, no importer step, and an in-state test

California runs a different cascade under Public Resources Code 42041(w), and two of the differences matter operationally.

  1. A person who manufactures a product using covered material AND owns or is the licensee of the brand, where the product is sold or distributed in the state.
  2. If no such person is in the state, the brand owner, or if the owner is not in the state, the exclusive licensee.
  3. If no such person is in the state, whoever sells, offers for sale, or distributes the product in or into the state.

California has no importer tier at all. The words importer and imports do not appear in the hierarchy. The backstop is a seller and distributor tier, which catches more parties than an importer test would, because it reaches anyone placing the product into the state rather than only the party that brought it into the country.

California asks whether you are in the state, not in the United States, and under 14 CCR 18980.1.1 that is a personal jurisdiction test rather than a physical presence one. A person is in the state if subject to the jurisdiction of California courts under Code of Civil Procedure 410.10. A foreign company amenable to California long-arm jurisdiction therefore stays high in the cascade instead of dropping to the backstop tier. That is a materially different mechanic from Colorado and Oregon.

Maryland: exclusions do the work

Maryland's chapter, COMAR 26.04.14, approaches it from the other direction. Rather than only cascading, it carves entities out of the producer definition entirely. A person is not a producer if they are a State or federal agency, a political subdivision or other governmental unit, a registered 501(c)(3) charitable organization or 501(c)(4) social welfare organization, a mill using any virgin wood fiber in the products it produces, or a paper mill producing containerboard from recycled content.

A de minimis producer is also outside the definition rather than merely relieved of a duty, which is a distinction worth noticing if you are documenting your position. The operative duty for everyone else sits at 26.04.14.06C: a producer may not sell or distribute products using covered materials in the State unless it is registered with an approved producer responsibility organization or holds an approved Individual Producer Plan.

Private label sits near the top, not the bottom

A retailer selling its own store brand is commonly assumed to be a producer of last resort. It is the opposite. In Colorado and Oregon a private-label retailer fails the first tier, because the goods do not carry the manufacturer's brand, and lands in the second tier as the brand licensee, with the importer below it. In California a store-brand retailer is the in-state brand owner. In every case the retailer sits above the fallback tiers, not beneath them.

One ambiguity worth knowing about if this is your situation. The Colorado and Oregon packaging tiers both say licensee of a brand or trademark, not owner, while a private-label retailer is normally the brand owner rather than a licensee. Colorado's own paper-product tier says owner or licensee, and California's statute says owns or is the licensee, so the omission in the packaging tiers reads as a drafting gap rather than a deliberate exclusion. In practice producer responsibility organizations treat private-label retailers as producers. If your obligation turns on this point, take advice rather than reading the tier list literally.

Material-specific rules that override the cascade

All three detailed-reporting states run separate producer rules for particular packaging types, and these beat the general hierarchy. This is where a company that has confidently answered the general question gets a different answer for part of its portfolio.

The other four states

Minnesota is not a wait-and-see state. Producers were required to appoint a producer responsibility organization by January 1, 2025 under Minn. Stat. 115A.1443. That is the producer-facing duty, and it is distinct from the organization's own duty to register with the commissioner by July 1, 2026 and each January 1 after that. Fees and detailed reporting arrive later.

Washington requires producers to be a member of a registered producer responsibility organization after July 1, 2026, or to register as one implementing an individual plan, under 2SSB 5284 section 104(1)(a). The organization registers with Ecology by March 1, 2026 and annually after. The enforcement point comes later: from March 1, 2029 a producer that is not a member in good standing and has not submitted an individual plan may not introduce covered materials into the state.

Maryland runs on the definition and registration structure described above, with Individual Producer Plans due to the Department by July 1, 2028 and a market restriction from October 29, 2028.

Maine is genuinely pre-program. The stewardship organization had not been selected as of late July 2026, so there is no producer registration, reporting or fee obligation to meet yet. It is a watch item rather than a compliance gap.

Who is generally not the producer

Packaging manufacturers, converters and component suppliers are generally not the obligated producer, because the obligation follows the brand. They do carry data duties, and in practice those are substantial: brand owners cannot complete a filing without component material, weight, resin and recyclability data that only the supplier holds. If you supply packaging, expect structured annual data requests rather than a filing obligation. The exception to check is whether you also sell anything unbranded or under your own brand, which can place you in the producer tier for those items.

Governments and, in some states, registered nonprofits are excluded outright. Small producers may be excluded by threshold, which is the second test and is covered separately on the de minimis page.

Working it out for your own portfolio

Three habits make this tractable. Run the cascade per state rather than once, because the answer genuinely differs. Run it per packaging type where a material-specific rule applies, because your retail packaging and your shipping boxes can land on different parties. And document the reasoning at the time, not later, because a position that is obvious to you now is the one a successor will have to reconstruct.

The Scope Screener runs all of this in seven questions and returns a per-state read with the rule and evidence label behind each answer. Where the rules genuinely do not settle the question, it says so rather than guessing, because licensing, co-packing, franchise and corporate-group structures regularly produce answers a form cannot reach. For those, get in touch.

Frequently asked questions

Am I the obligated producer, or is my packaging supplier?
Almost always you, not the supplier. The obligation follows the brand on the package. A packaging manufacturer or converter generally carries data duties rather than a filing duty, because brand owners cannot file without component data only the supplier holds. The exception worth checking is whether you also sell unbranded packaging or components onward, which can place you in the producer tier for those items.
Who is the producer under California SB 54?
Public Resources Code 42041(w) runs a cascade: first, a person who manufactures a product using covered material and owns or is the licensee of the brand sold in the state; then, if no such person is in the state, the brand owner or exclusive licensee; then whoever sells, offers for sale or distributes the product in or into the state. California has no importer tier, and under 14 CCR 18980.1.1 being "in the state" is a personal jurisdiction test rather than a physical presence test.
Is a retailer with a private label brand an obligated producer?
Yes, and near the top of the cascade rather than at the bottom. In Colorado and Oregon a private-label retailer fails the first tier because the goods do not carry the manufacturer\u2019s brand, and lands in the second tier as the brand licensee, with the importer below. In California a store-brand retailer is the in-state brand owner.
Does the importer become the producer for imported packaged goods?
Only in Colorado and Oregon, and only where there is no manufacturer or brand licensee within the United States. The trigger is import into the United States, not import into that state. California has no importer tier at all; its backstop reaches whoever sells, offers for sale or distributes the product in or into the state.
Who is the producer for e-commerce shipping packaging?
All three detailed-reporting states point shipping packaging at whoever packages and ships the order, overriding the general cascade. That can make you the producer for the box even where you are not the producer for the goods inside it, and it can shift the obligation to a third-party logistics provider or a marketplace that fulfils on your behalf.
Do I have to work out my producer status separately in each state?
Yes. The three detailed-reporting states use different cascades, California has no importer tier and uses a jurisdiction-based in-state test, and Maryland excludes several categories from the producer definition outright. Material-specific rules for shipping packaging, service packaging and publications override the general answer again. A single SKU can have different obligated parties in different states.
Am I an obligated producer in Minnesota or Washington yet?
Very likely yes, on the registration side. Minnesota required producers to appoint a producer responsibility organization by January 1, 2025 under Minn. Stat. 115A.1443. Washington requires producers to be a member of a registered organization after July 1, 2026 under 2SSB 5284 section 104(1)(a), with a market restriction from March 1, 2029. Fees and detailed reporting come later in both.