Colorado’s Extended Producer Responsibility programme for packaging and paper products has moved into operation.

Companies that qualify as producers have been prohibited from selling or distributing products using covered materials in Colorado without participating in the programme since 1 July 2025. Producer dues began in January 2026, and the approved statewide programme entered its implementation phase in June 2026.

The central compliance question is not simply whether a company sells packaged products in Colorado.

Responsibility depends on who manufactures the product, whose brand appears on it, whether a US importer is involved and which company adds the packaging used for an online delivery.

A single sale can therefore create responsibility for more than one type of packaging and potentially involve different companies.

Colorado’s programme is now operating

Colorado adopted its Producer Responsibility Program for Statewide Recycling Act through House Bill 22-1355 in 2022.

The programme requires producers of covered packaging and paper products to finance and manage a statewide recycling system. Circular Action Alliance, or CAA, was appointed as the Producer Responsibility Organization responsible for the main programme.

Colorado approved CAA’s final programme plan in December 2025. Implementation was required to begin within six months, by 9 June 2026. The programme is intended to expand recycling access, reimburse participating recycling service providers and finance the collection, transport, sorting, processing and management of covered materials.

This implementation timetable is separate from the compliance timetable for producers.

Producer registration was required earlier, and companies subject to the law have been prohibited from selling or distributing products using covered materials in Colorado without programme participation since 1 July 2025. Producer dues became payable from January 2026.

Which materials are covered?

The programme covers packaging materials and specified paper products sold, offered for sale or distributed in Colorado.

Packaging is defined broadly. It includes material intended for single or short-term use that is used to contain, protect, handle or deliver a product to a consumer at the point of sale, including through an internet transaction.

The definition is not limited to plastic or to packaging that is currently recyclable. It can include:

• paper and cardboard;
• plastic;
• glass;
• metal;
• cartons;
• flexible foam;
• rigid packaging;
• multimaterial packaging;
• certain food service products.

Paper products can include catalogues, brochures, magazines, directories, writing paper and similar products.

Whether a material is collected through Colorado’s standard recycling system does not determine whether it is legally covered. The programme distinguishes between a Minimum Recyclable List, an Additional Materials List and covered materials that are not currently collected through the standard system.

A producer may therefore owe dues for packaging that is difficult to recycle or not included in ordinary curbside collection.

Who is the producer for branded products?

Colorado applies a hierarchy to identify the responsible producer for product packaging.

Where a product is sold under the manufacturer’s own brand, or the packaging does not identify a brand, the manufacturer is generally the producer.

Where another company manufactures the product but it is sold under a different brand or trademark, responsibility generally moves to the US brand or trademark licensee under whose name the packaged product is sold or distributed in Colorado.

This makes the commercial identity of the product particularly important.

The company physically manufacturing or filling the product is not automatically responsible where it does so for another business’s private label. Conversely, a retailer or brand company can become the producer even if it does not manufacture the product or packaging itself.

The assessment should therefore distinguish between:

• the physical product manufacturer;
• the packaging manufacturer;
• the contract packer or filler;
• the owner or licensee of the consumer-facing brand;
• the company selling the product in Colorado.

The contracts between these businesses may allocate data collection and costs, but they do not override the statutory producer hierarchy.

Private-label products

Private-label arrangements are a common source of producer responsibility.

Consider a US retailer that purchases products from a contract manufacturer and sells them under the retailer’s own brand.

Although the contract manufacturer physically produces the goods, the retailer or other relevant US brand licensee will generally be the producer for the packaging used to contain the private-label product.

The same principle can apply where a specialist brand company purchases finished products from an overseas manufacturer and sells them through retailers or marketplaces in the United States.

The brand company may therefore need packaging specifications and material weights from a supplier that has no direct reporting obligation in Colorado.

A private-label business should not assume that its contract manufacturer reports the packaging. The manufacturer may not know the quantities ultimately sold in Colorado, and it may produce the same product for several different brands.

The responsible brand company must be able to connect its Colorado sales data with the packaging composition of each relevant product.

When does responsibility move to the importer?

Where there is no relevant manufacturer or brand or trademark licensee within the United States, responsibility generally moves to the company that imports the packaged product into the United States for use in a commercial enterprise that sells or distributes the item in Colorado.

This fallback rule is particularly relevant to foreign brands.

A European manufacturer selling through an independent US importer may not be the responsible producer for the immediate product packaging if the US importer sits within the statutory hierarchy.

The importer can become responsible even where:

• the foreign manufacturer controls the packaging design;
• the foreign brand remains visible on the product;
• the importer does not alter the packaging;
• a separate retailer completes the final consumer sale.

The foreign supplier may nevertheless need to provide the importer with packaging data. The importer will often have access to customs and sales records but not to the material composition or component weights required for reporting.

Direct-to-consumer sales from outside the United States require closer analysis. The foreign seller may also act as importer and may separately be responsible for the packaging used to ship the product to the Colorado consumer.

The legal result should be determined from the actual import and fulfilment structure rather than from the location of the brand’s headquarters alone.

