EPR Fees by State: What Packaging Actually Costs in Colorado, Oregon, and California
Posted By on Oct 08, 2026
EPR Fees by State: What Packaging Actually Costs in Colorado, Oregon, and California
Our EPR Reporting Requirements by State resource walks through how to build your packaging data and get it into each state’s report. This post picks up with the next question: what’s it actually going to cost?
For a while, the honest answer was “it depends,” because everyone was budgeting off draft ranges. That’s changed. Colorado and Oregon have published final 2026 rates, and California has released an illustrative 2027 schedule ahead of its first invoices in January. Those are the three states we cover here. Minnesota, Maryland, and Washington don’t start charging fees until 2028 to 2030, and Maine doesn’t have a program yet.
Below, you’ll find a side-by-side comparison of EPR fees by state, how California’s four-part fee works, the flat fee option for smaller producers, and what all of this means for your packaging budget, today and by the end of the decade.
EPR Fees by State: A Side-by-Side Comparison
Here’s what changed in 2026: rates are finally on paper. Colorado and Oregon published final schedules, and California released illustrative ranges. For the first time, you can compare states side by side instead of guessing.
What each material actually costs, by state
Dollars per pound. Colorado figures are 2026 Final Dues, which already include the state’s passive eco-modulation. Oregon figures are the 2026 Final Fee Rate. California figures are from the 2027 Illustrative Fee Schedule and are shown as a low-to-high range, because CalRecycle has not approved final rates yet.
| Reporting category | Colorado | Oregon | California |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kraft paper | $0.08 | $0.08 | $0.02–0.05 |
| Corrugated cardboard | $0.08 | $0.08 | $0.02–0.05 |
| Corrugated, tertiary and transport | $0.08 | $0.00 | $0.02–0.05 |
| Paperboard | $0.08 | $0.08 | $0.01–0.04 |
| Polycoated paperboard | $0.20 | $0.48 | $0.06–0.16 |
| Other paper laminates | $0.30 | $0.51 | $0.27–0.67 |
| Paper, small format | $0.22 | $0.44 | $0.05–0.12 |
| HDPE (#2) / LDPE (#4) flexible and film | $0.48 | $0.43 | $0.29–0.76 |
| HDPE / LDPE pallet wrap | $0.00 | $0.34 | $0.29–0.76 |
| PP (#5) flexible and film | $0.64 | $1.02 | $0.38–0.95 |
| PLA, PHA, PHB flexible and film | $0.74 | $1.02 | $0.49–1.20 |
| Plastic laminates and other flexible | $0.74 | $1.02 | $0.58–1.48 |
Two things worth noticing. Fiber is dramatically cheaper than flexible plastic everywhere: about five to six times in Colorado and Oregon, and even more in California’s illustrative ranges. And Oregon charges nothing for tertiary corrugated while Colorado charges full rate. That’s the kind of state-level quirk that makes a single national packaging strategy hard.
Keep in mind these are base rates. Eco-modulation bonuses and penalties can move your final bill up or down, and in California the stakes are big. Here’s how eco-modulation works in each state.
California’s Fee is Four Fees Stacked Together
No other state works this way, and it catches brands off guard. Your California invoice is built from four separate components:
-
Total Base Fee, charged per pound, varying by material category. This is the number in the table above.
-
Reuse Investment Fee, $0.04 to $0.10 per pound of plastic component.
-
Plastic Pollution Mitigation Fund weight fee, $0.17 to $0.25 per pound of plastic component.
-
Plastic Pollution Mitigation Fund component fee, $0.001 to $0.0012 per plastic component unit.
That fourth one is the surprise. It’s a charge on the count, not the weight. If your packaging has three plastic components instead of one, you pay it three times, no matter how light they are.
The fund those last two fees flow into is not small. SB 54 requires producers to remit $500 million a year into the California Plastic Pollution Mitigation Fund from 2027 through 2037, $5 billion in total. There’s also a separate Circular Economy Administrative Fee billed quarterly to cover CalRecycle’s enforcement costs.
