What’s changing in 2026: Product-related environmental law and supply chain due diligence

Tag: CSDDD

What’s changing in 2026: Product-related environmental law and supply chain due diligence

In the area of product-related environmental law, the year 2026 will be characterized at the European level by further implementation steps within the framework of the EU Battery Regulation and the start of application of the EU Packaging Regulation. At the national level, the implementation of these two legal acts is at the center of attention. In addition, purely national accents are being set in the area of electrical equipment regulation. Further developments regarding the implementation of due diligence obligations in various supply chains will also remain a major topic in 2026.

The present article represents the prelude to a series of blog posts with the common title “What’s changing in 2026,” in which the experts of the “Produktkanzlei” team summarize the relevant topics from their respective areas of expertise. In this article, the changes in product-related environmental law that have already been decided or are still in the legislative process are presented first (see under A.). In a second part, the foreseeable developments regarding due diligence obligations in the supply chain are summarized (see under B.).  

A. Product-Related Environmental Law  

Product-related environmental law in all its facets represents a supporting pillar of the dynamically growing regulatory architecture for sustainability, resource efficiency, waste prevention and management, and climate protection. Unfortunately, however, the legislative architects do not always seem to have practical and implementable ideas of how the overall regulatory construct should look and function. Coupled with typical delays, constant plan changes, and accompanying legal uncertainty, this leads to the fact that the plaster on the formerly bright green shining “Green Deal” has already begun to crumble alarmingly during the construction phase.  

For the companies and authorities concerned with execution, the EU Packaging Regulation and the further development of the EU Battery Regulation will be in focus in the year 2026. This is flanked at the European level by the recently announced decisions regarding various exemptions for lead within the framework of the RoHS Directive. At the national level, the short-term amendment to the ElektroG (Electrical and Electronic Equipment Act) is currently causing a stir. Looking ahead, numerous aspects of the Omnibus VIII package published shortly before the turn of the year will lead to further changes to already decided and applicable legal acts in 2026.  

I. EU Packaging Regulation  

The Packaging Regulation (EU) 2025/40 (PPWR) was published in the Official Journal of the EU on January 22, 2025, and formally entered into force on February 11, 2025. The general date of application is set for August 12, 2026, although further transitional periods apply for numerous obligations, some of which also depend on the adoption of further delegated and implementing acts.  

From August 12, 2026, the following requirements must be complied with:  

  • Substance restrictions for lead, cadmium, mercury, and hexavalent chromium, the sum of which in packaging must not exceed 100 mg/kg (Art. 5 para. 4 PPWR).  While this substance restriction has applied for many years under the EU Packaging Directive, the PFAS restriction contained in Art. 5 para. 5 PPWR for packaging that comes into contact with food is a genuine novelty. Nevertheless, there are no further transitional periods for this, and the complex requirements must be complied with directly upon the start of application from August 12, 2026. In addition, the article-related substance restrictions and prohibitions, particularly from the REACH and POP Regulations, continue to apply to packaging.  
  • Performance of a conformity assessment procedure on the basis of technical documentation for each packaging and subsequent issuance of an EU declaration of conformity (Art. 38 et seq. in conjunction with Annex VII and VIII PPWR). A CE marking for packaging, however, is not required from a packaging law perspective. From August 12, 2026, the conformity assessment initially only has to cover compliance with the substance restrictions. Further topics, such as specifically recyclability, minimum recycled content in plastic packaging, labeling, minimization, and reuse, are only to be complied with significantly later and only then become the subject of the conformity assessment.  
  • A very central aspect is also the correct role allocation and thus in particular the delimitation between mere suppliers of packaging materials and packaging, manufacturers of packaging, and downstream distributors.  This is of enormous importance because different obligations are assigned to the individual roles according to Art. 15 et seq. PPWR, and these can consequently only be fully and properly assumed and complied with if the role allocation is correct. Primarily decisive here is the distinction between a mere supplier with pure information obligations under Art. 16 PPWR and the manufacturer with the core obligations under Art. 15 PPWR.  According to Art. 3 para. 1 no. 13 in conjunction with Art. 15 para. 6 PPWR, a corresponding marking is decisive for the manufacturer status, whereby in particular with regard to sales packaging, the entity whose products are packed therein will generally be its manufacturer. In practice, however, a case-by-case analysis based on all circumstances and coordination between the individual actors in the supply chain is always required to arrive at a role delimitation suitable for the respective constellation. This should then ideally be contractually established to avoid misunderstandings. If the manufacturer of packaging is established in a non-EU country, an importer with the obligations under Art. 18 PPWR is also added to the supply chain, whereby it should be noted in particular that the importer has an independent labeling obligation regarding their role.  
  • Finally, reference must be made to the obligations for producers of packaging within the meaning of Art. 3 para. 1 no. 15 PPWR in the area of extended producer responsibility under Art. 44 et seq. PPWR. THE EPR requirements have so far been implemented by national law based on the EU Packaging Directive, so that a national patchwork of detailed regulations has developed. Since the PPWR also largely leaves the implementation of packaging-related extended producer responsibility to the Member States, it can be assumed that there will continue to be national particularities. In Germany, a ministerial draft of a law to adapt packaging law and other legal areas to Regulation (EU) 2025/40 is already available, which intends to replace the previous Packaging Act (VerpackG) with a Packaging Implementation Act (VerpackDG). In terms of content, according to the present draft, the known basic structures will largely remain, which are merely to be adapted in some places to the requirements of the PPWR. Worth highlighting here are in particular new cost-bearing and financing obligations for all producers of packaging and the future possibility of participation for packaging not subject to system participation in a so-called “other organization for producer responsibility.” The Central Agency Packaging Register (ZSVR) has already published initial interpretative guidance on this.  

Finally, it should be pointed out that currently a lot is still in flux and both further interpretative and application notes as well as changes to the text of the PPWR itself and necessary tertiary legal acts are to be expected in the coming weeks and months. For affected companies, close monitoring of further developments is therefore essential in addition to operational preparation in order to recognize possible changes to implementation-relevant aspects at an early stage.  

II. EU Battery Regulation  

Also in the context of the Battery Regulation (EU) 2023/1542 (EUBR), which has already been applicable since February 18, 2024, relevant developments are pending for the year 2026.  

First of all, reference must be made to the obligation to designate a Producer Responsibility Organization (PRO) by January 15, 2026 within the framework of existing registrations according to § 7 in conjunction with § 64 para. 7 BattDG (German Battery Implementation Act). A list of PROs approved so far is available from the stiftung elektro-altgeräte register and is constantly updated. Without the timely designation of a PRO, still existing registrations will lapse without replacement and must be reapplied for if necessary, whereby it must be noted that placing batteries on the market in the period between the lapse of the existing and the granting of the new registration is not permitted.  

In contrast, the obligation to attach a declaration on the carbon footprint for industrial batteries (Art. 7 para. 1 EUBR), which is actually applicable from February 18, 2026, as well as the labeling obligations (Art. 13 para. 1 to 3 EUBR) actually applicable from August 18, 2026, and the obligations for labeling and classification into performance classes for the carbon footprint for EV batteries (Art. 7 para. 2 EUBR) provided for from the same date, will all not apply from the mentioned dates. The reason for this is that according to the statutory regulation, all these obligations only come into effect when specifying delegated acts and implementing acts from the EU Commission have entered into force. In order to give the affected economic operators sufficient time to implement the requirements, the start of application is automatically postponed to a date 18 months after the entry into force of the tertiary legal acts if they do not enter into force in time. Since all necessary tertiary legal acts have not yet been adopted and entered into force, the mentioned obligations will come into effect in mid-2027 at the earliest.  

In this context, reference must be made to the consultation procedure running until January 26, 2026, on the necessary specifications for the labeling of batteries according to Art. 13 para. 1 to 3 EUBR. Unfortunately, in terms of content, it must be stated that the drafts submitted for consultation contain no regulations on numerous practice-relevant aspects (e.g., on the labeling of installed batteries in the supply chain) and yet other regulations go significantly beyond the EUBR itself (e.g., obligations to use QR codes in different situations). In this respect, it remains to be seen how the drafts submitted for consultation will develop further to provide genuine legal certainty. Finally, it should be pointed out that the requirements for carbon footprint labeling contained in the draft do not yet lead to the relevant obligations coming into effect, as further specifications on the performance classes to be labeled are required in additional tertiary legal acts, which are not yet available.  

