Does every plastic product fall within the scope of DIVID? A simple explanation of German reporting obligation

Does absolutely every plastic package placed on the German market, and indeed anything containing even a small amount of plastic, have to be reported under the EWKFondsG Act? This is a question that experts hear almost every time at the beginning of a discussion about a DIVID annual declaration audit. And, frankly speaking, it is entirely justified. After all, if someone hears that the regulation concerns plastic products, they will intuitively think: “if we export goods in plastic packaging, we must certainly report everything”.

The problem is that, when it comes to DIVID, following this logic often leads to incorrect conclusions.

Does every plastic have to be reported in a DIVID declaration?

The short answer is: no.

The fact that packaging contains plastic does not automatically create an obligation to report that packaging and submit the declaration required under the EWKFondsG Act. In practice, the scope of the DIVID system is much narrower and, at the same time, much more “functional” than most companies assume.

So where does this misunderstanding come from? The most common mistake experts encounter in practice results from a very intuitive, but unfortunately oversimplified, approach. 

Many companies begin their assessment by asking: “Does our packaging contain plastic?” and stop there. This approach appears logical, given that the regulation concerns plastic products, but in the case of DIVID, an affirmative answer is merely the beginning of the assessment, not its conclusion.

Problems arise when a second, far more important question is not asked: “What is the actual purpose of this product and how is it used by the consumer?”

As auditors specialising in examining and confirming information contained in declarations submitted to the DIVID register, we observe that companies often focus exclusively on the technical aspect (analysing the material used) while overlooking the highly important market and functional context of the product. As a result, packaging that is very similar in terms of the material used in its production is treated (and incorrectly reported) in exactly the same way, despite the product inside serving an entirely different purpose. Yet this purpose is precisely what is crucial under the EWKFondsG Act.

This product classification method can be simplified as follows:

• the question “Is plastic used?” → serves only as the first (preliminary) filter that narrows down the range of products that may (but do not necessarily) fall within the DIVID system,
• the question “How is the product used by the consumer?” → constitutes the actual criterion that ultimately determines whether the packaging of a given product should be reported.

Only by combining these two perspectives can a company correctly determine whether it needs to prepare a DIVID declaration and engage an auditor to verify the reported data. Omitting the second step most commonly leads either to excessive reporting (as a precautionary measure) or to the complete omission of an obligation, both of which may have genuine financial or regulatory consequences.

For this reason, it is always advisable to take a step further with DIVID and view the product through the eyes of its user.

Which products are actually covered by DIVID?

The DIVID system is based on the EWKFondsG Act, which implements the so-called Single-Use Plastics (SUP) Directive in Germany and aims to reduce the environmental impact of single-use plastic products.

Contrary to what many may initially assume, this regulation does not cover all plastic packaging but only specific categories of single-use products listed in the Act. The mere presence of plastic does not determine whether reporting is required. Much more important is how the product functions in practice on the market and how it is used by consumers.

In reality, analysing a DIVID obligation comes down to one fundamental question: is the product intended for immediate use or consumption, and is it likely to generate waste in public spaces? This means considering whether the product can be used immediately (without further preparation) and whether it is consumed “on the go”, for example as a quick snack.

A good example is kabanos sausages, which are ready to eat immediately after purchase, require no preparation and are often consumed directly from the packaging. They are therefore regarded as an “on-the-go” product and fall within the scope of DIVID. On the other hand, frankfurters, although they may be packaged in a very similar way, generally require heating and usually form part of a larger meal. As a result, they do not fall within the same category. 

This stage of assessing a plastic-packaged product is where the most common mistakes occur. If we were to look only at the packaging, the two products described above would appear almost identical, whereas their actual use is entirely different.

What about submitting a declaration concerning the packaging itself?

The packaging itself is another area that frequently raises questions among businesses operating on the German market. Unlike the LUCID system, DIVID does not focus solely on the packaging and does not assess it separately from its contents. Therefore, the product must be considered holistically as a “market product”, taking into account: 

• what it is, 
• how it is used, 
• under what circumstances it reaches the consumer.

Conditions that must be met for a product to be reported in DIVID

From a practical perspective, for a product to be subject to reporting in DIVID, several conditions must be met simultaneously:

• it must contain plastic,
• it must belong to one of the product categories specified in the EWKFondsG Act,
• it must be ready for immediate use,
• it must not require preparation,
• it must typically be consumed directly,
• it must have the characteristics of an “on-the-go” product.

Which plastic-packaged products are difficult to classify?

The greatest challenges arise with so-called “borderline products”, such as:

• sliced cold cuts,
• cheese,
• ready-made meal sets,
• small food packages.

In these cases, there is no single obvious answer. Classification should always return to the question: “How does the average consumer behave?” Will they consume the product immediately, or will they use it later as part of a larger meal?

What mistakes are made by companies placing products on the German market?

When preparing declarations for German registers, it is very easy to fall into the trap of overgeneralisation and adopt an extreme approach, either by oversimplifying the analysis, reporting everything “just in case”, or completely overlooking the obligation and assuming, for example, that a particular product range does not fit within the categories typically covered by the regulation.

A good example of an unclear and questionable situation concerns products sold in multipacks or bulk packaging. Some companies report the entire carton as a single unit, while others do not report anything at all, even though the carton contains individual snack-type products that are in fact covered by the EWKFondsG Act.

In practice, the correct approach to reporting in the DIVID system lies somewhere in between and always requires an assessment of the product in the context of its actual use by consumers.

When dealing with German obligations concerning single-use plastic packaging, vigilance is essential

In summary, when preparing declarations relating to single-use packaging, it is important to remember that not every product containing plastic is automatically subject to reporting obligations in the DIVID system. It is essential to look beyond the material itself and consider the product’s function and how it is used, particularly whether it is a single-use product intended for immediate use or consumption. In practice, this means analysing the entire context rather than focusing exclusively on the packaging.

The best way to understand DIVID is to change perspective – it is not a system concerned with “plastic” itself, but with waste generated in public spaces. It is through the lens of where and how a product is consumed that its regulatory status should be assessed. This approach allows products to be classified much more accurately and significantly reduces the risk of errors.