The Flat Fee Option, If You’re Small Enough
Two states let low-volume producers skip category-level calculation entirely and pay a flat amount. For a lot of mid-sized brands this turns a compliance project into a line item, and it’s underused because it isn’t well publicized.
Colorado, if your Colorado-allocated weight is 10 short tons or less: $800 for 1 to 2.5 tons, $1,600 for 2.5 to 5, $2,600 for 5 to 7.5, and $3,600 for 7.5 to 10.
Oregon, if your Oregon-allocated weight is 10 metric tons or less and your revenue is under $10 million: $1,200 for 1 to 2.5 MT, $2,500 for 2.5 to 5, $4,100 for 5 to 7.5, and $5,800 for 7.5 to 10.
So What Does This Actually Cost You?
EPR fees only apply to the units you sell into states with active programs. That’s the single biggest factor in what you’ll actually pay, and it’s the piece most cost estimates skip.
The seven EPR states together account for roughly 21% of the U.S. population. But not all of them are charging yet:
| Where we are | Share of U.S. population | Poly mailer | Kraft paper mailer |
|---|---|---|---|
| Today: Colorado and Oregon invoicing | 3% | 0.9% | 0.1% |
| January 2027: California added | 15% | 4.6% | 0.3% |
| Around 2029: all seven states charging | 21% | 6.5% | 0.4% |
| If all 50 states adopted the same programs | 100% | 31% | 1.7% |
Modeled on a 0.06 lb poly mailer at $0.10 per unit and a 0.05 lb kraft paper mailer at $0.13 per unit, using published 2026 rates and the midpoint of California’s illustrative range. Percentages show EPR fees as a share of that item’s packaging cost. State shares are approximate and follow CAA’s population apportionment method.
Two takeaways from that table.
Today, EPR is a rounding error for most brands and a real line item for plastic-heavy ones. If you ship in fiber, you’re looking at a fraction of a percent. If you ship in poly, you’re at roughly 5% of your packaging cost once California starts invoicing in 2027, and closer to 6 or 7% by the end of the decade.
The number that should shape your planning is the last row. If EPR keeps spreading at its current pace and the fee structures stay roughly where they are, a plastic-heavy brand is looking at EPR adding something in the range of 15 to 40% to its packaging cost, depending on material and price point. A fiber-based brand lands under 2%. That gap is the entire argument for making material decisions now rather than in 2032.
EPR Fees and the Fully Loaded Cost of Packaging
EPR fees are often modest per unit today, but they’re now another line item in the fully loaded cost of your packaging. That calculation already includes unit price, freight, storage, fulfillment, operational impacts, tariffs, and risk or compliance costs.
The hypothetical scenario below shows how that plays out across a few common EcoEnclose formats.
Modeled on Oregon’s 2025 fee schedule. 2026 rates are lower for flexible plastic. See the table above.
EPR fees add a new lens: the end-of-life cost of the material itself. For hard-to-recycle or multi-layer materials, fees can be big enough to change which option is truly the lowest cost once everything is counted. Other brands will find they’re already using the most cost-effective packaging, just at a slightly higher total cost than before.
Either way, EPR fees are one more reason to judge packaging on its full cost, not just its unit price.
Know Your Numbers, Then Change Them
The rates above only turn into a real number once you know exactly what you’re putting into each state: which SKUs, which components, and how much they weigh. If you haven’t built that dataset yet, that’s step one, and it’s the same work that gets your annual reports done.
Then look past the base rate. Eco-modulation bonuses, California’s rising charge on virgin plastic, and simple design changes like dropping a component or switching materials can all move your bill. The brands that know their numbers now are the ones that get to make those calls on their own timeline, not the state’s.
About EcoEnclose
EcoEnclose is a sustainable packaging provider helping brands optimize packaging choices to align with EPR laws—reducing fees, minimizing plastic use, and building smarter long-term strategies.