Tag Archives: regulation

Trump Administration deregulatory push yields industry wish list for rule rollbacks

By Erin Caddell, Anchor Advisors LLC – A GK Strategy partner firm

Amidst the mile-a-minute pace of activity in the Trump Administration’s first six months, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)’s April 11th posting of Federal Register document 2025-06316, “Request for Information: Deregulation” did not exactly make for scintillating tabloid reading. Yet the effort initiated by OMB’s memo is likely to spark substantial regulatory activity by a number of federal agencies starting this fall and into the remainder of Trump’s current term that will be highly impactful across a range of industries in the U.S.

OMB’s request for information (RFI) was prepared in response to an Executive Order signed by President Trump on April 9th to repeal “[u]nlawful, unnecessary and onerous regulations”. The order notes that the U.S. Supreme Court has issued a number of rulings in recent years limiting the power of federal agencies, and asks commenters to identify regulations now inconsistent with these decisions.

Companies and their trade associations were only too happy to respond to OMB’s request. The RFI received nearly 8,500 comments during the 30-day window (though some were from individuals calling for caution against moving too quickly to deregulate). OMB and federal agencies will likely begin the process of repealing or amending certain rules cited in the comments starting this fall. Importantly, the executive order notes that agencies may attempt to rescind the rules in question without the traditional notice-and-comment period required for formal rulemaking, which can add months if not years to the process. The order cites a provision in the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) providing a “good cause” exemption to traditional rulemaking requirements if the original rule is “impracticable, unnecessary or contrary to the public interest.” Any attempts to circumvent the rulemaking process would be met immediately by legal challenges (interestingly, the Mortgage Bankers Association, an influential trade association, argued that agencies should continue to utilize the notice-and-comment process, as abandoning this function could rob industry with a key means of providing input). But even if ultimately overturned, companies would have to make accommodations to assume a proposed repeal could become effective, particularly if intermediate courts support the Administration.

So what does Corporate America hope to deregulate? Anchor reviewed a representative sample of comment letters submitted by trade associations representing a range of industries. We summarize in the table below recommendations from six of these comments. Taken together, the missives describe their authors’ frustrations with the blizzard of rulemaking under the Biden Administration and cite hundreds of regulations they believe should be repealed or revised in the name of spurring economic growth and reducing the administrative burden.

Select Industry Association Responses to OMB Deregulation Request for Input (RFI)

Organization	Rule cited	Agency(s)	Year	Commenter’s rationale
Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA)	Adoption of energy efficiency standards for new construction of HUD- and USDA-financed housing	HUD, USDA	2024	Will drive up costs for new single-family and multi-family construction; 30 states still operating under prior standard enacted in 2009; shortage of inspectors trained on new standard.
National Multifamily Housing Council/National Apartment Association	Floodplain management and protection of wetlands	HUD	2024	Imposes substantial compliance costs on homeowners without robust data on actual risk reduction benefits nationwide.
Information Technology and Innovation Foundation	Rule requiring minimum of two crew members on most US freight and passenger train journeys.	Federal Railroad Administration	2024	Lacks foundation in safety data; is driven by labor-union pressures; automated braking systems and other technological advances intended to mitigate accidents caused by human error.
American Petroleum Institute (API)	National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for Particulate Matter	EPA	2024	In 2024, EPA mandated a lowering of maximum air particulate matter – a measure of air quality – of no more than 9.0 micrograms per cubic meter vs. 12.0 previously. API argues no new scientific evidence had emerged to warrant such a reduction. API argues the new standard will limit economic growth. The group supports revising, not repealing the rule.
Small Business Low Risk Coalition (group of manufacturing/industrial trade associations)	Multi-sector general permit rules for stormwater discharge from industrial facilities	EPA	2021	Argues 2021 version of standard was issued in overly hasty fashion relative to the 2015 version, which received lengthy multiagency review. The group argues that the 2021 permit rules added costly, unnecessary analytical monitoring requirements for many industries.
American Hospital Association (AHA)	Remove telehealth originating and geographic site restrictions within the Medicare program.	CMS	Various	Currently, Medicare patients in urban or suburban areas do not have the same access to telehealth services covered by Medicare as those in rural areas; in other cases patients must be in a clinical setting to receive telehealth services, which defeats their purpose.

Source: Regulations.gov

What does this mean for investors and companies? The OMB request for information and its many industry responses are a sign that deregulation – obscured thus far by the trade war, the immigration crackdown and the many controversies that follow the current Administration – will nonetheless be a key theme for Trump’s second term. The fall Unified Regulatory Agenda, a document published by presidential Administrations twice a year that details each federal agency’s priorities for the coming 12 months, will provide clues as to how the Administration has translated OMB’s fact-finding mission into agency priorities.

Given the inclination of Trump, Vought and those around them in the Administration, OMB is likely to push ahead with many of the deregulatory recommendations put forth in the comment letters. Opponents will attempt to counter these efforts through the courts, with their allies in Congress, and by attempting to influence public opinion. But as with many other aspects of the Trump Administration, critics will face the challenge of fighting many battles at once.

