6 comments

  • xp84 5 minutes ago
    For all the regulations that have arguable merits, the EU loves to also do stupid ones like this one. As though the packaging of board games is what's clogging the landfills and oceans. The packaging is used to hold the actual game for its whole lifetime!!

    If they're really just trying to target industries which DO produce a ton of packaging waste, then they should target it better.

  • gerdesj 1 hour ago
    The article simply states "we must comply with some regs" and nothing else of substance.

    There is no indications of what registration implies nor what packaging is actually required. We get this:

    "That’s because one of the primary issues they face is the sheer amount of resources that they need to invest into remaining PPWR compliant."

    but no indication of what that means.

    This is a whine and whinge piece without any substance. I'm sure there are issues but there is nothing substantive here.

    • ahupp 45 minutes ago
      > but no indication of what that means

      The very first thing it means is that a firm has to understand the new law and then determine what changes it requires. And as a firm gets smaller that makes the relative burden higher. Of course this shouldn’t imply you never change anything, but it does mean every incremental new regulation is a ratchet that shifts in favor of large firms. The EU estimates this regulation avoids 23Mt of CO2[0], which is about 0.8% of EU emissions. Not sure that’s the place to focus unless you can make a case that it will have spillover effects into other markets.

      [0] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-9-2023-00218...

      • a2ff6eeb0 1 minute ago
        Almost a 1% win, just by changing packaging? That seems massive.
      • mappu 20 minutes ago
        I have no skin in this game, but just because they're doing it doesn't mean it's their focus, the EU is big enough to work on multiple 0.8%-size wins all over the place.
      • teaearlgraycold 10 minutes ago
        0.8% actually sounds pretty good
    • wolvoleo 52 minutes ago
      It's not about the packaging really. It could be as simple as a bubble wrap envelope. The problem is having to register in every country and some of them levy fees that are insane for small artists. The EU was supposed to be a single entity with simple rules but in this case they want to make things as difficult as possible.

      The article could be clearer yes but it's really an issue especially for small self employed artists selling by post in the EU. They're basically being killed off if they relied on shipping to other countries.

      And the risks of non compliance are high fines. This was meant to punish AliExpress and their sellers for packaging waste but how are they going to fine Happy Goose Ltd in a basement in Shenzhen? They're not. Business in the EU however are going to be easy pickings. So the Chinese will just keep what they're doing and the EU independent artists are screwed with retarded bureaucracy.

      For an Amazon it's a joke paying 200€ to register in a single country, but for an artist that may not even have single package to a certain country every year it's insane. And you can't even register when you have an order to send, you have to do it before.

      It's deeply evil and totally meant to kill the little guy or girl.

      There's some exceptions for small business but they're mainly bureaucratic, the hefty fees still apply.

  • em-bee 1 hour ago
    this article is a bit confusing because it talks about businesses outside of the EU. the PPWR affects businesses within the EU even more. businesses outside have a good chance to get away with ignoring the regulations because the EU will have a tough time to enforce them outside their borders. businesses in the EU however have no chance to escape.

    and this isn't just tabletop games. this is any business shipping anything anywhere. even when just shipping a single package in a year. the problem is that compliance costs several hundred dollars per country per year. among other things, a representative needs to be named for each country[1]. those are going to cost money. that means unless you make thousands of dollars in profits in any single country, you can't afford shipping to that country any more.

    realistically speaking, this law is so dumb that i expect that we'll see a revision soon, because it effectively destroys the EU single market for small businesses.

    there is talk about exceptions for micro-businesses, but for one those seem to be optional, and they may not apply to cross-border shipping which is the big problem here.

    [1] i looked it up: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2025/40/oj/eng

    (paragraph 123) when the packaging or the packaged product is made available by means of distance contracts directly to the end user, the producer could also be established in another Member State or in a third country. In such cases, if the producer is established in another Member State, it should appoint an authorised representative for the extended producer responsibility in the Member State where the end user is located.

  • Cameri 22 minutes ago
    You'll now pay a compliant packaging company to package goods for you.
  • ThrowawayTestr 1 hour ago
    How much of the EU's GDP is from fining companies?
    • gyanchawdhary 53 minutes ago
      Made me chuckle
    • gerdesj 1 hour ago
      Fuck all. Your point is what exactly?
  • lowbloodsugar 1 hour ago
    Oh come now. Just pay your corruption tax to a nice middleman that helped create this in the first place. “Nobody thought of what this would do to small businesses”? Oh sweet summer child. Someone did the math.