Legislation on disposable packaging misses the mark

The new law on packaging for take-away drinks and meals is being felt primarily at the checkout in this first week. For various single-use packagings, 5 to 50 cents is being added. In most places there is no or only one alternative: bringing your own container or cup. Do we all have to go out with our own tableware from now on? The government wants to make ''reuse the norm''. We also call for investment in a reusable system. That pays off, both financially and in terms of environmental impact. But what is a reusable system? And where does it go wrong? How does this legislation work? The new legislation has an important goal in mind: to reduce waste and litter and to encourage the transition from single-use to reuse. Every day in the Netherlands we throw away countless plastic single-use cups and containers that are used once. Rijkswaterstaat estimates the number at 19 million. Many of those cups and containers also end up in the environment as litter. In 2026, the Dutch government wants 40% less single-use compared to 2022, because: ''Reuse is our new norm''. The legislation contains three parts: certain single-use packaging may no longer be offered for free, and additionally, companies are obliged either to offer a reusable alternative (think of the deposit cup) or to allow the consumer to bring their own packaging (the so-called Bring-Your-Own, or BYO). Or both. Offering a reusable alternative is not mandatory for pre-packaged items (think of a wrap from the supermarket), even though that could be a free alternative to single-use. Unfortunately, the focus these weeks is mostly on the consumer: they have to pay extra for single-use or bring their own containers. There is too little attention on reusable solutions. Thus, a crucial part of the legislation is overlooked in order to achieve the goal (40% less single-use packaging in 2026). Moreover, the responsibility and costs are almost entirely shifted onto the consumer. And that cannot be the intention. Legislation part 1: Surcharge on plastic single-use cups and containers: good idea, poor execution. Certain single-use packaging may no longer be provided for free. A financial incentive that should lead to less single-use packaging and a transition to reusable alternatives. The government has only set guidelines for the amounts. You wonder: why do we have to pay 5 cents extra for a pre-packaged lunch wrap? That leaves us no choice. And does a 10-cent single-use container stand less chance of becoming litter? For that, as a consumer, you must first of all realize that you are paying the surcharge. Possibly the media attention in recent weeks has created some awareness, but you hardly notice it when ordering. It is also only mandatory to state it on the receipt, but who actually asks for a receipt with their chips? Since it is also not a deposit that you can get back, the packaging has no value and the risk of litter is just as high as before the legislation. Moreover, a catering business or supermarket can spend the surcharge freely: it is simply extra profit. State Secretary Heijnen said about this: “We are not going to check if they invest all that money in alternatives, but that is the idea.” In practice, we suspect that many businesses charge exactly enough for single-use packaging so as not to lose customers and to make a nice extra margin. They are not encouraged to invest in the necessary reusable alternatives. An example of where this does happen is the German city of Tübingen. The municipality levies a tax on single-use packaging to combat waste from single-use packaging and partly fund its processing, and to serve as ''an incentive to use reusable systems''. The municipality thereby promotes reusable systems. A lawsuit by the local McDonalds was to no avail, by the way: a federal judge ruled in favour of the municipality. Legislation part 2: Allowing Bring-Your-Own: foldable pizzas and soggy chips. Regarding reusable alternatives, the focus these weeks is on Bring Your Own (BYO). Partly due to the campaign by Nederland Schoon together with State Secretary Heijnen, where you could get free chips in The Hague if you brought your own container. Is it realistic and workable to ask everyone to bring their own packaging? The snack bars are not keen to squeeze their snacks into their customers' pots and pans. And the pizzerias also wonder how they are going to fold their pizzas into a container. BYO can contribute to less single-use packaging, but will at most make a difference of a few percent. Legislation part 3: Obligation to offer a reusable alternative: the core of what we need. The only way to achieve 40% less single-use packaging is reusable systems. Let this also be exactly what

The new law on packaging for take-away drinks and meals is being felt primarily at the checkout in this first week. For various single-use packagings, 5 to 50 cents is being added. In most places there is no or only one alternative: bringing your own container or cup. Do we all have to go out with our own tableware from now on? The government wants to make ''reuse the norm''. We also call for investment in a reusable system. That pays off, both financially and in terms of environmental impact. But what is a reusable system? And where does it go wrong?

