The average price of UK plastic Packaging Recovery Notes (PRNs) has more than doubled in a year, increasing packaging compliance costs for retailers and prompting the British Retail Consortium (BRC) to call for the system to be folded into the UK's wider packaging Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) framework.
A Plastic PRN is an official electronic certificate showing that one tonne of plastic packaging waste has been recycled or reprocessed. Companies with legal obligations for packaging placed on the UK market can purchase PRNs as evidence that they have met their recycling obligations.
According to BRC analysis, the average price of plastic PRNs has risen from around £180 per tonne in 2025 to more than £370/t in 2026. The trade body estimates that the increase will add just over £100m to the retail sector's plastic PRN bill this year.
The BRC is calling on the UK Government to phase out the existing PRN system and incorporate its role into Extended Producer Responsibility for packaging (pEPR).
The call comes as the Government reviews the PRN and Packaging Export Recycling Note (PERN) system and producers enter the second year of pEPR.
The PRN system has operated in the UK since the 1990s and provides evidence that packaging recycling targets have been met.
Accredited UK reprocessors issue PRNs for qualifying packaging waste that they recycle or reprocess. Accredited exporters issue PERNs for qualifying packaging waste that is exported for recycling.
Obligated producers acquire PRNs or PERNs to demonstrate that they have met their recycling targets.
For plastic packaging, the recycling target for obligated producers increased from 55% in 2025 to 57% in 2026 and is due to reach 59% in 2027.
PRN prices fluctuate according to the supply and demand for recycling evidence. When the supply of qualifying material is tight, prices can rise, increasing the cost to businesses that need to purchase certificates.
Andrew Opie, director of food and sustainability at the BRC, described the PRN system as "outdated, inefficient, and completely unnecessary".
He said the Government should simplify the regulatory framework by "folding PRNs into a single EPR framework".
The BRC argues that rising PRN prices are adding to the cost of packaging compliance, while retailers must also meet separate pEPR and, where applicable, Plastic Packaging Tax requirements.
The UK's pEPR scheme shifts more of the cost of managing household packaging waste from taxpayers and local authorities to businesses that place packaging on the market.
Unlike PRNs, which provide evidence that recycling targets have been met, pEPR disposal fees contribute towards the cost of collecting and managing household packaging waste.
For the 2026-27 assessment year, pEPR disposal fees are being modulated according to the recyclability of packaging.
Under the Recyclability Assessment Methodology, packaging is assigned a red, amber or green classification. The system is designed to increase fees for less recyclable packaging and reduce them for packaging assessed as more recyclable.
PackUK, which administers the scheme, forecast £1.44bn in payments to local authorities during the first assessment year, covering 2025-26.
For the 2026-27 operational year, PackUK forecasts £1.47bn in chargeable disposal costs for local authorities, with total fee recovery of approximately £1.56bn after administration and other costs.
PRNs and pEPR disposal fees therefore have different functions. Government guidance states that pEPR disposal fees do not cover the cost of meeting packaging recycling targets, including the purchase of PRNs.
The Plastic Packaging Tax (PPT) is another separate packaging measure. It generally applies to finished plastic packaging containing less than 30% recycled plastic, subject to exemptions and registration thresholds.
The tax rate increased to £228.82/t on 1 April 2026.
The BRC includes PRNs, pEPR fees and PPT among the packaging-related costs faced by retailers. However, the three mechanisms have different purposes.
PRNs provide evidence that recycling obligations have been met. pEPR disposal fees contribute towards the cost of managing household packaging waste. PPT is designed to encourage greater use of recycled plastic in packaging.
The distinction is important to the debate over PRN reform as the Government considers how the different elements of the UK's packaging regulatory system should work together.
The BRC is also calling for revenue raised through pEPR to be legally ringfenced for improvements to packaging collection, sorting and recycling infrastructure.
The trade body argues that ringfencing would give businesses greater clarity over how producer fees are used while supporting investment in UK recycling infrastructure.
"We need Government to simplify the system by folding PRNs into a single EPR framework," Opie said.
The BRC's wider position is that producer funding should continue to support recycling while reducing what it considers unnecessary duplication in the packaging compliance system.
The BRC's intervention comes as the UK Government considers reforms to the PRN and PERN system.
A Government consultation on proposed changes closed on 5 May 2026 and received 81 responses. The proposals included measures intended to improve the operation of the system, create a more level playing field between UK reprocessors and exporters, and reduce the risk of fraud and error.
A joint response from the four UK governments is due to be published in autumn 2026.
The Government's response will provide greater clarity on whether PRNs and PERNs should remain a separate mechanism within the wider producer-responsibility system and what changes could be made to their operation.
Until any reforms take effect, obligated producers will continue to use PRNs or PERNs to meet packaging recycling targets, alongside pEPR waste-disposal fees and, where applicable, Plastic Packaging Tax.
"Plastic PRN prices surge as BRC calls for EPR reform" was originally created and published by Packaging Gateway, a GlobalData owned brand.