Furthermore, the so-called Omnibus IV package (proposals COM(2025)504 and COM(2025)501) provides for some facilitations within the framework of the BattVO:  

  • Operating instructions and safety information only for BESS (Battery Energy Storage Systems) instead of for all batteries 
  • Producer identification: instead of previously internet and email address, only “digital contact”  
  • Importer identification: instead of previously internet and email address, only “digital contact”  
  • Threshold for due diligence obligations at €150 million instead of €40 million  
  • Verification of due diligence obligations only every three years instead of annually.  

Although the legislative procedure for this is currently still ongoing, a conclusion is to be expected in 2026.  

III. RoHS Exemptions  

On November 21, 2025, three long-awaited delegated directives with decisions on renewal applications for central exemptions from the generally existing lead restriction were published:  

  • Delegated Directive (EU) 2025/2364 of the Commission of September 8, 2025, amending Directive 2011/65/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards an exemption for lead as an alloying element in steel, aluminum, and copper (Entries 6a to c Annex III RoHS)  
  • Delegated Directive (EU) 2025/1802 of the Commission of September 8, 2025, amending Directive 2011/65/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards an exemption for lead in high melting temperature type solders (Entry 7a Annex III RoHS)  
  • Delegated Directive (EU) 2025/2363 of the Commission of September 8, 2025, amending Directive 2011/65/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards an exemption for lead in electrical and electronic components in glass or ceramic (Entry 7c Annex III RoHS)  

In terms of content, some previously broadly defined exemptions were significantly restricted and cut back to specific use situations. In terms of time, the extended or newly formulated exemptions were consistently calculated very tightly, so that those actors who continue to rely on certain exemptions just barely have or had enough time left to submit new renewal applications with further substantiation for the necessity of the exemptions in time.  

An overview of the current renewal situation, including already submitted new renewal applications, is provided by the RoHS 2 exemptions – Validity and rolling plan, updated as of December 19, 2025.  

IV. National Electrical and Electronic Equipment Act (ElektroG)  

In contrast to the European developments reported so far, the Second Act to Amend the Electrical and Electronic Equipment Act, published in the Federal Law Gazette on November 27, 2025, and generally applicable since January 1, 2026, represents a purely national development in Germany without an immediate background in EU law. Essentially, the following innovations and changes were introduced:  

  • New requirements for the take-back of single-use and reusable e-cigarettes and electronic tobacco heaters by all distributors of the same from July 1, 2026 (Sec. 17 para. 1a ElektroG). Actually affected by this are those distributors of such products who were previously not yet obliged to take back due to not reaching the size threshold for the general take-back obligation. The take-back obligation must not be made dependent on the purchase of a new product and also applies to distance selling. The new take-back obligation also leads for the first time to the intervention of the information obligations from Secs. 18 and 18a ElektroG for the newly affected distributors, which entails additional implementation effort.  
  • Expansion of the manufacturer and distributor information obligations in Sec. 18 para. 3 and 4 ElektroG by adding an information obligation regarding risks when handling lithium-containing batteries since January 1, 2026.  If the distributor simultaneously has information obligations under Art. 74 para. 4 EUBR and the necessary information on lithium-containing batteries is already contained therein, a duplication of information does not appear necessary.  
  • Furthermore, the distributor information in distance selling must since January 1, 2026, not only be clearly visible but additionally also easy to find. This is concretized in the explanatory memorandum to the law (BT-Drs. 21/1506, p. 26) as follows: “In addition to good visibility of the information, it must also be ensured that the information is easily findable on the website, for example, by being able to be called up via a search function or reached directly via the website’s control menu. To ensure that the information can definitely be perceived without a separate search when ordering corresponding products, it must either be displayed on the pages with the corresponding products or displayed before or during the order. This has to be taken account for the page design on smartphones, where there is less space on the individual page, and it has to be ensured through the display of the symbol before or during the order that the notice is perceived.” 
  • In the newly inserted Sec. 18a para. 2 and 3 ElektroG, supplementary specifications are made for the marking of collection and take-back points in stationary retail, which apply from July 1, 2026. According to this, distributors must place the symbol according to Annex 3a in color as well as clearly visible and legible at least in DIN A4 format in the immediate field of vision of the customer flow in the entrance area of their retail store. They must also inform about how the take-back takes place in their retail store.  
Symbol according to Annex 3a ElektroG
  • Furthermore, likewise from July 1, 2026, distributors must point out clearly visibly in their retail store with the symbol according to Annex 3 (symbol of the crossed-out wheeled bin) in the immediate vicinity of the sales location of the electrical equipment that waste electrical equipment is to be disposed of separately from unsorted municipal waste. This is concretized in the explanatory memorandum to the law (BT-Drs. 21/1506, p. 26) in such a way that the symbol is to be placed, for example, on the shelf itself immediately next to the price indication. The symbol should accordingly correspond in design and font size to the price indication for the respective product.  
  • Sec. 18a para. 4 ElektroG furthermore concretizes the information obligations for distance sellers likewise from July 1, 2026. According to this, distance sellers must place the symbol according to Annex 3a clearly visibly and legibly in the presentation media used by them on the pages with the corresponding products or before or during the order.  They must also inform about how the pick-up according to Sec. 17 para. 2 sentence 2 ElektroG and the take-back according to Sec. 17 para. 2 sentence 4 ElektroG take place.  
  • Finally, it should be pointed out that since January 1, 2026, it is mandatory to also enclose in writing the information according to Sec. 19a ElektroG for so-called b2b devices. This means a complete enclosure in paper form, and mere accessibility via a link or QR code is not sufficient.  

VI. Other Topics  

Beyond the topics highlighted in detail above, other topics will also continue to be of relevance in the year 2026:  

  • Implementation of the new obligations to introduce a national regime of extended producer responsibility based on Directive (EU) 2025/1892 amending the Waste Framework Directive. The scope of the new requirements will cover certain CN codes of Chapters 61 and 62 for textiles, accessories, and shoes (CN codes 6401 to 6405). The main obligated party will be the so-called producer, i.e., the one who is established in a certain Member State and hands over covered products for the first time in this Member State or the one who, as a distance seller, sells products directly to end consumers in another Member State. The obligations will include a national registration and take-back obligations and are to be transposed into national law by June 17, 2027, so that a legislative procedure regarding this is to be expected in the course of the year 2026.  
  • With the Omnibus VIII package published on December 10, 2025, the EU Commission has proposed a great abundance of simplifications in the area of environmental regulation. Many of the requirements have no direct product reference. However, at this point, reference should be made in particular to the plans to fundamentally reform and restrict the system of authorized representatives within the framework of the extended producer responsibility regimes and, furthermore, to further harmonize and simplify the regimes themselves. In addition, packaging law aspects are also to be taken up again in this course.  

Finally, it should be mentioned that the year 2026 is also likely to be characterized by further enforcement measures and related court decisions, particularly within the framework of the Single-Use Plastics Fund Act and other legal acts introduced in recent years, so that in addition to legislative developments, case law could certainly set interesting accents.  

B. Due Diligence Obligations in the Supply Chain  

The regulations on due diligence obligations in the supply chain underwent significant changes at the end of 2025, which economic operators must now prepare for in 2026. At the forefront is the agreement of December 9, 2025, between the Council of the EU, the EU Parliament, and the EU Commission on the Omnibus I package. The resulting legislative amendments, originally initiated by the EU Commission on February 26, 2025 (see also our blog post “OMNIBUS Initiative and possible adjustments to the LkSG – What is planned or already implemented?” of April 23, 2025), lead to substantial innovations for the Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence (CSDDD) and the Directive (EU) 2022/2464 on Corporate Sustainability Reporting (CSRD). These are presented below, as well as the impact of the CSDDD on the LkSG (German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act) as the national implementation act. In addition to the Omnibus I package, the Regulation (EU) 2023/1115 on deforestation-free supply chains (EUDR) was postponed by one year and adjusted content wise at the last possible moment in 2025. Here, too, the most important innovations are presented and the consequences for companies in 2026 are explained.  

Regardless of the presentation and evaluation of the content-related changes, it is worth mentioning from the authors’ point of view that a majority in the EU Parliament for the mentioned changes only came about due to the vote of the conservative EPP group together with the right-wing and far-right groups “Patriots for Europe,” “Europe of Sovereign Nations,” and “European Conservatives and Reformists.” The agreement was preceded by an often emotional and barely scientifically grounded political discourse about necessary adjustments to the legal acts. In this respect, it is questionable whether the adopted changes actually lead to facilitations for companies as claimed and, in particular, provide a long-term answer to the multiple challenges in supply chains.  

I. Omnibus I Package  

The EU Parliament passed the legislative package on December 16, 2025. The formal confirmation in the Council of the EU and the subsequent publication in the Official Journal are still pending. Only then can the changes enter into force.  

