The study examines for the first time the ecological and economic impacts of municipal packaging taxes. The aim is an independent and scientifically sound assessment of their effectiveness and consequences for the environment, economy, and consumers.

Limited Impact on Waste Generation

According to the study's calculations, the municipal packaging tax affects only a very small part of the overall waste situation. Even hypothetically scaling it across the entire country would reduce Germany's total packaging volume by just 0.04 percent and its greenhouse gas emissions by 0.0013 percent. From the perspective of the commissioning parties, the overall ecological benefit of the packaging tax therefore remains limited. 

High Burden for Businesses and Municipalities

BdS Head of Legal Department Kristina Harrer-Kouliev said: "The study shows that municipal packaging taxes do not achieve their central goal of effectively reducing packaging waste. Instead of genuine waste prevention, additional burdens are placed on the hospitality industry, retail, as well as consumers and municipalities. Increased bureaucracy does not replace effective environmental policies."

The relatively minor environmental effect is accompanied by significant administrative costs. For municipalities, there is considerable effort involved in introducing, collecting, and monitoring the tax. According to the study's calculations, administration costs account for around 10 to 15 percent of tax revenue. 

Simultaneously, companies face additional documentation requirements, adjustments to cash register systems, and training efforts. As per the study's estimates, the total tax burden on affected packaging would rise from the current approximately €0.1 billion to €4.1 billion. For individual packages, the burden would increase twenty- to thirty-fold. The study also finds that, in the long run, the tax is predominantly borne by consumers. These additional costs are generally passed on entirely or largely through higher prices. Households with lower incomes are especially affected. 

HDE Director of Sustainability Antje Gerstein said: "Our companies are already deeply committed to reducing and avoiding packaging without placing additional burdens on consumers. Instead of supporting this entrepreneurial initiative, such a tax only serves to increase product prices, ultimately harming consumers."

Additionally, the study demonstrates that 89 percent of the affected packaging volumes are already subject to other regulatory measures and charges, including system participation fees and contributions to the Single-Use Plastics Fund. As a result, the packaging tax adds further burdens on the same packaging. 

Municipal Packaging Taxes Trigger Substitution Effects

According to the study's findings, the packaging tax does prompt behavioural changes, but its ecological steering effect remains limited. Consumers tend to switch to pre-packaged convenience products, avoid hospitality offers, or use non-taxable packaging. Furthermore, there is evidence of avoidance behaviours in neighbouring municipalities where no packaging tax exists. The outcome: Packaging volumes often do not decrease but shift. In some cases, they may even increase. 

Reuse Is Not Always a Panacea

Despite expanded reusable offerings, single-use packaging remains the preferred solution for many consumption situations, as confirmed by business data from cities already implementing packaging taxes. Here, reuse rates do not increase. Even when consumers switch to reusable packaging, an ecological advantage is not automatically guaranteed. Reusable packaging only provides environmental benefits if it is used frequently enough and reliably returned. The study further shows that paper packaging produced in Europe, thanks to its high share of renewable energy, has a significantly better climate footprint than the average packaging subject to the tax. 

Commissioning Parties Demand More Effective Measures

Against the background of the study's results, the commissioning parties oppose municipal packaging taxes.

"The municipal packaging tax is neither efficient nor administratively simple."

DIHK Division Head Sebastian Bolay said: "The study aligns with what we also hear from companies already affected. The municipal packaging tax is neither efficient nor administratively simple. Instead of imposing new burdens, we should focus on strengthening and further developing existing circular economy systems. Expanding functioning recycling systems and innovative solutions for reducing material use would be far more effective."