How does this legislation work?

The new legislation has an important goal in mind: to reduce waste and litter and to encourage the transition from single-use to reuse. Every day in the Netherlands we throw away countless plastic single-use cups and containers that are used once. Rijkswaterstaat estimates the number at 19 million. Many of those cups and containers also end up in the environment as litter. In 2026, the Dutch government wants 40% less single-use compared to 2022, because: ''Reuse is our new norm''. The legislation contains three parts: certain single-use packaging may no longer be offered for free, and additionally, companies are obliged either to offer a reusable alternative (think of the deposit cup) or to allow the consumer to bring their own packaging (the so-called Bring-Your-Own, or BYO). Or both. Offering a reusable alternative is not mandatory for pre-packaged items (think of a wrap from the supermarket), even though that could be a free alternative to single-use. Unfortunately, the focus these weeks is mostly on the consumer: they have to pay extra for single-use or bring their own containers. There is too little attention on reusable solutions. Thus, a crucial part of the legislation is overlooked in order to achieve the goal (40% less single-use packaging in 2026). Moreover, the responsibility and costs are almost entirely shifted onto the shoulders of the co

Legislation part 1: Surcharge on plastic single-use cups and containers: good idea, poor execution

Certain single-use packaging may no longer be provided for free. A financial incentive that should lead to less single-use packaging and a transition to reusable alternatives. The government has only set guidelines for the amounts. You wonder: why do we have to pay 5 cents extra for a pre-packaged lunch wrap? That leaves us no choice. And does a 10-cent single-use container stand less chance of becoming litter? For that, as a consumer, you must first of all realize that you are paying the surcharge. Possibly the media attention in recent weeks has created some awareness, but you hardly notice it when ordering. It is also only mandatory to state it on the receipt, but who actually asks for a receipt with their chips? Since it is also not a deposit that you can get back, the packaging has no value and the risk of litter is just as high as before the legislation.

Moreover, a catering business or supermarket can spend the surcharge freely: it is simply extra profit. State Secretary Heijnen said about this: “We are not going to check if they invest all that money in alternatives, but that is the idea.” In practice, we suspect that many businesses charge exactly enough for single-use packaging so as not to lose customers and to make a nice extra margin. They are not encouraged to invest in the necessary reusable alternatives. An example of where this does happen is the German city of Tübingen. The municipality levies a tax on single-use packaging to combat waste from single-use packaging and partly fund its processing, and to serve as ''an incentive to use reusable systems''. The municipality thereby promotes reusable systems. A lawsuit by the local McDonalds was to no avail, by the way: a federal judge ruled in favour of the municipality.

Legislation part 2: Allowing Bring-Your-Own: foldable pizzas and soggy chips

Regarding reusable alternatives, the focus these weeks is on Bring Your Own (BYO). Partly due to the campaign by Nederland Schoon together with State Secretary Heijnen, where you could get free chips in The Hague if you brought your own container. Is it realistic and workable to ask everyone to bring their own packaging? The snack bars are not keen to squeeze their snacks into their customers' pots and pans. And the pizzerias also wonder how they are going to fold their pizzas into a container. BYO can contribute to less single-use packaging, but will at most make a difference of a few percent.

Legislation part 3: Obligation to offer a reusable alternative: the core of what we need

The only way to achieve 40% less single-use packaging is reusable systems. Let this also be exactly what customers need: accessible, free reusable alternatives. Cups and containers that you can borrow and return, preferably in as many places as possible, and which are washed by the catering industry itself or by external parties and redistributed if necessary. Just think of our system for beer bottles, for example. It is also interesting for catering businesses to join an overarching system, because in addition to recognition for the consumer, it can also take away the hassle and, moreover, reduce costs. A recent study shows that reuse on scale costs less than single-use. We want to encourage the catering sector and supermarkets to jump on the bandwagon as soon as possible, also in their own interest. The consumer expects a better solution than more expensive single-use. European and Dutch legislation on single-use packaging will only become stricter in the coming years. From 1 January 2024, for example, single-use may no longer be used for consumption on site. When you switch to a well-functioning reuse system, you avoid repeatedly adapting your operational system and you present a clear and understandable story to your customer.