The CSRD undergoes a drastic restriction of the personal scope of application. Only companies that had an annual turnover of 450 million euros and an average of 1,000 employees in the relevant financial year will be covered. Thus, only 10% of the previously obligated companies will be covered by the CSRD in the future. However, the obligation of the Commission to investigate an expansion of the scope and to report on it annually from 2029 remains.  

In addition to a change in the scope of application, changes with regard to the report-relevant data points can be expected in 2026. The basis for this is the drafts of the revised European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) published by the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG) at the end of 2025. On their basis, the EU Commission will now adapt Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/2772, which sets the standards for sustainability reporting. The drafts reduce the relevant data points by 61% and should thus simplify the preparation of the reports. Furthermore, it is also no longer planned to develop sector-specific data requirements, which were previously still being awaited.  

The amendments to the CSRD must be transposed into national law by the Member States 12 months after entering into force. Germany has already missed the previous implementation deadline of July 6, 2024. It is now to be expected that the CSRD, including the latest amendments, will be implemented in 2026. Even if many companies are no longer directly affected by the CSRD in the future, it is to be expected that, among others, banks and insurance companies will continue to request similar reports form their customers to those to be created under the CSRD. It remains to be seen whether a simplification actually occurs or whether additional work arises for companies due to different reporting requirements on the market.  

The CSDDD was also severely restricted overall with regard to the scope of application. Only companies that had a turnover of 1.5 billion euros worldwide and an average of over 5,000 employees in the last financial year will be obligated. Member States are free to expand the scope. Furthermore, the regulations are to apply mandatorily for the first time in July 2029 and thus yet another year later than after the last amendment of April 2025. With regard to the due diligence obligations to be fulfilled, it should be easier for companies in future to focus on identifying and assessing particularly likely negative impacts in the supply chain. Accordingly, the prioritisation of activities to prevent, mitigate and end such impacts should also be facilitated. What sounds like a sensible approach at first causes considerable legal uncertainty, as the law works here with a number of undefined legal terms that stand in the way of a clear guideline for companies. Legal violations leading to damage for those affected can, however, not be prosecuted under civil law uniformly across Europe as before, but only according to the applicable national regulations. Furthermore, the obligation to create and implement a climate transition plan was repealed.  

The amendments to the CSDDD will likely mean no significant changes for the LkSG (German Supply Chain Act). However, since the Federal Government has announced it will implement the CSDDD 1:1, the scope of application of the LkSG could at least be restricted. The currently available draft of the LkSG amendment (BT_Drs. 21/2474) from October 2025 does not yet provide for this. Instead, it contains a strong reduction of sanctionable violations against the LkSG and an abolition of the reporting obligation under § 10 para. 2-4 LkSG. A consultation in the Bundestag is still pending, and it is likely to be expected that in this course the amendment of the CSDDD will find its way into the amendment of the LkSG. Companies should therefore observe this process attentively in 2026.  

II. EUDR  

Shortly before the former start of application of the EUDR on December 30, 2025, it was postponed by 1 year to December 30, 2026 by Regulation (EU) 2025/2650. For small and micro-enterprises, it now applies only from July 30, 2027. Furthermore, the “First-Touch Principle” was implemented. According to this, only companies that, as operators, place a relevant product on the market in the EU for the first time must verify without cause whether the goods are deforestation-free, were produced in accordance with the relevant legislation of the country of production, and then submit a corresponding due diligence statement. A facilitation within the group of operators is also made if the operators are so-called micro or small primary producers. These are small companies that produce relevant products in a country with low deforestation risk according to the EU Commission’s benchmarking and place them on the market in the EU. In practice, this mainly concerns European agricultural businesses. Instead of a due diligence statement, they must submit a one-time, simplified declaration and are then assigned an identification number.  

Unlike before, so-called downstream operators, i.e., those who transform a relevant product already placed on the market in the EU into another relevant product, and traders, provided they are not SMEs, only have to register in the EU portal “Traces”. In addition, they have to collect basic data on their suppliers and customers (including name and email address) and record the reference number of the due diligence statement or the identification number from their suppliers, insofar as these are operators. However, these data only have to be stored internally for five years. They only have an obligation to check the fulfillment of due diligence obligations themselves if they obtain information about a violation. In addition to the changes mentioned above, however, it will be particularly relevant for many companies that have previously been marginally affected that products with HS code 49 (‘Printed books, newspapers, pictures and other products of the printing industry, manuscripts, typescripts and plans, of paper’) are now excluded from the scope of the Regulation. 

Even though significant simplifications have thus already been made for a multitude of actors, the EUDR obliges the EU Commission to check by April 2026 whether further adjustments are necessary to reduce bureaucratic hurdles. On this basis, a new legislative initiative could be started. It should be noted that this check still cannot draw on experiences from the field and furthermore creates renewed significant legal uncertainty for the affected companies. It is to be hoped that a national legal act will be enacted in 2026 in which the open questions regarding responsibilities and sanctions are regulated.  

Outlook  

The year 2026 will continue to remain very dynamic in both product-related environmental law and due diligence regulation and will bring one or two surprises. Therefore, it can only be urgently recommended for companies to closely follow the regulatory developments and court decisions in the relevant areas in order to be able to react to them in a timely and tailored manner.

Do you have any questions about this news, or would you like to discuss it with the author? Please contact: Michael Öttinger und Paul Jäde

13. January 2026 Michael Öttinger & Paul Jäde, M.Sc.
Bild Michael Öttinger
Michael Öttinger
Lawyer / Counsel
Bild Paul Jäde, M.Sc.
Paul Jäde, M.Sc.
Lawyer

You may also be interested in:

OMNIBUS IV package and EU Deforestation Regulation

The EU Commission is currently attempting to streamline and simplify numerous legal acts in an unprecedented campaign.

After the EU Commission presented OMNIBUS I and II packages in February 2025 (see our blog post OMNIBUS initiative and possible adjustments to the LkSG), it followed up with packages III and IV in May 2025. The new packages are all about ‘simplification.’ While Package III focuses on the Common Agricultural Policy and is not covered in this article due to its lack of relevance to product law, Package IV proposes a new category of companies and related simplifications. In addition, the EU Commission wants to digitise the fulfilment of product-related obligations. Although not part of the OMNIBUS initiative but not less prominent, the EU Commission published a revised version of the guidelines and FAQs on the Deforestation Regulation in mid-April. This was followed on 20.05.2025 by the long-awaited ‘country benchmarking’, which assigns a deforestation risk to the countries of origin of the raw materials covered by the EUDR.

This article provides an overview of the intended changes in the OMNIBUS IV package (see A.), explains the implications of the updates to the EUDR (see B.) and concludes with an interim assessment of the EU Commission’s approach following the first four OMNIBUS packages (see C.).

A. OMNIBUS IV package

The OMNIBUS IV package comprises a total of five draft amendments:

In addition to draft amendments to a large number of regulations and directives, the EU Commission has submitted a proposal for the definition of ‘small mid-cap enterprises’ (SMC) in Recommendation C(2025)3500.

According to the recommendation, SMCs are defined as enterprises that

  • are not small or medium-sized enterprises within the meaning of Recommendation 2003/361/EC,
  • employ fewer than 750 persons, and
  • have an annual turnover not exceeding EUR 150 million or an annual balance sheet total not exceeding EUR 129 million.

By introducing SMCs, the EU Commission intends to exempt a larger number of economic operators from regulatory obligations. Against this background, SMCs are to be subject to similar or even the same simplifications as small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) for a number of legal acts in future.

The proposed amendments to product-related regulations and directives are outlined below for individual legal acts or groups of legal acts.

I. EU Battery Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2023/1542)

Amendments to the Battery Regulation are provided for in the draft amendments COM(2025) 501 final, COM(2025) 504 final and COM (2025) 258 final. These are as follows:

  • Postponement of the scope of application: The EU Commission proposes an amendment to Art. 48(1) Battery Regulation. According to this, the due diligence obligations laid down in Art. 48(2), (3) and Art. 49, 50, 52 Battery Regulation shall only apply on 18 August 2027, two years later than previously planned.
  • Simplification for SMCs: The exemption of SMEs from the due diligence obligations under Art. 47 of the Battery Regulation is to be extended to SMCs.
  • Reduced disclosure requirements: Economic operators who are required to fulfil due diligence obligations under Art. 47 et seq. Battery Regulation will in future only have to review their strategy and publish it on the internet every three years instead of annually (amendment to Art. 52(3) Battery Regulation).
  • Mandatory online communication: In future, certain information must be provided in digital format and contact with the authorities must take place digitally. As these changes apply to a large number of regulations and directives, they are presented in detail below under B.III.

