Total:
$0.00
On 12 August 2026, the EU Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation - PPWR, Regulation (EU) 2025/40 - started to apply, replacing the 1994 packaging directive that had governed the rules until then.
If you sell eyewear into Europe, you have probably read that you now have to shrink your boxes: that empty space in an e-commerce parcel must not exceed 40%, effective immediately, or you are out of compliance.
That is not what the regulation says. The figure is wrong, the date is wrong, and the rule being described does not bite for another three and a half years.
Something else did land on 12 August. It is administrative rather than physical, it is the kind of obligation that reaches a merchant as a marketplace ultimatum rather than a regulator's letter, and almost none of the eyewear-facing coverage mentioned it.
And underneath both of those there is a question nobody has written about at all, which is what happens to your packaging analysis once you accept that the thing inside the box is a medical device.
The empty space rule is 50%, and it starts on 1 January 2030
The European Parliament's own summary of the adopted regulation puts it plainly:
"By 1 January 2030, economic operators who fill group packaging, transport packaging or e-commerce packaging must ensure that the maximum empty space ratio, expressed as a percentage, does not exceed 50%."
That is Article 24. Three things follow that the 40%-right-now version gets wrong.
The threshold is 50%, not 40%. Forty per cent does not appear in the provision.
The date is 1 January 2030, not 12 August 2026. The calculation methodology for the ratio is still to come in implementing acts, and the threshold applies from 1 January 2030 or three years after those acts, whichever is later.
There is a separate, earlier obligation, and it is not the one being reported either. From 12 February 2028, empty space in sales packaging must be reduced to the minimum necessary - a qualitative duty with no percentage attached to it. And under Article 10, from 1 January 2030, packaging must be designed so that its weight and volume are reduced to the minimum necessary to ensure functionality.
One detail from the reporting does survive, and it is the one that actually costs money: void fill counts as empty space. Air cushions, bubble wrap, paper shred, foam peanuts. You cannot stuff a box until it passes. The only way to reduce the ratio is to reduce the box.
So the honest position for an eyewear store in September 2026 is this: the packaging redesign is worth doing, and you have roughly three years rather than three weeks to do it. Do it because a right-sized rigid mailer is cheaper to ship than an oversized one, not because someone told you a deadline passed last month. If a compliance vendor is quoting you an emergency, ask them which article, which percentage and which date.
What actually applied on 12 August 2026
The obligations that genuinely switched on last month are the ones that do not change anything you can see.
Registration in the national register of producers (Article 44). Producers must be entered in the packaging producer register of each Member State in which they make packaging or packaged products available. The obligation is national, not European. "We sell to Europe" is not an answer to "are you registered in Germany?"
An authorised representative for extended producer responsibility (Article 45(3)). The provision is specific about who needs one and where:
"A producer ... shall appoint, by written mandate, an authorised representative for the extended producer responsibility in each Member State where the producer makes packaging or packaged products available for the first time, other than the Member State where the producer is established."
Read that as a US, UK or Asian eyewear brand and the consequence is a named appointment, with a real annual fee, in every EU market you ship to. It is a fixed cost landing on a variable revenue line, and that arithmetic only works above a certain European order value.
Substance restrictions (Article 5), an EU declaration of conformity and supporting technical documentation also apply from 12 August 2026.
And the duty that will reach you first: online marketplaces are required to obtain and verify producer registration and compliance information from their sellers. That is how every one of these regimes has actually arrived in this vertical - not as a fine, but as a platform compliance field with a deadline, appearing faster than any authority does, and with less notice than an authorised-representative appointment takes to arrange.
Is a spectacle case packaging? The Commission answered this in June
This is the eyewear-specific question, and it has usually been written up as genuinely open. It is less open than it was.
On 5 June 2026, two months before the regulation applied, the Commission adopted a guidance notice - C(2026) 3702 final, thirty-three sections of interpretation, the first of which is the definition of packaging. Very little of the e-commerce commentary cites it.
Article 3(1), point (1) defines packaging as "an item, irrespective of the materials from which it is made, that is intended to be used by an economic operator for the containment, protection, handling, delivery or presentation of products to another economic operator or to an end user." The carve-out is for items that are an integral part of a product.
The guidance then supplies the test that does the work. Items are not packaging when they are integral to the product - meaning "part of the product and necessary for its intrinsic use, not just for protection or handling."
Two of its worked examples are close enough to a spectacle case to be useful.
Dust bags for shoes and garments: packaging, where they are intended for containment, protection, handling, delivery or presentation to the end user during supply. Not packaging where they are genuinely integral to the product or sold separately.
IV bags and syringes: not packaging. The reasoning is the part worth copying out - they are integral delivery devices, and critically, they are not a packaging component that is discarded to access its contents.
Now hold a hard spectacle case against both. You open it to get the glasses out. Its function is protection and handling, which is the exact pair of words the guidance says does not make an item integral. The favourable reading - that a customer keeps it for years, so it must be part of the product - is not the test the Commission applied.