E-commerce can divide responsibility between companies

Colorado includes a specific producer rule for products sold or distributed through internet transactions.

The law separates two packaging layers.

The first is the packaging that directly contains or protects the product. Responsibility for that packaging follows the ordinary producer hierarchy involving the manufacturer, brand licensee or importer.

The second is the additional packaging used to ship the product to the consumer. For that packaging, the producer is the person that packages or ships the product to the consumer.

This distinction can divide responsibility within one order.

A branded electronic device may arrive in its retail box. The retail box and internal protective packaging may be attributable to the product brand or importer. If a fulfilment provider places that box inside a corrugated shipping carton with paper padding, responsibility for the additional delivery materials may fall on the company packaging or shipping the order.

Potentially relevant actors include:

• the product brand;
• the US importer;
• the online retailer;
• a marketplace fulfilment service;
• a third-party logistics provider;
• a distributor dispatching the order;
• a foreign direct seller.

The contractual statement that one company is merely a logistics provider does not necessarily resolve the statutory question. The physical fulfilment process and the identity of the person packaging or shipping the product remain relevant.

Companies should also avoid assigning the full packaging weight to both parties. The retail packaging and the additional shipment packaging need to be separated so that each responsible producer reports the appropriate material.

A marketplace is not automatically responsible for every order

Selling through an online marketplace does not automatically transfer all Colorado EPR obligations to the platform.

Where a US brand owner or importer remains responsible for the product packaging, the use of a marketplace as the sales channel does not by itself remove that responsibility.

The marketplace or its fulfilment operation may become relevant for the additional shipping packaging where it packages or ships the product to the consumer.

Different arrangements can therefore produce different results:

• A brand fulfils orders from its own warehouse and remains responsible for the product and shipping packaging.
• A marketplace fulfils orders and adds the delivery packaging, potentially separating responsibility for that packaging from the branded retail packaging.
• A third-party seller adds its own shipping materials before supplying the order through the marketplace.
• A foreign seller dispatches the product directly to the Colorado consumer.

The marketplace’s general EPR policy should not be treated as a substitute for reviewing the statutory producer definition.

Responsibility can also differ between fulfilment routes used by the same seller. A business may need separate data for orders shipped internally, by a marketplace and by an independent logistics provider.

B2B packaging is not automatically excluded

Colorado excludes packaging used solely in business-to-business transactions where the covered material is not intended to be distributed to the end consumer.

It also excludes packaging used solely for transportation or distribution to nonconsumers.

These exclusions are narrower than a general B2B exemption.

A sale being invoiced to a business does not automatically place the packaging outside the programme. The relevant question is what happens to the packaging and whether it is supplied to a covered entity or ultimately reaches the consumer.

Examples of packaging that may be excluded include:

• stretch film used only between manufacturing facilities;
• reusable or short-term distribution packaging removed at a wholesale warehouse;
• intermediate packaging used solely within an industrial production process;
• transport materials that never reach a consumer or other covered entity.

By contrast, packaging may remain covered where a business customer is the final user and the packaging enters a waste stream served by the programme.

Colorado’s definition of covered entities extends beyond private households and includes locations such as small businesses, schools, hospitality locations, public places and government buildings.

Mixed distribution structures therefore require a more precise assessment. The same packaging format may be excluded in one supply route and covered in another.

Product and packaging exemptions

Not every type of packaging is a covered material.

Colorado excludes several product-specific and use-specific categories. These include certain packaging:

• intended for the long-term storage or protection of a durable product for at least five years;
• used exclusively in industrial or manufacturing processes;
• used solely for transportation or distribution to nonconsumers;
• used solely in qualifying B2B transactions;
• associated with specified drugs, medical devices and dietary supplements regulated by the US Food and Drug Administration;
• used for certain animal biologics;
• used for products regulated under federal pesticide legislation;
• required to meet specified child-resistant packaging rules;
• used for certain refurbished portable electronic devices;
• used for products sold or distributed outside Colorado.

The scope of an exclusion depends on the precise statutory conditions.

For example, the fact that a product is used in healthcare does not necessarily exclude its packaging. The relevant packaging must be used to contain a product covered by the specified federal regulation.

Likewise, the industrial-process exclusion should not be applied to all packaging supplied to an industrial customer. Packaging used exclusively within the manufacturing process must be distinguished from packaging in which a finished product is delivered to its final user.

A business with an exempt product may still have covered secondary, shipment or promotional packaging. Each packaging component should therefore be assessed separately.

Small-producer exemptions

Colorado provides several exemptions based on the producer and the amount of covered material supplied.

A producer is exempt where it used less than one short ton of covered materials for products sold or distributed within or into Colorado during the previous calendar year.

This is a material-volume exemption, not an exemption for each individual packaging type.

A company should aggregate the relevant covered paper and packaging materials it supplied into Colorado. It cannot apply a separate one-ton threshold to plastic, cardboard, glass or each individual brand.