II. Regulation on fluorinated greenhouse gases (Regulation (EU) 2024/573)

Amendments to the Regulation on fluorinated greenhouse gases (“F-Gas Regulation”) are provided for in the draft amendment COM(2025)501 final. For the import or export of products and equipment containing fluorinated greenhouse gases, registration in the F-Gas Portal is currently required under Article 20 of the F-Gas Regulation. This applies regardless of whether the products and equipment are subsequently subject to further obligations or restrictions under the F-Gas Regulation, which means a high administrative burden to comply with the extensive registration requirements. For this reason, the EU Commission wants to limit registration as a prerequisite for import and export to the following cases:

  • Import and export of fluorinated greenhouse gases
  • Placing on the market of products and equipment that must be reported in accordance with Art. 26 F-Gas Regulation
  • Export of products and equipment in accordance with Art. 22(3) F-Gas Regulation whose function depends on fluorinated greenhouse gases with a global warming potential of ≥1000, from the date of prohibition in accordance with Annex IV F-Gas Regulation.

According to the EU Commission, the changes mean that many SMEs and SMCs will no longer be subject to the registration requirement under Art. 20 F-Gas Regulation.

III. Amendments to various product-related legal acts

With the proposed amendment COM(2025) 503 final, which refers to various directives, and the proposed amendment COM(2025) 504 final, which in turn refers to various regulations, the EU Commission is proposing a series of digitisation measures. This covers in particular the provision of certain product-related information and the exchange of this information with the competent authorities. The following legal acts are affected:

  • RoHS Directive (Directive (2011/65/EU)
  • Electromagnetic Compatibility Directive (Directive 2014/30/EU)
  • Low Voltage Directive (Directive 2014/35/EU)
  • Radio Equipment Directive (Directive 2014/53/EU)
  • Pressure Equipment Directive (Directive 2014/68/EU)
  • Battery Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2023/1542)
  • Ecodesign Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2024/1781)

The following adjustments are proposed:

  • If an EU declaration of conformity or similar document must be included with a product, it must be produced in electronic format and made available via an internet address or a machine-readable code.
  • Every manufacturer must provide a ‘digital contact’ on products placed on the market. A corresponding obligation to provide an electronic address has been in force since 13.12.2024 for non-harmonised consumer products (without ‘CE’). This extended labelling requirement is enshrined in Art. 9(6) Regulation (EU) 2023/988 (the EU Product Safety Regulation or GPSR), i.e. in the manufacturer’s obligations. Electronic addresses have also been implemented for other labelling requirements in the GPSR. In addition, mandatory digital communication between economic operators on the one hand and national authorities on the other is to be introduced in the future. As soon as the ‘European Business Wallet’ is available, the digital address provided there will constitute the ‘digital contact’.
  • Operating instructions for products may, with the exception of safety instructions, also be made available exclusively in digital form in future.
  • Reporting obligations to national authorities, which could previously also be fulfilled in analogue form, may only be fulfilled digitally in future.
  • In future, general specifications are to be used more frequently instead of harmonised standards.
  • An obligation is to be introduced to store information from the EU declaration of conformity on the digital product passport (DPP) if a DPP is required under another regulation.

As shown, the changes proposed by the OMNIBUS IV package are comprehensive. It will be interesting to see to what extent the proposals on digitalisation will be accepted and can pave the way for a transition to the ‘European Business Wallet’. Affected companies should also pay particular attention, as some legal acts, such as the Battery Regulation, are dealt with in several draft amendments and are therefore subject to different legislative procedures.

B. Update on the EU Deforestation Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2023/1115)

According to Art. 29 Regulation (EU) 2023/1115 (EUDR), the EU Commission is to carry out a risk assessment of countries or parts of countries. The assessment relates to the risk that a relevant product listed in Annex I EUDR from the territory concerned violates the prohibition of deforestation under Art. 3(a) EUDR. A distinction is made between three categories:

a. high risk

b. standard risk

c. low risk

The classification of a country or parts thereof has two effects. On the one hand, according to Art. 13 EUDR, in the case of a low risk, reduced due diligence obligations apply to market participants (Art. 2(15) EUDR) and traders (Art. 2(17) EUDR). Subject to an assessment of the risk of circumvention of the Regulation, the obligations under Art. 10 EUDR (risk assessment) and Art. 11 EUDR (risk mitigation) do not have to be fulfilled. However, this means, conversely, that the obligations to obtain information under Art. 9 EUDR and, in particular, to draw up and submit a due diligence declaration remain in place even in the case of a low risk without exception. On the other hand, the frequency of checks by the competent authorities depends on the classification. While in the case of high risk, 9% of market participants who place relevant products on the market or make them available on the market must be checked each year, in the case of standard and low risk, the figures are 3% and 1% of market participants, respectively, cf. Art. 16(8)-(10) EUDR.

The long-awaited categorisation by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/1093 now qualifies four countries as high risk (Belarus, Myanmar, North Korea and Russia) and 140 countries (including all 27 EU Member States) as low risk. This classification has been met with some criticism, as the threshold for assuming a high risk has been set very high. This contradicts many reports on deforestation in countries such as Brazil, Indonesia and the Democratic Republic of Congo, which continue to be classified as ‘standard risk’ because all unlisted countries are automatically assigned to the ‘standard risk’ category. However, according to Art. 29(2) of the EUDR, the list is to be reviewed on an ongoing basis and adjusted as necessary.

In addition to country benchmarking, the EU Commission has again updated the guidelines on the EUDR and the FAQs. The following updates are particularly noteworthy:

  • Wood or paper packaging that constitutes a relevant product under Annex I EUDR is not covered by the EUDR if it is only used to support or protect another product. In this case, they function primarily as packaging. However, they are subject to the EUDR in exceptional cases if their supporting and protective function gives the other product its essential character and they can therefore no longer be classified as mere packaging, see No. 2.5 FAQ.
  • Pursuant to Art. 4(9) EUDR, market participants may, when submitting their due diligence declarations, refer to the reference numbers of due diligence declarations that other market participants have already submitted to the information system in relation to the relevant product. This requires a review of the declarations previously submitted. The obligation to “ascertain” that due diligence was exercised in line with the EUDR has now been specified to mean that it refers to the verification of the validity of the respective reference numbers, see No. 3.4 FAQ. Deeper investigations may nevertheless be useful in individual cases, as responsibility for compliance with the requirements under Art. 3 EUDR continues to exist, see Art. 4(10) EUDR.
  • Members of a group of companies may authorise one of their members to submit the due diligence declarations for all members of the group. Although each member of a group of companies remains subject to the Regulation, the submission of the due diligence declaration can now be bundled, see No. 3.13 FAQ.
  • A single due diligence declaration may cover a large number of batches and relevant products in advance in accordance with Art. 4(2) EUDR. It should not exceed batches for a period of one year and should only include products that already exist at the time of submission. However, depending on the supply chain and product, it may be advisable to submit several due diligence declarations to ensure that all products placed on the market are actually covered by a declaration, see No. 5.19 FAQ.

In addition to the EU Commission, the Federal Office for Agriculture and Food published FAQs on 14.05.2025, which clarify a number of issues and should be consulted in particular by German companies.

Interim conclusion on current EU legislative procedures

The current pace at which the EU Commission is initiating new legislative procedures may be driven by a desire to demonstrate its ability to act in crises. However, if this comes at the expense of quality and creates legal uncertainty for the companies affected, this demonstration will unfortunately not be successful. The dilemma is particularly evident in short-term postponements of the date of application of legal acts, such as the EUDR at the end of 2024 and now the due diligence obligations under the Battery Regulation. Even if the intention behind this is to protect companies from excessive burdens, such actions tend to give the impression of an overwhelmed EU that is unable to provide clear regulations and appropriate guidelines from the outset. This damages the image of a European legal community in which legal certainty and clarity are supposed to prevail. Against this backdrop, we can only appeal to legislators to provide companies with more support in implementing the adopted legislation rather than hastily proposing supposed simplifications.

Do you have any questions or would you like to discuss the news with the author? Please contact Michael Öttinger and Paul Jäde.

24. June 2025 Michael Öttinger
Bild Michael Öttinger
Michael Öttinger
Lawyer / Counsel

You may also be interested in:

OMNIBUS initiative and possible adjustments to the LkSG – What is planned or already implemented?

The regulatory framework surrounding the topic of ‘sustainable corporate governance’ is currently the subject of intense debate and is already undergoing change.

