Experts called for a review of the methodology for calculating the eco-catchment in the EPR system

Representatives of industry associations and large businesses proposed to review the methodology for calculating environmental fees within the framework of the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) system. Such initiatives were made, in particular, by Lyubov Melanevskaya, Executive Director of the RusPEC Association, and Huseyn Ibragimov, representative of the PPK REO.

The EPR system obliges manufacturers and importers to ensure the disposal of goods and packaging after they lose their consumer properties — independently, through specialized recyclers, or by paying an environmental fee. Since January 1, 2026, the environmental fee rate has increased by 8%. This significantly affects the business of most enterprises, experts say, especially considering that last year the eco-collection was increased by 15%.

Initially, the environmental regulator proposed to increase payments much more radically: the average eco-collection rate for packaging products was supposed to increase by more than 4.5 times — from about 13.4 thousand to 61.4 thousand rubles per ton. This scenario has not been implemented. Nevertheless, market participants point out that the already accepted increase in rates can lead to an increase in the cost of a number of goods, including socially significant ones, up to 7% — without taking into account inflation and the tax burden. At the same time, according to Rosprirodnadzor, about 70% of importers do not submit reports on EPR, and the actual volume of recycling is only 24% of the established standards.

"There is a well-established practice of evading extended responsibility. There are reasons for this. One of them is that the methodology of the environmental fee rate, which is the basis for calculating everything that causes heated debate, is crooked and requires revision," says Lyubov Melanevskaya, executive director of the RusPEC Association.

According to Valery Panarin, SIBUR's chief expert in closed-loop economics, the basic eco-collection rate should be reasonable and comfortable for all market participants. "There should be no increasing coefficients that multiply it. It is also necessary to identify groups of goods, the waste from the use of which is almost completely disposed of," he believes.

"For example, industrial and transport packaging is centrally collected by market participants and used as a pure, valuable raw material for recycling. At first, an incentive—based low ROP payment can be applied to such goods, and in the future, it can be abandoned altogether," Panarin suggested.

As another way to reduce eco—collection, market participants call the transition to monopackaging - containers made from materials of the same group, which are fully recyclable. According to industry research, polyethylene and polypropylene packaging is recyclable, while combined containers with an inner foil layer are not recyclable. "The simpler the packaging and the easier it is to recycle, the lower the costs for the business. This motivates us and our suppliers to choose recyclable materials," said Elena Kuzmina, Project Manager at X5's Department for Government Relations.

A separate issue remains the reporting procedure for importers. "One of the proposals that is being discussed is the provision of reporting after importation into the territory of Russia. We have enough time to come to a consensus, an understandable decision for business and the industry," said Huseyn Ibragimov, a representative of the PPK REO.

All important news is on the Izvestia channel in the MAX messenger.