British Glass has raised concerns that the government is jeopardizing the UK’s glass industry following the passage of a controversial new packaging tax by Parliament.
According to British Glass, the newly implemented extended producer responsibility (pEPR) scheme will transfer the costs of collection and sorting from local authorities to producers. As a result, heavier containers, such as glass, will face significantly higher levies. This means that products packaged in glass bottles and jars may incur additional costs exceeding 10p, whereas items in plastic or metal containers will incur only marginal fees.
Specifically, glass fees for beverage packaging could be approximately 49 times higher than other packaging materials, such as less recyclable options. Consequently, brands may feel compelled to move away from using 100% recyclable glass products.
British Glass, representing the UK glass industry, warns that this shift could result in job losses within a sector that employs 120,000 individuals throughout its supply chain.
The new packaging tax, scheduled for implementation in April 2025, is also expected to raise prices across various products and may paradoxically encourage increased usage of disposable plastic, according to the trade body British Glass.
Dave Dalton, Chief Executive of British Glass, stated: “The Government has failed to listen to concerns from producers and trade bodies and is ploughing on with this ill-thought-out scheme which is a hammer blow to the glass sector and British manufacturing.”
He continued, “British Glass supports the principle of pEPR and acknowledges the need for reform in packaging waste collection and recycling to foster a circular economy in the UK. However, this policy threatens our competitiveness compared to alternative packaging formats, leading to job losses primarily in the UK’s manufacturing heartlands.”
“Consumers and small to medium enterprises (SMEs) already operating on thin margins will face price increases,” he added.
“The environmental implications are equally concerning. While the Government aims for a circular and zero-waste economy, the pEPR policy will likely incentivize greater plastic use—material that is less eco-friendly than glass. We urge the Government to rethink this policy and engage with businesses and British Glass urgently.”
Both British Glass and several major food and beverage producers have expressed their concerns to MPs and Ministers regarding the detrimental impact of the pEPR policy.
During a debate yesterday evening, Recycling Minister Mary Creagh remarked: “As we look at the global plastic pollution treaty negotiations in Busan, South Korea, we certainly hope to play our part in that work.”
Unfortunately, as British Glass technical director Dr. Nick Kirk points out, the current pEPR framework may counteract these efforts.
“While pEPR aims to shift away from hard-to-recycle materials to those that are recyclable, the existing policy will inadvertently promote a transition from glass packaging to less recyclable options like plastic. The proposed pEPR fees, based on weight, fail to consider that packaging is typically purchased in units, thus skewing the market dynamics against glass due to its significantly higher fees compared to competing materials. Glass remains 100% recyclable and can be recycled infinitely without degradation.”
In terms of financial implications, a 330ml glass beer bottle will face a pEPR fee of around 5p. With the addition of supply chain margins and VAT, consumers can expect at least a 10p price increase, particularly affecting larger soft drink, wine, and spirit bottles. In contrast, metal and plastic beverage packaging will see no such impact.
This shift may trigger inflation for consumers or, more likely, a transition away from glass packaging altogether.
“We have already observed the ramifications of brands pivoting away from glass as they finalize their packaging choices for 2025,” added Nick Kirk.
“Moreover, there’s been a notable rise in imports of empty glass packaging from non-EU countries, which are producing higher carbon emissions per unit of glass packaging.”
He further asserted, “These imports can be at least 20% cheaper than UK-produced glass packaging and will better absorb the pEPR cost, resulting in increased imports and a detrimental effect on UK glass production—as well as contributing to greater carbon emissions globally. This underscores a fundamental lack of understanding by the Government regarding the global competition faced by the UK glass sector.”