Adjustments are imminent to the key EU regulations designed to ensure that companies in the European Union (EU) move towards climate neutrality, human rights and environmental protection. In addition, according to the agreements reached by the SPD and CDU in their coalition agreement, changes are also planned at national level, particularly with regard to the Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (LkSG). The proposed changes come against the backdrop of a weakening economy and accelerating global warming. On the 15.04.2025, the EU’s Copernicus service and the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) published their report ‘European State of the Climate’. According to the report, Europe is the fastest warming continent and therefore particularly affected by climate change.

This article provides an overview of the changes already adopted and planned as part of the OMNIBUS initiative (see A.), the expected changes to the LkSG (see B.) and the associated opportunities and risks for competitiveness, environmental protection and human rights (see C.).

A. OMNIBUS initiative

The OMNIBUS initiative was publicly presented by the EU Commission on the 26.02.2025. According to the Commission, the background to this is the changed geopolitical world situation, which has made changes to essential instruments for sustainable corporate governance necessary. In particular, it is important to simplify EU regulations and thus increase the competitiveness of companies, as freed-up capacity could be reinvested. This should also bring the two concerns of ‘competitiveness’ and ‘climate protection’ closer together. The legal acts affected by the proposals, which in turn directly affect companies and are therefore of interest in this article, are Directive (EU) 2022/2464 (CSRD) (see I.), Directive (EU) 2024/1760 (CSDDD) (see section II), Regulation (EU) 2023/956 (CBAM) (see section III) and Regulation (EU) 2020/852 (Taxonomy Regulation). Despite ongoing discussions, Regulation (EU) 2023/1115 (EUDR) is not covered by the initiative, even though the EU Commission is also seeking changes here.

The OMNIBUS initiative – insofar as it is directly relevant to companies – is essentially divided into three Commission proposals:

With Commission proposal COM (2025) 80 final, the Commission intended to postpone the date of application of the CSRD and CSDDD. The proposal was adopted unchanged by the EU Parliament on 03.04.2025 and subsequently by the Council of the EU on 14.04.2025 and published in the Official Journal of the EU on 16.04.2025 (Directive (EU) 2025/794).

The Commission proposal COM (2025) 81 final provides for changes to the content of the CSRD and CSDDD in order to reduce and simplify the obligations imposed on companies by the legal acts. The proposal has been forwarded to the Council of the EU in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure and is to be given priority treatment by the institutions.

Finally, the Commission proposal COM (2025) 87 refers to the amendment of the CBAM with the aim of increasing the efficiency of the mechanism, among other things by simplifying reporting requirements for importers. This proposal is also at the start of the ordinary legislative procedure.

I. CSRD

The CSRD is itself a directive amending Directive 2013/34/EU (the Accounting Directive), Directive 2004/109/EC (the Transparency Directive), Directive 2006/43/EC (the Audit Directive) and Regulation (EU) No. 537/2014 (EU Audit Regulation). Its aim is to inform investors, consumers and civil society about a company’s sustainability performance. This should enable informed decisions to be made about investments or the use of services. To this end, companies within the scope of application are required to disclose the risks and opportunities for the company arising from social and environmental issues. Reporting is carried out in accordance with the European Sustainability Reporting Standard (ESRS) and must be verified to a certain extent by auditors. The CSRD must be transposed into national law.

With the adoption of Directive (EU) 2025/794, the reporting requirements introduced by the CSRD will apply to companies that are not already covered by the scope of the Directive for the 2024 financial year, depending on the company, from 01.01.2027 or 01.012028, one year later than previously planned.

The Commission’s draft COM (2025) 81 final essentially provides for the following changes to the CSRD:

  • The personal scope is to be limited to companies with more than 1,000 employees that either have a turnover of EUR 50 million or a positive balance sheet of EUR 25 million. According to the Commission, this will reduce the number of companies within the scope by 80%. At the same time, this is intended to align the scope with the CSDDD in order to harmonise the regulations more closely (amendment to Art. 19a of the Accounting Directive).
  • All companies outside the scope of application may refer to a voluntary standard to be adopted by the Commission based on the ‘Voluntary Sustainability Reporting Standard for non-listed SMEs’ (VSME) published in December 2024 for voluntary reporting. This should also be the maximum amount of information that companies within the scope of the Directive may request from their exempt business partners along the supply chain in order to fulfil their own reporting obligations (amendment to Art. 19a of the Accounting Directive).
  • The sector-specific reporting standards that are currently still pending will not be adopted. Instead, the existing ESRS will be revised. In particular, a significant reduction in the data points required is being sought (amendment to Art. 29b of the Accounting Directive).
  • Voluntary reporting by companies with more than 1,000 employees and less than EUR 450 million in turnover in accordance with the Taxonomy Regulation. If they wish to report in accordance with the Taxonomy Regulation, they must disclose their turnover and certain key figures, while other key figures are only reported on a voluntary basis. According to the Commission, this eliminates the costs of reporting under the Taxonomy Regulation for these companies. The background to this provision is likely to be that reporting under the Taxonomy Regulation on a voluntary basis continues to be subject to certain minimum standards (introduction of Art. 19b of the Accounting Directive).

II. CSDDD

In the case of the CSDDD, Directive (EU) 2025/794 postponed the date of application for the largest companies by one year, meaning that the first companies will be required to comply with the requirements from the 26.07.2028. The CSDDD must be transposed into national law.

The CSDDD aims to ensure sustainable and responsible conduct with regard to human rights and environmental impacts in companies and along their supply chains. Key obligations include identifying and preventing potential and actual human rights violations and negative environmental impacts of the company itself and within its supply chain. A climate transformation plan must also be adopted and implemented that is consistent with the Paris Climate Agreement.

The Commission’s draft COM (2025) 81 final essentially provides for the following changes to the CSDDD:

  • In future, companies will only be required to exercise due diligence with regard to their own activities and those of their direct suppliers (known as the Tier 1 approach). Only in the case of ‘plausible information’ about negative impacts of business activities on indirect business partners must these be identified and mitigated or prevented. According to the Commission, ‘plausible information’ is, for example, information that clearly indicates that the direct business partner was only used as an intermediary to circumvent human rights and environmental obligations. However, it should still be ensured that the company’s own code of conduct is complied with along the supply chain (amendment to Art. 8 CSDDD).
  • The definition of stakeholders is limited to employees and their representatives, as well as individuals and communities whose rights and interests could be directly affected by business activities. At the same time, companies will only have to involve ‘relevant’ stakeholders in future, rather than all potentially relevant stakeholders (amendment to Art. 3 para. 1 lit. n) and Art. 13 CSDDD).
  • Companies will in future only have to assess and monitor the implementation, effectiveness and adequacy of their measures to comply with due diligence obligations every five years instead of annually (amendment to Art. 15 CSDDD).
  • In future, there will no longer be a minimum amount for penalty payments. Instead, the Commission intends to adopt guidelines on the imposition of penalty payments to ensure that they are consistent with the factors to be taken into account in the event of a breach (amendment to Art. 27 CSDDD).
  • The obligation to draw up a climate transformation plan will be retained. However, in future it will not have to be implemented, but will merely have to contain measures for implementation (amendment to Art. 22 CSDDD).
  • The EU-wide civil liability regime is to be abolished. Trade unions and NGOs will also no longer be empowered to enforce claims for damages on behalf of natural persons. A civil claim for damages will therefore only be possible if provided for under national law (amendment to Art. 29 CSDDD).
  • The Commission is to be required to publish and update best practices and guidelines on compliance with due diligence obligations every six months (amendment to Art. 19 CSDDD).

III. CBAM

The aim of the regulation is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, levy a fair price for CO2 emissions from the production of CO2-intensive goods imported into the EU, and promote cleaner industrial production through a method for calculating grey emissions in line with the Paris Agreement and the EU’s ‘Fit for 55’ package. The main obligation to date is to report the direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions of goods contained in imports into the EU. From 2026, CO2 certificates must be purchased, each of which ‘represents’ a certain amount of greenhouse gases. If a product whose production has resulted in indirect or direct emissions is then imported into the EU, the corresponding amount of CO2 certificates must be surrendered upon import. This will make the import of greenhouse gas-intensive products from outside the EU more expensive in the future.

The Commission’s draft COM (2025) 87 essentially provides for the following changes to the CBAM:

  • The date of application for the mandatory purchase of allowances for imports of goods within the scope of the Regulation is postponed by one year to February 2027 (amendment to Art. 20 CBAM).
  • Importers of small quantities of goods covered by CBAM whose imports account for only a very small proportion of the greenhouse gas emissions contained in those goods will be exempt from the regulation (amendment to Art. 2 CBAM in conjunction with the introduction to Annex VIII).
  • Reporting requirements for importers within the scope of the regulation will be streamlined. This applies in particular to the approval procedures before the national authorities and the Commission, the collection of data in third countries, the procedures for determining the greenhouse gas emissions contained and the possibility of claiming that a CO2 price has already been paid in third countries (amendments to various articles).