The limits on that conclusion are real and worth stating. Commission guidance is interpretive, not binding. Annex I is indicative only, and the guidance says in terms that inclusion in Annex I is not by itself sufficient to classify an item as packaging. A case sold separately, as an accessory, is not packaging. And the answer could differ for something genuinely built into the product offer rather than wrapped around it.
But the practical planning assumption has moved. Assume the case is packaging - which means it counts in your EPR reporting, sits in the fee base you are charged on, and carries the design and labelling requirements as they phase in. The same reasoning runs to your pouch, your cloth and your lens tissue. Budget on that basis and be pleasantly surprised, rather than the reverse.
The part nobody has written: your frames are medical devices
Everything above is what PPWR does to any small-parcel e-commerce business. This next part is what it does to yours, and it comes from a fact established in the European product compliance post: spectacle frames and corrective lenses are Class I medical devices under Regulation (EU) 2017/745, and contact lenses - corrective and plano alike - are Class IIa.
That classification reaches your packaging from two directions at once, and they point opposite ways.
The direction that helps you
PPWR defines a category called contact sensitive packaging, and it defines it by reference to a list of Union legal acts - a list that includes Regulation (EU) 2017/745. On the face of that definition, packaging intended to be used for frames and lenses is contact sensitive packaging. The definition is framed around the product the packaging is intended for, not around physical contact with it.
Contact sensitive packaging gets relief that ordinary e-commerce packaging does not: it is carved out of the Article 6 recyclability requirements arriving in 2030, pending a review in 2035, and out of the Article 7 recycled content targets, pending a review in 2032. Those are two of the most expensive obligations in the regulation, and the general e-commerce guidance an eyewear merchant is most likely to read assumes they apply to you in full.
Do not over-read it. The relief was drafted with sterile barrier systems in mind, the review dates mean it is temporary by design, and the reasonable working assumption is that it reaches the primary packaging around the device rather than the outer transit mailer. It is a question to put to your compliance adviser with the definition in front of them - but it is a question worth putting, and most eyewear sellers do not know it exists.
The direction that does not
Under MDR Annex I, Chapter III, the information that must accompany a device goes on the device itself, and only "if this is not practicable or appropriate" may some or all of it appear "on the packaging for each unit."
For a spectacle frame, most of it is not practicable on the device. A manufacturer's registered business address, an authorised representative's details where the manufacturer sits outside the Union, a lot or serial number, a UDI carrier and an explicit indication that the item is a medical device do not fit on a temple.
So they land on the unit packaging. Which means the case or unit box you were thinking of as branding is already doing regulatory work under a second regime - and from 12 August 2028, PPWR adds a harmonised material-composition label to the same surface, with relief available where space is constrained by existing regulatory labelling requirements. That relief exists precisely for situations like this one, and claiming it means knowing that both regimes are on the same piece of card.
There is a further date on the same surface. MDCG 2025-8 Rev.1, endorsed in March 2026, sets out how the Master UDI-DI works for spectacle frames, spectacle lenses and ready-to-wear reading spectacles, implementing Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2025/1920, which applies from 1 November 2028 after a three-year transitional period. Devices produced before that date are not required to carry it.
Put the two 2028 dates next to each other - 12 August for the packaging label, 1 November for the Master UDI-DI - and the sensible conclusion is that you redesign the case artwork once, in 2028, for both.
And then there are the words on it
One more regime reaches the same surface, and it is the one most likely to catch a store out, because it governs not what the packaging is made of but what you are allowed to call it. From 27 September 2026, the EmpCo directive makes generic environmental claims like "eco-friendly" unlawful on goods sold into the EU unless you can demonstrate recognised excellence. In California, from 4 October 2026, SB 343 restricts the word "recyclable" and the chasing-arrows symbol - though a federal judge preliminarily enjoined enforcement in July 2026, so check where that litigation stands before you act on it.
Read the three together and the sequence is clear enough. PPWR decides what the case is made of and what technical information has to be printed on it. EmpCo and SB 343 decide which adjectives and which symbols you may put next to that. If you are redesigning packaging once for 2028, the copy on it needs to clear all three, and the greenest-sounding version of that copy is the one most likely to fail.
Why this keeps happening
This is the third time the same line has decided the answer. In the product compliance post it decided whether you are a distributor or a manufacturer. In the product liability post it decided who is on the hook when a lens fails. Here it decides whether your packaging gets a carve-out worth real money, and how much regulatory text has to fit on a case.
The device classification of the object you import is doing more work in this business than any packaging rule, and it is the thing worth getting written down once.
What an eyewear store should actually do
Check your registrations, market by market. This is the only item on this page with a date in the past. Article 44 registration and, if you are outside the EU, Article 45(3) authorised representative appointments in each Member State you ship to.
Count your packaging honestly. Mailer, case, sleeve, cloth bag, tissue, card, tape, label. Assume the case is in. Some of the rest is packaging, some is product, and some is simply not needed.