Reusable: not more expensive, just nicer

Thanks to the new legislation, the customer has to pay extra for single-use, but reusable packaging can be offered for free, for example via a deposit system or an app that registers the return of the packaging. Moreover, the sturdier packaging — which must last longer than single-use — also ensures better dining experiences. Last summer we tested reusable containers at various festivals. They were enthusiastically received by the visitors. It is indeed more pleasant to eat when your pancake doesn't slide off your paper plate.

Same cups and containers everywhere, return anywhere

To make returning the cups and containers as easy as possible for the customer, it helps if the catering industry works with a shared system. A shared system — also called an overarching, uniform, or pool system — means that companies make use of the same packaging. The global Euro pallet system is a well-functioning example. This requires neutral packaging, not linked to a specific chain. And unfortunately, things still sometimes go wrong there because of branding and marketing. To achieve a shared system, coordination within a region is highly valuable. For example, such a system for cups was launched in Wageningen, Haarlem, and Leiden. Networks are also already being set up for meals; Wageningen is currently testing a shared system for meal packaging. Chains such as SLA and Burger King Germany have joined a shared international reuse system.

Shifting to other single-use alternatives is no solution

The surcharge on single-use packaging made of or containing plastic causes a shift to other materials. Plastic-free alternatives are being sought ever more frantically. This leads to at least two problems. Increasingly, we see ''plastic-free'' packaging appearing, which turns out not to be plastic-free after all. A recent example is the ''paper cups'' at festival Dauwpop. In addition, single-use packaging continues to generate a lot of waste and litter, regardless of the material, and single-use packaging (made of paper, for example) is neither sustainable nor circular. For liquids and hot products, you need plastic. According to NS spokesperson Willemijn Weinands, there is ''no good sustainable alternative for that yet.'' Let us channel the energy from the search for plastic-free single-use packaging into good reuse systems. After all, that is what the legislation was drawn up for.

A universal cup for every fast-food joint

That is the solution. McDonalds and KFC offering a reusable cup that you can return only to them are missing the mark. This is how you create collector's items that will gather dust on people's shelves at home. This is evident from Germany, where reuse has been compulsory since January and where McDonalds, by its own account, does not get back 70% of its reusable cups. From our surveys, it appears that branded cups are a barrier for consumers, who want many return points and are willing to travel at most five extra minutes to return packaging. Those fast-food chains are not quite that widespread after all.

The right information for the transition

To say the least, there is reluctance among businesses about offering reusable cups and meal packaging themselves. And that is understandable: the prevailing view is still that reuse is more expensive and more of a hassle than single-use. Even that it is less sustainable. That has now all been debunked. Yes, reuse requires initial investments, but is cheaper in the long run. The government would like to see businesses invest in reusable systems. Unfortunately, current legislation falls short of achieving that on a large scale. Were the shortcomings of the legislation then not foreseeable at all? Our input to the so-called public internet consultation for this legislation raised these pain points in December 2021. Now it is up to our government to push businesses in the right direction anyway. We hereby invite businesses: make your business future-proof, start with reusable cups and meal packaging. Many have gone before you. For the wallet, your customers, and the environment.

By: Karl Beerenfenger & Emmy Van Daele of Mission Reuse (a joint transition programme of Enviu, Natuur & Milieu and Recycling Netwerk Benelux)

Contact details

Karl Beerenfenger karl@fairresourcefoundation.org 06-18632023

Emmy Van Daele emmy@fairresourcefoundation.org 06-83903990