B. LkSG

As already demanded by the CDU during the election campaign, there are to be changes to the LkSG. Specifically, the coalition agreement states

‘In addition, we are abolishing the national supply chain due diligence law (LkSG)’ (line 1909).

However, if one reads the lines following this quote, this is probably not literally the case. The LkSG is to be replaced by the CSDDD, which is to be transposed into national law in a ‘bureaucracy-free and enforcement-friendly’ manner. With regard to the LkSG, it is stated that the reporting obligations are to be completely abolished with immediate effect. However, the statutory due diligence obligations will continue to apply, even if no sanctions are imposed. The only exception will be ‘massive human rights violations,’ which will continue to be punished.

It therefore remains to be seen what the changes will actually look like. However, it is not to be expected that the law will be completely abolished and that the responsible Federal Office for Economic Affairs and Export Control (BAFA) will have to reassign all staff in this area of responsibility, but rather that it will continue to work on the matter and draw up guidelines, such as the recent information sheet on industry initiatives and antitrust law.

C. Assessment and outlook

Any changes resulting from the OMNIBUS initiative are now dependent on agreement between the Council, the EU Parliament and the Commission. In any case, Directive (EU) 2025/794 has given the legislator a little more time, which is also needed due to the sometimes widely divergent positions among EU member states and within the Parliament. In this context, it will be interesting to see how the CDU and SPD work together in the context of Germany’s position and, in particular, how the measures are subsequently implemented at national level.

It remains to be seen whether the proposed amendments, if adopted, will succeed in better aligning competitiveness with climate and human rights protection. At first glance, competitiveness stands to benefit most by limiting the personal scope of the legal acts and reducing reporting requirements. However, due to the risks posed by climate change, the financial market in particular may continue to push for more extensive reporting requirements for smaller companies under civil law in the case of CSRD reporting. In addition, changes in the case of the CSDD could also lead to renewed legal uncertainty and, in some cases, aimless action on the part of companies. For example, the term ‘plausible information’ about human rights violations and environmental damage is open to interpretation and can mean anything from reliable knowledge to generic findings about problematic supply chain flows. The obligation to review own due diligence systems only every five years does not necessarily take into account the fact that complex compliance systems require very regular monitoring and evaluation. Finally, the ‘retreat’ to national liability regimes once again leads to a fragmented legal situation, which creates uncertainty, particularly for companies operating across the EU. On a positive note, the Commission has committed to publishing guidance every six months. This has been lacking in the past.

Do you have any questions or would you like to discuss the news with the author? Please contact Michael Öttinger and Paul Jäde.

23. April 2025 Michael Öttinger
Bild Michael Öttinger
Michael Öttinger
Lawyer / Counsel

You may also be interested in:

What’s changing in 2025: Product-related environmental law and supply chain due diligence

In the area of product-related environmental law, 2025 will be characterized at European level by further implementation steps under the EU Battery Regulation, by preparations for the EU Packaging Regulation and probably by the progress of files that have already been initiated. At national level, some legal uncertainty is to be expected for the time being until the new Bundestag and the new federal government take up their work. Further developments relating to the implementation of due diligence obligations in Germany will certainly also depend heavily on the upcoming political developments, although certain lines are likely to be clear due to European legal requirements.

This article is the first in a series of blog posts with the joint title “What’s changing in 2025“, in which the experts from Produktkanzlei team summarize the relevant topics from their respective areas of expertise.

This article first presents the changes in product-related environmental law that have already been adopted and are still in the legislative process (see A.). In a second part, the foreseeable developments on due diligence obligations in the supply chain are summarized (see B.).

A. Product-related environmental law

As in the previous year, the ongoing implementation of the EU Battery Regulation will also be of central importance in the coming year (see I.). In addition, the year 2025 will have to be dominated across all sectors by preparations for the recently finalized EU Packaging Regulation (see II.). At national level, the focus in many sectors will initially remain on the Single-Use Plastics Fund Act (see III.). After all, many issues will continue to develop and become more concrete in the coming months (see IV.).

I. EU Battery Regulation

Regulation (EU) 2023/1542 (BattReg) has been in force since 18.02.2024. The first compliance deadline in this context was 18.08.2024, since when extensive new formal requirements apply. This generally includes the requirement for a conformity assessment (incl. EU declaration of conformity and CE marking), mandatory manufacturer, importer and identification markings and the obligation to include operating and safety instructions. In addition, the new substance restriction for lead in portable batteries (Art. 6 in conjunction with Annex I No. 3 BattReg), performance and durability requirements for rechargeable industrial batteries, LMT batteries and electric vehicle batteries (Art. 10 in conjunction with Annex IV BattReg), safety of stationary battery energy storage systems (Art. 12 in conjunction with Annex V BattReg) and information on the state of health and expected lifetime of stationary battery energy storage systems, LMT batteries and electric vehicle batteries (Art. 14 in conjunction with Annex VII BattVReg) apply to specific battery categories.

At first glance, the list of additional new requirements for 2025 is much shorter, but several core areas of the BattReg are affected, meaning that the implementation and adaptation effort will remain high. The following aspects should be mentioned for 2025:

  • Carbon footprint for electric vehicle batteries (Art. 7 BattVO)

According to Art. 7 para. 1 subpara. 2 lit. a) in conjunction with Annex II BattReg, it should actually be mandatory from 18.02.2025 for electric vehicle batteries to prepare a carbon footprint declaration and enclose it in writing with each battery. However, this will require further clarification from the EU Commission regarding the method by which the carbon footprint is calculated and verified and the format of the relevant declaration. Both should have been published by the EU Commission by 18.02.2024, but are still at the draft stage (draft regarding calculation and draft regarding declaration). As a result, a provision now applies to postpone the date of application, according to which this is only 12 months after the publication of the aforementioned legal acts instead of the originally planned 18.02.2025. This means that the date of application will be postponed until at least early to mid-2026. If the first delegated acts and implementing acts cannot be completed and published by the EU Commission on time, further delays are also to be expected for all other comparable constellations. This will initially affect other battery categories in particular within the scope of Art. 7 BattReg.

  • Due diligence obligations in the supply chain (Art. 47 ff. BattReg)

According to Art. 48 para. 1 BattReg, economic operators who place batteries on the market or put them into service must comply with the due diligence obligations laid down in Art. 48 para. 2 and 3, 49, 50 and 52 BattReg and, to this end, must establish and implement strategies to comply with the due diligence obligations applicable to batteries. According to Art. 51 BattReg, the fulfillment of obligations must be verified by a notified body and approved if the findings are positive. However, such a notified body has not yet been established in Germany, meaning that the verification procedure to be applied has not yet been specified. An initial specification of the due diligence obligations can be expected in the guidelines to be published by the EU Commission by 18.02.2025, although it is questionable whether these will actually be published in time. Against this background, the preparation of measures to fulfill the due diligence obligations can initially only be based on the vague legal wording and general principles, for example also according to the German Supply Chain Act.

  • Extended producer responsibility (Art. 54 ff. BattReg)

The provisions on extended producer responsibility according to Art. 54 ff. BattReg also apply from 18.08.2025 and develop the existing regime under Directive 2006/66/EC, which is currently implemented in Germany in the BattG. The basic structures of producer registration and the take-back obligations of producers and distributors will be retained in principle but will be further developed and tightened in numerous aspects. However, the adoption of the detailed requirements is the responsibility of the individual Member States, which must establish these in national legislation. Although Germany currently has a draft law to adapt its battery law to Regulation (EU) 2023/1542 (Batterierecht-EU-Anpassungsgesetz – Batt-EU-AnpG), it is more than questionable whether this will be finally passed before the new elections in February. This is currently associated with enormous legal uncertainty for affected economic operators and it can therefore only be recommended that national developments in all relevant Member States be closely monitored.

In addition to the newly added obligations, it is to be expected that the enforcement of the already applicable requirements will pick up speed, so that the implementation measures taken must now prove themselves in practice for the first time. It is to be hoped that the responsible authorities will proceed with a sense of proportion and thus contribute to the practical application of the BattReg.

II. EU Packaging Regulation

After a legislative process lasting over two years, the Council finally adopted the Regulation on packaging and packaging waste (PPWR) on 16.12.2024. This means that it only needs to be published in the Official Journal of the EU before it applies 18 months after its entry into force. Depending on the exact date of publication, the start of application is expected to be mid-2026, meaning that there will be no legal obligations in 2025. National packaging legislation must also be adapted to the new requirements by mid-2026 at the latest.