Ask about contact sensitive status in writing. One question to your adviser or your EPR scheme: does the primary packaging for a Class I device qualify as contact sensitive packaging, and what does that change for 2030?
Right-size the box on economics, not panic. You have until 2030 on the ratio and 2028 on sales packaging. The shipping saving is available now.
Audit the words before the materials. The EmpCo date is this month and the SB 343 date is next month. Changing copy is cheaper and faster than changing a supply chain, and it is the part with the nearest deadline.
Plan one artwork change for 2028, covering the PPWR material-composition label and the Master UDI-DI together.
Expect the marketplace, not the regulator. The first contact will be a platform compliance field with a short deadline.
The connection to how you sell, which is not a stretch
Every obligation above is charged against the parcel.
An eyewear order that ships as one parcel - frame, lenses fitted, case, done - carries one packaging footprint, one EPR reporting line, one empty space calculation when that day comes.
An order that ships as a frame now and a lens fix later carries two. So does the order where the customer picked the wrong lens option, sent it back, and had a replacement shipped. Returns are not a compliance category, but they are a second parcel, and the second parcel is where the packaging cost, the customs cost and the carbon cost all quietly double.
This is the same conclusion the tariff changes point at from the other direction: fewer, better-configured, higher-value parcels beat more small ones, and the cheapest place to prevent a second parcel is the product page, where the prescription and the lens choice are either captured properly or left to be sorted out by email.
Frequently asked questions
Is the empty space limit 40% or 50%?
Fifty per cent, for grouped, transport and e-commerce packaging, from 1 January 2030 - or three years after the Commission adopts the calculation methodology, whichever is later. The 40% figure circulating in e-commerce compliance summaries does not appear in the provision. A separate and earlier duty, from 12 February 2028, requires empty space in sales packaging to be reduced to the minimum necessary, without a percentage.
Does PPWR apply to me if I am not established in the EU?
Generally yes, if you place packaged goods on the EU market by shipping to EU consumers. Non-EU sellers are additionally the ones who need an authorised representative for extended producer responsibility under Article 45(3), in each Member State where they make packaging available.
Is a spectacle case packaging?
Probably. The Commission's June 2026 guidance says an item is not packaging only where it is integral to the product and necessary for its intrinsic use, "not just for protection or handling", and treats an item that is discarded to access its contents as packaging. A hard case is opened to get the glasses out. Plan on it being packaging and get a position from your compliance adviser rather than assuming the favourable reading.
Does medical device status exempt my packaging?
No - there is no blanket exemption for medical device packaging. But PPWR's definition of contact sensitive packaging is framed by reference to a list of Union acts that includes the Medical Devices Regulation, and contact sensitive packaging is relieved of the 2030 recyclability and recycled content requirements pending review. Registration, EPR fees, substance restrictions, minimisation and the empty space ratio are unaffected.
When do the labelling requirements apply?
The harmonised material-composition label applies from 12 August 2028. Where space is constrained by labelling that other regulation already requires - which is the ordinary situation for a medical device - relief is available. Confirm your position before reprinting anything.
Can I still call my packaging recyclable or eco-friendly?
Carefully, and less freely than before. Generic environmental claims become unlawful in the EU from 27 September 2026 under the EmpCo directive unless supported by recognised excellence, and California's SB 343 restricts "recyclable" and the chasing-arrows symbol from 4 October 2026, subject to litigation. Specific, substantiated claims survive; vague flattering ones do not.
What happens if I do nothing?
Most likely nothing for a while, and then a compliance request from a marketplace or a logistics partner with a short deadline, at which point registration and representative appointment take longer than the deadline allows.
This article is general information about regulatory developments, not legal advice. Rules of this kind apply differently depending on your catalogue, your suppliers and where you sell; take advice on your own position before acting. Nothing here states the compliance position of VisioncarePro or of any merchant.
VisioncarePro adds structured prescription capture and lens selection to any Shopify product, so an order arrives complete and ships once.
Install VisioncarePro free on the Shopify App Store →
Sources: Regulation (EU) 2025/40 (PPWR), Articles 3, 5, 6, 7, 10, 24, 44 and 45 · European Parliament Legislative Observatory, document summary of the adopted regulation (empty space ratio and minimisation dates) · European Commission, Commission Notice C(2026) 3702 final, 5 June 2026, guidance document for Regulation (EU) 2025/40, section 1 (definition of packaging) · Latham & Watkins, "European Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation: Summary of Provisions and New Guidance" · Fieldfisher, "New EU packaging and packaging waste rules: 10 key things every global business should know" · CIRS Group, "Under the EU PPWR, is medical device packaging truly exempt?" · Oliver Healthcare Packaging, "EU Packaging & Packaging Waste Regulation: Impact on Healthcare" · Regulation (EU) 2017/745 (MDR), Annex I, Chapter III, Section 23 · MDCG 2025-8 Rev.1, March 2026, and Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2025/1920. Two widely circulated e-commerce summaries reporting a 40% empty space cap effective 12 August 2026 are inconsistent with the sources above and with the Parliament's own summary of the adopted text.
