Packaging decisions today involve far more than aesthetics or cost. For the designers and procurement teams we work with, selecting materials increasingly requires navigating chemical disclosures, sustainability certifications, and a fast-moving patchwork of state-level environmental policy.
We field more questions on this topic than almost anything else—from brands reviewing legacy specs to buyers building new packaging programs from scratch. What follows is a practical overview of what’s changed, what documentation to request, and how to write RFPs built for today’s compliance landscape.
The packaging formats involved vary widely: paper shopping bags, corrugated shipping boxes, rigid setup boxes, reusable totes, poly mailers, garment bags, accessories, like tissue paper. But the compliance fundamentals apply broadly across all of them.
Key Takeaways for Packaging Buyers
- Remove vague coating language from packaging specifications. Many brands are updating specs to avoid PFAS-related materials and improve chemical transparency.
- Request certification documentation early in procurement. Standards developed by bodies such as, ISO — covering certifications such as FSC, SFI, BPI — help ensure packaging materials and processes meet environmental and sustainability benchmarks.
- Stay aware of emerging U.S. packaging policies. State-level Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) laws are expanding and may influence packaging design and reporting requirements.
- Use a documentation checklist. This simplifies vendor comparisons and ensures material testing standards are consistent.
- Write clear packaging RFPs. Detailed specifications around materials, certifications, and volumes produce more accurate bids and better supplier alignment.
- Understand recycled content requirements. State laws like California’s SB 343 set minimum Post-Consumer Waste (PCW) thresholds for recyclability claims — making recycled content verification a compliance issue, not just a sustainability preference.
PFAS & Material Red Flags to Remove From Packaging Specs
One of the most consistent areas of concern we encounter in packaging reviews right now is PFAS—per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, sometimes called “forever chemicals.”
These compounds have historically been used to create oil- and water-resistant coatings on certain packaging types. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, PFAS are extremely persistent in the environment and are under increasing regulatory scrutiny across industries.
While current legislation is largely focused on food packaging, the pressure for broader chemical transparency is already influencing how packaging specs are written. Many brands are proactively reviewing legacy specifications—often ones that haven’t been updated in years—and removing vague or outdated coating requirements.
Common specification red flags include:
- “Water-resistant coating” without chemical disclosure
- Unspecified barrier coatings on paper bags or boxes
- Fluorinated plastic materials
- Packaging specifications written before recent chemical transparency initiatives
For most packaging formats—paper bags, tissue paper, gift boxes, corrugated mailers—these coatings are often unnecessary. Removing them simplifies material structure, reduces regulatory risk, and rarely affects performance.
Sustainable Packaging Certifications Buyers Should Request
Beyond chemical transparency, procurement teams are relying more heavily on formal certifications to verify sustainability claims and maintain supply chain visibility. This is particularly true when packaging programs span multiple suppliers or vendor relationships.
The ISO has developed a broad range of environmental and sustainability standards that underpin many of the certifications packaging buyers encounter — including those covering materials, recycled content, and textile production.
These fall into two categories: Material/Environmental and Social Compliance
Material/Environmental:
Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certification tracks forest-based materials from responsibly managed forests through manufacturing and to the final product. Renewed annually, it’s a current, reliable credential — and publicly searchable, so buyers can verify supplier status independently. For packaging buyers sourcing paper bags, rigid setup boxes, or corrugated shipping packaging, FSC documentation confirms that:
- Fiber sources meet responsible forestry standards
- Certified materials remain traceable through the manufacturing chain
- FSC labeling used in packaging artwork follows proper usage guidelines
Beyond FSC, a complete documentation request typically includes:
- PCR (Post-Consumer Recycled) content verification
- Mill specification sheets confirming paper weight and composition
- Material declarations for films, laminates, or coatings
GRS (Global Recycled Standard)
For packaging that incorporates recycled content — particularly recycled polyester in reusable totes or poly mailers — GRS certification takes PCR verification a step further by providing third-party confirmation of both recycled content percentage and chain of custody through production. When requesting PCR verification from suppliers, asking whether that content is GRS-certified adds an additional layer of traceability
GOTS (Global Organic Textile Standard)
For fabric-based packaging formats like reusable totes and garment bags, GOTS certification covers both the organic status of fiber inputs and the social and environmental conditions of processing. It’s one of the more rigorous textile standards available, and relevant for brands with organic or sustainability commitments that extend to their packaging accessories.
Social Compliance:
Sedex & BSCI
Sedex and BSCI operate differently from the certifications above — rather than verifying materials, they assess supply chain ethics— covering labor practices, health and safety, and business conduct at the factory level. Suppliers audited through Sedex or holding BSCI certification have undergone third-party assessment of their social compliance practices, which is increasingly relevant for brands with supplier code of conduct requirements or ESG reporting obligations.