However, this should not obscure the fact that the Packaging Regulation, like the existing BattReg, will bring extensive changes. Packaging law is being developed from a waste regime into a life cycle regulation with comprehensive sustainability requirements. This will affect the entire packaging industry, all economic players who package products and sell packaged products. For a complete and timely implementation of all requirements, it is essential that all suppliers of packaging materials and packaging and all packaging economic operators start promptly to jointly assign the respective roles under the Packaging Regulation and initiate the necessary implementation steps.

Unfortunately, the legal definition of manufacturer in Art. 3 No. 14 PPWR does not provide clarity here. It states that “any natural or legal person who manufactures packaging or a packaged product” is to be regarded as a manufacturer, without providing any further criteria or conditions as to which of the two alternatively named actors is to be regarded as the responsible manufacturer and when. This uncertainty is exacerbated by the fact that Art. 3 No. 16 PPWR defines “any natural or legal person who supplies packaging or packaging material to a manufacturer” as a supplier. This leaves it completely unclear whether the supplier of finished packaging, for example a prefabricated folding carton, or only the person who fills it with their goods is to be regarded as a manufacturer within the meaning of Art. 3 No. 14 PPWR. Against this backdrop, it is to be hoped that the EU Commission will quickly publish corresponding interpretative notes in order to enable the clarification of the roles in a legally secure manner.

In terms of timing, the provisions of the Packaging Regulation will not all apply directly from mid-2026, but must be complied with in stages. Central to this are a completely new conformity assessment obligation immediately from 2026 (Art. 35 ff. PPWR, incl. EU Declaration of Conformity, but without CE marking), as well as a manufacturer, importer and identification marking obligation (Art. 15 para. 5, 6 and Art. 18 para. 3 PPWR).

The majority of the new, central sustainability obligations, such as

  • recyclability (Art. 6 PPWR),
  • the minimum recyclate content in plastic packaging (Art. 7 PPWR),
  • the obligation to minimize packaging (Art. 10 PPWR),
  • the ban on excessive packaging (Art. 24 PPWR),
  • the restriction of certain packaging formats (Art. 25 PPWR) and
  • the entire reusability requirements (Art. 11 and Art. 26 ff. PPWR),

will, however, only apply from 01.01.2030. In between, probably from the beginning of 2028, new, EU-wide uniform packaging labeling regulations will become mandatory, which should then finally put an end to the national patchwork.

For further details, see our blog post “EU Packaging Regulation nears final adoption”.

III Single-use Plastics Fund Act

At national level, the Single-use Plastics Fund Act (Einwegkunststofffondsgesetz – EWKFondsG) has caused quite a stir in the affected sectors in recent weeks and months. This has been in force since 01.01.2024 and, in particular, requires manufacturers of single-use plastic products (food containers, packets and wrappers with food content, beverage containers/bottles/cups, lightweight plastic carrier bags, wet wipes, balloons and tobacco filters) to register on the DIVID platform of the Federal Environment Agency (UBA). As of 01.01.2025, the further provisions on annual quantity reporting (to be submitted by 15.05. of each year with regard to the previous year) and the related duty to pay the levy have now also come into force.

However, the Federal Environment Agency has made some very controversial decisions in recent months that have called into question or even turned upside down the allocation of roles previously assumed in the market. The Federal Environment Agency’s general ruling on an unfilled yoghurt pot (available HERE) is central to this. In this ruling, the Federal Environment Agency decided that an unfilled yoghurt pot is also to be regarded as a food container covered by the law and that the producer of the same is therefore a producer within the meaning of the law. Thus, according to the Federal Environment Agency’s interpretation, the obligation to register, report quantities and pay duties does not apply to the person who fills the pot with yoghurt, but takes effect one step earlier. Although an appeal has been lodged against this far-reaching classification, it is unlikely that a decision will be made in the near future. In combination with the considerable backlog in processing requests for classification and other appeals against classification decisions, there is considerable uncertainty in the market. However, this does not mean that the obligations will be postponed or otherwise suspended, so that every market actor should choose and implement a reasonable implementation strategy, if possible in cooperation with suppliers and business customers.

IV. Overview of further developments

In addition to the BattReg and the PPWR, further comprehensive legislative projects in the area of product-related environmental law will also be on the EU agenda in 2025. The following topics should be highlighted here:

  • The draft revision of the Waste Framework Directive published in mid-2023 has been in trilogue negotiations since October 2024. In particular, the current draft also aims to introduce a regime for extended producer responsibility for textiles and footwear. This would then lead to national registration and take-back obligations. In terms of timing, the legislative process is expected to be completed in 2025 and the new obligations may apply from 2027. This would then be the second step towards a genuine circular economy, after all Member States have actually already had to introduce separate collection of textile waste since 01.01.2025 (cf. Art. 11 para. 1 subpara. 2 Directive 2008/98/EC, implemented in Germany in Sec. 20 para. 2 sentence 1 No. 6 and Sentence 2 KrWG).
  • A major uncertainty factor in the electronics industry continues to be the very slow and non-transparent decision on renewal applications for exemption from ubstance restrictions under the RoHS Directive 2011/65/EU. As numerous assessments on related exemptions are now available, decisions on essential exemptions for lead and cadmium can probably be expected in 2025. According to a current draft, the decision-making process for exemptions under RoHS will in future be more time-bound, more transparent and involve the European Chemicals Agency.

At national level, the start of 2025 is characterized by the current political situation in Germany, in which the current governing parties no longer have a majority in the (dissolved) Bundestag and new elections are due in February. In light of this, it seems almost impossible that legislative projects (still) initiated by the current government in the area of product-related environmental law will be completed. Instead, these will fall victim to the principle of discontinuity. This applies in particular to the draft of a second law to amend the Electrical and Electronic Equipment Act, with which the general take-back and information obligations are to be extended and new obligations introduced in relation to disposable e-cigarettes. Other projects, such as the further development of the national packaging law, will also not be finalized.

B. Due diligence obligations in the supply chain

The increasingly dense network of regulations on human rights and environmental requirements in the supply chain is now leading to a labyrinth of obligations, rights, exceptions and counter-exceptions that is almost impossible to understand, despite the well-meaning intentions. Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence (CSDD), Directive (EU) 2022/2464 on sustainability reporting (CSRD), Regulation (EU) 2023/1115 on deforestation-free supply chains (EUDR), Regulation (EU) 2024/3015 on the prohibition of products made using forced labor (FLR) and the due diligence obligations in the BattReg have created a jungle that is gradually obscuring the essentials instead of shedding light on the darkness. This is even more true against the background that the individual regulatory regimes are not coordinated with each other, issues are addressed several times and individual aspects cannot be implemented in practice despite their noble intentions.

In terms of content, it is worth mentioning at this point that Regulation (EU) 2024/3234 postponed the application of the EUDR by one year to 30.12.2025 shortly before its actual planned date of application on 30.12.2024. However, this should not be taken as an opportunity to (temporarily) halt implementation efforts, as these still require complex and far-reaching measures with potentially far-reaching interventions throughout the supply chain. Although the FLR will come into force on 14.12.2027, this Regulation requires measures to ensure that the entire supply chain is free of any forced labor. For more complex supply chains, this will certainly require a lead time of several years.

With regard to the national perspective, there will certainly be adjustments to the German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (Lieferkettensorgfaltspflichtengesetz – LkSG) after the new elections and the formation of a new government. This is not only in order to comply with the obligation to implement the CSDDD by 26.07.2026 (further details can be found in our blog post “EU Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) – What will change in Germany?”), but also in order to implement new findings from the implementation and political objectives. Against this background, it is not possible to make reliable forecasts at this point in time. What can be considered almost certain, assuming the LkSG remains in force, is that the reporting obligation under the LkSG will be linked to the reporting obligation under the CSRD. Although the draft law on the implementation of Directive (EU) 2022/2464 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2022 amending Regulation (EU) No. 537/2014 and Directives 2004/109/EC, 2006/43/EC and 2013/34/EU with regard to sustainability reporting by companies will probably not be finally adopted in the current legislative period, there seems to be a consensus across party lines that at least this alignment is absolutely necessary.