Colorado also provides a revenue-based exemption. The statute initially set the threshold at less than USD 5 million in realised gross total revenue during the previous calendar year, excluding specified on-premises alcohol sales. That amount is adjusted annually using the relevant consumer price index.

Companies should therefore use the current threshold published by the Colorado authorities rather than continue to apply the original statutory figure without adjustment.

Other exempt producers include specified governmental bodies, nonprofit organisations, qualifying agricultural businesses, certain individual food-service establishments and builders or construction businesses.

An exemption should be documented. A company that concludes it is below the tonnage threshold should retain the calculations, sales data and packaging weights supporting that conclusion.

Registration, reporting and payment are separate obligations

A producer that does not qualify for an exemption must generally participate in the programme administered by CAA unless it is covered by an approved alternative programme.

Registration is only the first step.

CAA registration requires the responsible legal entity to be identified. Producers then enter into the applicable participation agreements, submit supply reports and pay the resulting dues.

Colorado required producer registration by 1 October 2024. Companies that missed the deadline remain required to register and may be subject to enforcement.

The first Colorado supply report used to calculate the 2026 programme dues was due in July 2025 and covered 2024 supply data.

The 2026 annual supply report, based on 2025 data, was due on 31 May 2026. Reporting includes the quantities of covered materials supplied into Colorado and requires companies to connect sales with packaging and paper-product weights.

The reporting entity must also be clear about the brands, affiliates and associated producers included in its submission. A group registration or participation agreement does not necessarily allow all legal entities to combine their reporting without a documented reporting structure.

How producer dues are calculated

Colorado producer dues are primarily based on the type and quantity of covered materials supplied into the state.

The 2026 schedule assigns different rates to material categories. The rate reflects factors such as the cost of managing the material, its collection route and its recycling performance.

CAA also offers an optional flat-dues structure for producers supplying no more than ten short tons of covered material into Colorado.

For the 2026 programme year, the published flat dues range from USD 800 for producers supplying between one and 2.5 short tons to USD 3,600 for producers supplying between 7.5 and ten short tons.

Producers supplying more than ten tons generally pay according to the detailed material rates.

The schedule also incorporates eco-modulation. Certain materials face higher dues where they disrupt recycling or are not included on the Minimum Recyclable List. Other materials can receive incentives based on recycling performance or specified design characteristics.

This means that two producers supplying the same total packaging weight may not pay the same amount if their packaging portfolios differ materially.

An individual programme is not a simple opt-out

Colorado allows a producer to propose an individual programme instead of participating in the main statewide programme.

This option requires regulatory approval.

An individual programme proposal must address the relevant programme-plan requirements, explain how the producer will contribute to state oversight costs, reimburse recycling service providers and operate any alternative collection programmes.

The producer must also follow the applicable notification, review, amendment and reporting procedures.

This is substantially different from electing to manage a company’s own packaging data or recycling contract.

Colorado has approved an individual programme administered by Interchange 360 for specified petroleum and automotive products. That approval demonstrates that an alternative programme is possible, but it also reflects a structured sector-specific system rather than a general exemption from producer responsibility.

For most consumer-product companies, participation through the designated PRO is likely to remain the practical compliance route.

Producer responsibility can differ between US states

Colorado is one of several US states implementing packaging EPR, but the producer definitions are not identical.

A company should not assume that the legal entity identified for California, Oregon or another state will automatically be the correct producer in Colorado.

Differences may involve:

• the role of the manufacturer and brand owner;
• treatment of importers;
• responsibility for marketplace and e-commerce packaging;
• B2B and transport packaging exclusions;
• material and product exemptions;
• revenue and tonnage thresholds;
• required reporting categories;
• programme fees and eco-modulation.

A national producer assessment should therefore begin with a common supply-chain and packaging dataset but apply each state’s legal hierarchy separately.

One company may report a product’s packaging in Colorado while another entity within the same group or distribution chain is responsible in another state.

The legal entity must be identified before the data is prepared

Colorado’s programme requires more than calculating the total weight of packaging sold in the state.

Before reporting, a business must determine which company is the producer for each material flow.

This can require separate conclusions for:

• branded retail packaging;
• private-label packaging;
• imported packaged products;
• unbranded products;
• e-commerce shipping materials;
• food service products;
• paper products;
• B2B and transport packaging.

Only after the responsible entity has been identified can the company determine which sales, packaging specifications and material weights belong in its report.

This order matters. Preparing one consolidated packaging dataset and deciding later which company should report it can lead to duplicate declarations, omitted shipping packaging and incorrect allocation between brands, importers and fulfilment providers.

Colorado’s programme is already operating, and companies that missed the earlier registration or reporting deadlines remain exposed to enforcement. Businesses entering the Colorado market or changing their US distribution model should assess producer responsibility before products are supplied.

Viron Compliance supports international manufacturers, brands, importers and online sellers with packaging EPR assessments and ongoing compliance across the United States and other markets. We help businesses identify the responsible legal entity, classify covered materials and coordinate registration, reporting and producer-fee requirements.