5 ms·

I haven't followed the legislative process, where can I find that the eu wanted a single registry but the country pushed for national ones? Because i have never

I haven't followed the legislative process, where can I find that the eu wanted a single registry but the country pushed for national ones? Because i have never read it. I'm not saying it's not true, it's just that it's so hard to follow these things when one is supposed to have a life as well

Avamander 23d ago
You have to use the FOIA-equivalent of your member state to get access to the documents submitted to the EU by your country.
mpweiher 23d ago
There has been reporting on this in many places. Here is one: https://packaging-journal.de/en/eu-commission-wants-to-scrap-authorised-representative-obligation-for-ppwr/ https://packaging-journal.de/en/eu-commission-wants-to-scrap... "According to the Händlerbund, the European Commission's proposal to abolish the requirement has been on the table since December 2025. However, discussions in the Council of the EU were suspended a few weeks ago after a majority of member states spoke out against it." "A restricted version is currently being discussed in the European Parliament. According to this, an exemption is only to apply to micro-enterprises with up to 49 employees and an annual turnover of a maximum of 10 million euros. A first reading is scheduled for October 2026 at the earliest."
- amarcheschi 23d ago
  Ok ty
- deleted 23d ago
  [deleted]
- pembrook 23d ago
  If you need to both: a) exempt companies with under 50 employees to not kill small business AND b) are okay with doing so, ie. there's little consequences from exempting companies from this Then this is the mark of a terrible piece of legislation. What problem are we actually addressing here by creating another fee collecting, headache inducing registration regime and the 684th enforcement bureaucracy in the EU over yet another trivial consumer issue? Yes, single use plastics aren't great. Incentivize companies to move away from them by creating positive market incentives instead of creating an anti-productive, full time packaging Stasi. It's almost as if the people attracted to a career in government can only imagine their subjects responding to the stick, even though the carrot is often far more persuasive. This is the classic downfall of all economic central planning. The problem with this particular topic is it's a religious one for many in the urban monoculture. They don't ultimately care about packaging waste, they care about punishment and repentance for humanity's existence. We've angered the gods and must repent via punitive measures! To incentivize good behavior is antithetical to that, even if it is more effective at actually doing the thing.
  - dvdkon 22d ago
    What does "positive market incentives" mean for you? My immediate thought is various subsidies, but given how those usually end up (easy money for companies spending more on lawyers than actual productive work), I'd much rather just have a tax.
    - pembrook 22d ago
      The tax won't actually create the desired outcome though. In practice the tax is basically just a wealth transfer from the private sector to the state, who will use that money to dump into boomer pensions and not invest in packaging innovation. Punitive taxation doesn't invent new technologies. Investment does. For example, the only reason the electric car market even exists today is because of subsidies 15 years ago. I agree subsidies can easily turn into a boondoggle, but so can the state itself given more tax money. Ultimately, I personally think government choosing to focus time and money on this specific thing over other far more important issues is dumb (like say, the thousands of young men dying in Ukraine right now, the social welfare debt spiral, the lack of a capital markets union, the lack of any coherent military strategy, etc. etc.) But if we're going to posture as if we actually care about this issue, we are going about the desired outcome the completely wrong way.

Avamander 23d ago

You have to use the FOIA-equivalent of your member state to get access to the documents submitted to the EU by your country.

mpweiher 23d ago

There has been reporting on this in many places. Here is one: https://packaging-journal.de/en/eu-commission-wants-to-scrap-authorised-representative-obligation-for-ppwr/ https://packaging-journal.de/en/eu-commission-wants-to-scrap... "According to the Händlerbund, the European Commission's proposal to abolish the requirement has been on the table since December 2025. However, discussions in the Council of the EU were suspended a few weeks ago after a majority of member states spoke out against it." "A restricted version is currently being discussed in the European Parliament. According to this, an exemption is only to apply to micro-enterprises with up to 49 employees and an annual turnover of a maximum of 10 million euros. A first reading is scheduled for October 2026 at the earliest."

amarcheschi 23d ago
Ok ty
deleted 23d ago
[deleted]
pembrook 23d ago
If you need to both: a) exempt companies with under 50 employees to not kill small business AND b) are okay with doing so, ie. there's little consequences from exempting companies from this Then this is the mark of a terrible piece of legislation. What problem are we actually addressing here by creating another fee collecting, headache inducing registration regime and the 684th enforcement bureaucracy in the EU over yet another trivial consumer issue? Yes, single use plastics aren't great. Incentivize companies to move away from them by creating positive market incentives instead of creating an anti-productive, full time packaging Stasi. It's almost as if the people attracted to a career in government can only imagine their subjects responding to the stick, even though the carrot is often far more persuasive. This is the classic downfall of all economic central planning. The problem with this particular topic is it's a religious one for many in the urban monoculture. They don't ultimately care about packaging waste, they care about punishment and repentance for humanity's existence. We've angered the gods and must repent via punitive measures! To incentivize good behavior is antithetical to that, even if it is more effective at actually doing the thing.
- dvdkon 22d ago
  What does "positive market incentives" mean for you? My immediate thought is various subsidies, but given how those usually end up (easy money for companies spending more on lawyers than actual productive work), I'd much rather just have a tax.
  - pembrook 22d ago
    The tax won't actually create the desired outcome though. In practice the tax is basically just a wealth transfer from the private sector to the state, who will use that money to dump into boomer pensions and not invest in packaging innovation. Punitive taxation doesn't invent new technologies. Investment does. For example, the only reason the electric car market even exists today is because of subsidies 15 years ago. I agree subsidies can easily turn into a boondoggle, but so can the state itself given more tax money. Ultimately, I personally think government choosing to focus time and money on this specific thing over other far more important issues is dumb (like say, the thousands of young men dying in Ukraine right now, the social welfare debt spiral, the lack of a capital markets union, the lack of any coherent military strategy, etc. etc.) But if we're going to posture as if we actually care about this issue, we are going about the desired outcome the completely wrong way.