Certified materials and compliant packaging can carry a modest cost premium — but for most brands, the documentation trail they create is worth it, both for supplier accountability and for getting ahead of reporting requirements that are only becoming more common.
Emerging U.S. Packaging Policy Trends
Navigating chemical disclosures and certification documentation is largely a supplier-side exercise. Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) is different — it puts responsibility directly on the brands placing packaging into the market.
EPR frameworks shift the cost of packaging waste management from municipalities to the companies introducing packaging into commerce. Since 2021, seven U.S. states — Maine, Oregon, California, Colorado, Minnesota, Maryland, and Washington — have enacted packaging EPR laws. New York, New Jersey, Illinois, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire are actively considering similar legislation.
For procurement teams, this matters in practical terms:
- Recyclability affects which materials qualify under EPR frameworks — and increasingly, so does recycled content percentage. California’s SB 343, for example, requires a minimum level of Post-Consumer Waste (PCW) content for packaging to carry a recyclability claim. Post-Industrial Waste (PIW) content, while easier to source, does not count toward these thresholds in the same way — a distinction worth understanding when reviewing supplier PCR documentation. For current guidance on recyclability requirements, CalRecycle is the authoritative source.
- Packaging weight and waste reduction are factored into some state programs, which reinforces the case for removing unnecessary coatings or over-engineered material structures
- Reporting requirements tied to packaging volumes mean documentation habits built during procurement pay off downstream
One design-side note worth flagging to your creative team: building a small designated compliance area into packaging layouts now — for recycling symbols or regulatory marks — avoids a full redesign later as requirements expand state by state.
Supplier Documentation: What Packaging Buyers Should Expect
Even experienced procurement teams can find packaging documentation inconsistent or hard to compare across vendors. A simple supplier documentation checklist makes the process more systematic and helps flag gaps before they may become problems.
A complete packaging documentation file typically includes:
- Certification documentation relevant to your packaging formats (FSC for paper-based, GOTS for fabric-based)
- PCR content verification (GRS-certified where applicable)
- PFAS-free declarations where relevant
- Mill specification sheets
- Lab testing reports for material performance
- Sedex audit reports or BSCI certification where supplier ethics documentation is required
When reviewing testing reports, three things are worth checking closely:
Testing Standards
Look for recognized standards such as ASTM, TAPPI, or ISO. These indicate the testing was conducted against consistent, industry-accepted benchmarks.
Sample Description
Confirm the report references the same material construction being quoted. A testing report for a different board weight or laminate structure isn’t directly applicable.
Performance Results
Common performance metrics vary by packaging format—tear resistance for bags, burst strength for corrugated boxes, film thickness for poly mailers, and fabric durability for reusable totes. Understanding what you’re looking at helps confirm that packaging will perform reliably in real shipping and retail environments.
Building a Smarter Packaging RFP
The most competitive quotes come from precise specs — the more detail captured in a packaging RFP upfront, the better equipped suppliers are to return accurate, comparable bids.
A strong packaging RFP typically includes:
- Material specifications (paper weight, board grade, film thickness)
- Packaging dimensions and tolerances
- Printing process and color references
- Certification requirements (FSC, GRS, GOTS, or social compliance standards as applicable)
- Estimated annual order volumes
- Sustainability or compliance expectations
When building new packaging programs or revisiting existing ones, working closely with packaging partners during the spec-development phase tends to surface material options and production considerations that might not appear in a standard bid process.
One operational detail worth building into any compliance-driven packaging transition: certified materials don’t always move on the same timeline as standard stock. FSC-certified mills, in particular, can carry longer lead times than conventional suppliers, and sourcing GOTS or GRS-certified materials may require qualifying new vendors entirely. If you’re refreshing an existing packaging program or launching something new with compliance requirements baked in, building in additional lead time at the spec stage — rather than discovering the gap at the production stage — is one of the more practical things a procurement team can do.
Brands can mitigate lead time risk by working with packaging partners who have established supplier relationships already in place. Vetted mill networks and long-standing vendor relationships mean certified materials are more accessible — and qualification timelines are significantly shorter than starting from scratch. It’s one of the less visible but practically meaningful advantages of working with an experienced packaging partner versus sourcing independently.
The Big Picture
Packaging procurement is becoming more strategic. Brands are balancing design goals, sustainability commitments, and an evolving regulatory landscape—often across multiple product lines and packaging formats simultaneously.
The most resilient packaging programs share a few common traits: clear material specifications, verified certifications and supplier documentation, and packaging designs built with enough flexibility to absorb regulatory change without requiring a full restart.
Getting these foundations in place early makes packaging programs easier to manage, easier to audit, and more adaptable as policy continues to develop.
Questions about a specific packaging format or existing spec? The Prime Line team works through these decisions with brands and buyers regularly—reach out anytime.