Outlook

As already indicated on several occasions, national developments in product-related environmental law and the protection of human rights and environmental concerns in supply chains will depend crucially on the outcome of the new elections in February 2025. The course that has already been set could be changed spontaneously, meaning that companies may also have to take new directions. Where this leads to a reduction in unnecessary requirements and formality, such a development would certainly be welcome. However, where far-reaching cuts are to be announced and possibly implemented for the sake of a simple message, this should be done with caution with regard to legal certainty, the coherence of legal regulations and the weighing up of all relevant protected interests.

Either way, all economic players will face a turbulent year in 2025, in which a further increase in regulatory density can be expected from the EU in addition to national developments. However, it must also be assumed that statutory guidelines and tertiary legislation will only be published with massive delays, which will result in further legal uncertainty. In any case, the focus in 2025 must be more than ever on close monitoring of new developments and a sound understanding of upcoming issues in order to derive the right operational and strategic measures.

Do you have any questions about this news, or would you like to discuss it with the author? Please contact: Michael Öttinger

7. January 2025 Michael Öttinger
Bild Michael Öttinger
Michael Öttinger
Lawyer / Counsel

You may also be interested in:

EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) – What is changing in Germany?

Directive (EU) 2024/1760 on corporate sustainability due diligence was published in the Official Journal of the EU on 05.07.2024 and came into force on 25.07.2024. The EU Member States now have until 26.07.2026 to transpose the new requirements into national law.

Many member states can literally implement the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) on a greenfield site, as they have not yet issued any national requirements in this area. The Federal Republic of Germany, on the other hand, is in a special situation due to the Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (LkSG), which has been in force since 01.01.2023. As the CSDDD – similar to the LkSG – standardizes comprehensive due diligence obligations in the supply chain, which also apply regardless of the product, the industry and the supply chain structure, the question arises for Germany as to whether and how the LkSG should be adapted to the CSDDD.

I. What are the differences to the LkSG?

Since the CSDDD basically has a similar regulatory structure to the LkSG, a fundamental restructuring of the LkSG is certainly not to be expected. The due diligence architecture, which is based on a risk analysis and – building on this – requires preventive and remedial measures in the event of risks and violations of the human rights and environmental concerns covered, will remain at the core of the regulation. The same applies to the accompanying complaints procedures, documentation and information obligations.

Within this framework, however, the CSDDD requires numerous adjustments that will lead to considerable shifts and changes. The following aspects are particularly relevant:

  • Art. 2 CSDDD initially narrows the scope of application of the LkSG by introducing an additional turnover threshold of EUR 450 million annual net turnover (worldwide) in addition to the employee threshold. In contrast, the scope of application will be extended with regard to companies that are not based in the EU but reach the aforementioned turnover threshold within the EU. In addition, certain franchise and license constellations will also fall within the scope of application in future.
  • In terms of timing, Art. 37 CSDDD provides for the following staggering: Application from 26.07.2027 for companies with more than 5,000 employees and a net turnover > EUR 1.5 billion, from 26.07.2028 for companies with more than 3,000 employees and a net turnover > EUR 900 million and from 26.07.2029 for companies with more than 1,000 employees and a net turnover > EUR 450 million.
  • The following human rights and environmental aspects are added by the CSDDD: Biodiversity, protection of species (CITES), Rotterdam Convention on the import and export of chemicals, protection of the ozone layer (Vienna Convention and Montreal Protocol), natural heritage under the World Heritage Convention, wetlands under the Ramsar Convention, pollution from ships, pollution of the oceans under the Convention on the Law of the Sea, prohibition of arbitrary interference with private life, family, home and correspondence, prohibition of interference with freedom of thought, conscience and belief, and general children’s rights.
  • Compared to the LkSG, the CSDDD does not contain any restrictions as to which parts of the upstream supply chains are to be included in the due diligence obligations. Accordingly, all indirect suppliers must also be considered in future. The differences in the used terms, according to which the supply chain in the CSDDD is referred to as an activity chain and indirect suppliers as indirect business partners, should however not have substantive impact.
  • In addition to the duty to remedy already contained in Sec. 7 LkSG, which is formulated as a duty to fundamentally end a breach, the CSDDD also requires the introduction of a duty to reverse negative effects or at least financial compensation for damage incurred (Art. 12 CSDDD in conjunction with Art. 3 para. 1 lit.t) CSDDD).
  • There will then be simplifications for a large number of the companies covered with regard to the reporting obligation. According to Art. 16 CSDDD, the CSRD report under Directive (EU) 2022/2464 with regard to sustainability reporting by companies will in future also apply to the fulfillment of the reporting obligation under the CSDDD. Only those companies that are not (yet) subject to the CSRD reporting obligation will therefore still have to prepare a separate report for the purposes of the CSDDD or the LkSG.
  • The plan to minimize the consequences of climate change required under Art. 22 CSDDD does not constitute a due diligence obligation in the true sense of the word, even according to the structure of the CSDDD. Experience has shown that the required scientific basis will present numerous companies with major hurdles. Ultimately, the LkSG is unlikely to be the right place for transposition into national law.
  • With regard to civil liability for breaches of due diligence obligations, the German legislator will be forced to make a 180-degree turnaround, as Art. 29 CSDDD obliges the Member States to introduce civil liability for breaches of the prevention and remediation obligations under Art. 10 et seq. CSDDD.

II. When and how is the LkSG likely to be amended?

As an EU directive, the CSDDD must be transposed into national law by 26.07.2026, meaning that the LkSG must be adapted by this date at the latest. However, the CSDDD provides for the following barriers to this:

  • According to Art. 4 para. 1 CSDDD, Member States may not provide for deviating provisions with regard to the identification and assessment of adverse impacts (Art. 8 CSDDD), the prevention of potential adverse impacts (Art. 10 CSDDD) and the bringing to an end of actual adverse impacts (Art. 11 CSDDD). Consequently, Sec. 9 para. 3 LkSG, according to which measures are only required for indirect suppliers if there is substantiated knowledge of a possible violation, will have to be lifted in any case. In addition, the existing preventive and remedial measures will have to be extended to include at least financial participation obligations for implementation measures by SME business partners. In all other areas, however, the Member States are generally free to provide for more extensive regulations in national law (Art. 4 para. 2 CSDDD).
  • Art. 1 para. 2 CSDDD is likely to be of particular relevance for Germany. According to this provision, EU Member States are prohibited from lowering the current level of due diligence obligations with reference to the CSDDD (so-called prohibition of regression or deterioration). In this context, the legal opinion “Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der Gestaltung des Anwendungsbereichs des Lieferkettensorgfaltspflichtengesetzes (LkSG) bei der Umsetzung der Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD)” by Prof. Dr. Anne-Christin Mittwoch for Germanwatch and Oxfam rightly came to the following conclusion: “The objective of the CSDDD requires an interpretation of Art. 1 para. 2 CSDDD to the effect that the provision precludes both an increase in the existing employee thresholds of the LkSG and the introduction of turnover thresholds, insofar as the CSDDD serves as justification for this.” [translation from the original German version]

This means that the immediate “scaling back” of the LkSG to the scope of application of the CSDDD, as vehemently demanded by numerous German politicians and the German Federal Government in a joint strategy paper, is probably not legally permissible.

III. What is the relationship between the CSDDD and other due diligence obligations?

The relationship between the CSDDD and the following legal acts is regulated in Art. 1 para. 3 CSDDD in such a way that the more specific provisions take precedence in the event of contradictions. In practice, this will mean that all the different nuances of the respective legal acts will have to be taken into account during implementation. The following legal acts are particularly relevant here:

  • Regulation (EU) 2023/1115 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 May 2023 on the making available on the Union market and the export from the Union of certain commodities and products associated with deforestation and forest degradation and repealing Regulation (EU) No 995/2010 (EUDR)
  • Regulation (EU) 2017/821 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2017 laying down supply chain due diligence obligations for Union importers of tin, tantalum and tungsten, their ores, and gold originating from conflict-affected and high-risk areas (CMR-Regulation)
  • Regulation (EU) 2023/1542 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2023 concerning batteries and waste batteries, amending Directive 2008/98/EC and Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 and repealing Directive 2006/66/EC (EU Battery Regulation)
  • Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on prohibiting products made with forced labour on the Union market [final decision in the Council and publication expected soon]

Conclusion

Due to the numerous extensions and few restrictions in the relationship between the CSDD and the LkSG, it will be necessary to amend the LkSG. There is currently already a government draft for the implementation of the CSRD in Germany, which provides in Art. 3 for the LkSG reporting obligation to be linked to that of the CSRD. Further amendments have been announced for this legislative period.

Do you have any questions about this news, or would you like to discuss it with the author? Please contact: Michael Öttinger

16. August 2024 Michael Öttinger
Bild Michael Öttinger
Michael Öttinger
Lawyer / Counsel

You may also be interested in: