EPR Fees in Canada: What Paperboard Versus Plastic Could Mean For Food and Foodservice Packaging

As Canada’s extended producer responsibility programmes continue to evolve, packaging choices are coming under closer scrutiny. For food and foodservice brands, the decision between paperboard and plastic is no longer just about presentation, performance, or cost at the point of purchase. It can also influence reporting requirements, recyclability considerations, and the fees producers may pay when packaging enters provincial recycling systems. 

Why this matters now 

Canada’s EPR landscape is moving from policy discussion to active commercial reality. Programmes are expanding, reporting expectations are becoming more detailed, and producers are being asked to understand exactly what they place on the market. That makes packaging design a business issue as much as a sustainability one: the earlier brands understand material choices, weights, formats, and end-of-life pathways, the better positioned they are to manage obligations and avoid costly surprises. 

What are EPR fees for food packaging in Canada?

Extended producer responsibility, or EPR, shifts responsibility for packaging waste from municipalities and taxpayers to the businesses that place packaging on the market. In Ontario’s Blue Box framework, for example, producers of packaging, paper products, and packaging-like products are accountable for collection and recycling once consumers discard those materials; most work with producer responsibility organisations to meet these obligations. (rpra.ca) 

For packaging producers, this means the material mix matters. Fees typically depend on the province, the material category, the weight supplied, and the relevant programme’s fee schedule. A restaurant chain, grocery brand, importer, or foodservice supplier may need to report paperboard cartons, plastic cups, lids, trays, film, or multi-material formats separately.

Why paperboard and plastic are not treated the same 

Paperboard and plastic can both be designated materials, but they are often assigned to different reporting categories and fee rates. Recycle BC’s 2026 schedule, for example, lists separate rates for paper packaging categories such as corrugated cardboard, boxboard, gable top cartons, paper laminates, and aseptic containers, alongside plastic categories including film and other plastics. (circularmaterials.ca) 

That distinction is important because “paper” is not always simply paper. A paperboard bowl with a plastic lining may be assessed differently from a paperboard carton. Likewise, a clear rigid PET salad container may be assessed differently to a flexible plastic sauce pouch. The details of each component can change how packaging is classified and how producers model their obligations. 

How should producers compare paperboard versus plastic? 

The most useful comparison looks beyond the visible pack. Producers should assess the full packaging system, including the container, lid, lining, label, wrap, insert, and any other component that may need to be reported. The ideal choice may be the format that protects food, meets safety and customer expectations, optimises cost/weight and performs well in real collection and recycling systems.

A practical assessment should include the following steps: 

• Identify the province of supply. Obligations differ across Canada. 
• Confirm the producer. Brand holder, importer, retailer, or supplier roles can affect responsibility. 
• Classify every component. Separate base, lid, label, liner, sleeve, wrap, and insert. 
• Track weight accurately. Fees are commonly tied to material weight. 
• Check recyclability claims. Avoid claims that do not match local collection realities. 
• Model operational impacts. Consider leakage, shelf life, stacking, storage, and customer use. 

Lightweighting: Reducing impact without compromising performance 

Because many EPR fees are linked to material weight, lightweighting can play an important role in packaging strategy. With paperboard, this can mean optimising the board grade, structure, and geometry so the pack uses only the material required to protect the product, support stacking and handling, and deliver the right customer experience. 

Lightweighting is not simply about making packaging thinner. It is about designing smarter: removing unnecessary material, improving structural efficiency, reducing over-packaging, and selecting formats that perform well through filling, distribution, retail, and use. Done well, paperboard can help brands balance material reduction with pack integrity, shelf appeal, and recyclability considerations. 

Recyclability versus “recyclable” claims

What this means for food and foodservice brands 

EPR fees are not the only factor in packaging decisions, but they are becoming an increasingly important part of the commercial and sustainability conversation. For brands exploring alternatives to plastic, paperboard may offer an opportunity to rethink packaging design, simplify material choices, and support recyclability goals where the format is appropriate. 

The key is to assess each pack on its own merits. Material type, coating, lining, weight, food protection, customer experience, and local recycling infrastructure all shape the final picture. By reviewing these factors early, producers can make packaging choices that work harder across compliance, operations, and brand impact. 

Cost versus total value 

A direct comparison of material cost can be useful, but it rarely tells the full story. Packaging value should also account for EPR exposure, material efficiency, logistics, storage, damage reduction, brand perception, consumer convenience, and the ability to support credible sustainability claims. A format with a slightly higher unit cost may deliver stronger total value if it reduces waste, improves operational performance, or helps simplify compliance. 

For food and foodservice brands, the opportunity is to move the conversation from “Which material is cheapest?” to “Which packaging system creates the best outcome across performance, compliance, sustainability, and consumer experience?” 

Ready to explore your options? 

As EPR requirements evolve, now is the time to review your packaging portfolio and identify where paperboard could help reduce complexity, support recyclability goals, and strengthen total value. Speak to our team to explore packaging solutions designed for today’s market and tightening recycling requirements.