History also shows that deregulation can be a double-edged sword for the private sector. The Global Financial Crisis of 2007-08, which followed a long period of loosened of the U.S. financial services industry, is the most striking recent example. But more recent cases like the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank in spring 2023 demonstrate the dangers of lighter-touch regulation. In that case, rule changes reducing capital and liquidity requirements for banks of Silicon Valley’s size encouraged the firm to increase its risk profile, making the firm highly vulnerable to a rise in short-term interest rates. Companies must do more on their own to protect their businesses, customers and employees at times when the pendulum swings toward deregulation. Ethics committees, ombudsmen and similar compliance measures (Anchor and its partners can help with this!) can serve companies well at times like this when animal spirits are running high – on Wall Street as well as in Washington, D.C.

Housing Policy Under Labour: One Year On

Twelve months ago, the Labour government was elected on a manifesto with housing policy at its heart. It pledged to improve the lives of renters, as well as make housing more affordable by accelerating housebuilding and reforming planning policy, which in turn placed housing policy at the centre of the government’s ‘growth mission’.

One year on from this government taking office, what have been the major trends in housing policy under Labour, and how much progress is it making against the commitments it set out before the election? In this blog, our consultants Sam Tankard, Will Blackman and Joshua Owolabi look at the biggest housing policy initiatives from the government and what to expect next.

Planning and Housebuilding

The root of many troubles facing UK construction and housebuilding lies in the planning system which, in its promise of reform back in 2023, Labour committed to “back the builders not the blockers”. This move was seen as necessary if Labour had any hopes of meeting its manifesto promise to build 1.5 million homes over the course of this parliament. This was always a tall order given the UK has averaged 150,000 new homes between 2013 – 2023, despite targets often still sitting at around 300,000 a year.

The government’s Planning and Infrastructure Bill was introduced earlier this year as one of its flagship pieces of legislation, designed to speed up the delivery of new homes, increase capacity of local planning authorities with new planning officers, unlock land through compulsory purchase orders, and introduce a Nature Restoration Fund to offset environmental impacts.

This was welcomed by developers, investors and pro-housing campaigners as a sign that the government was finally putting in the policy requirements to unlock the level of growth needed to hit their targets, especially as housebuilding ‘starts’ since the beginning of this parliament are sitting at 186,000 – some way off the government’s target.

However, those same supportive voices now feel disappointed that the government has already started to water down the bill, even after removing the whip from an MP for leading a rebellion against it. In its original form, the bill was not considered hugely radical: criticised in part for only making tweaks rather than wholesale change. It does not, for example, even deal with the wider issues hindering development such as zoning and the value of available land, the labour skills shortages in construction, or the rising cost of materials that are pushing up the cost of housebuilding.

Now in the Lords, the government has introduced amendments that would make Environmental Delivery Plans harder and more complicated, as developers will now have to demonstrate how it will contribute positively to nature, and giving Natural England a potential veto on the delivery of new homes.

This significant concession signals the bill could be weakened further still, making it neither effective in delivering the housing at scale, nor enshrining the environmental protections that campaigners want to see. Housing Secretary, Angela Rayner, will need to use her political heft in the Cabinet to demonstrate the government remains on track and isn’t just compromising on a damp squib. After all, as a former prime minister once said, “standing in the middle of the road is very dangerous, you get knocked by the traffic from both sides”.

Rental Reform

One of the most significant areas of housing policy reform over the last 12-months was in fact originated under the last Conservative government. The Renters’ Rights Bill, which is currently coming towards the end of its passage through Parliament, has been a long time in the making.

It was the Theresa May government in 2019 that first consulted on reforms to rebalance the rights and responsibilities of landlord and tenants, which included ending the ability of landlords to issue Section 21 notices, or ‘no-fault’ evictions. This change continues to be the centrepiece of the bill and is intended to give greater stability and security of tenure to tenants. The bill also provides landlords with reformed and expanded grounds for seeking possession of their properties under Section 8 of the Housing Act 1988. This includes cases where the landlord wishes to sell or to move into the property themselves. Other measures include stricter requirements around rent increases, the creation of a new ombudsman, new requirements on landlords to remedy mould and damp problems, and a new right for tenants to request a pet.

The Conservative government’s version of this legislation – then called the Renters’ Reform Bill – fell away following the dissolution of the last parliament. Labour’s version of the legislation includes some significant differences to its predecessor, including increased notice and grace periods, and a three-month requirement of rent arrears before a landlord can seek possession, up from the two months proposed by the Conservatives. Almost all of the changes put forward by Labour are to the benefit of tenants rather than landlords.

Taken together, these reforms are the most significant changes to the regulation of the private rented sector for over 35 years. The residential landlord sector has been careful not to be seen to oppose the legislation outright given the unhelpful optics around this. However, many individual landlords are concerned that the balance has tipped too far away from them, potentially leaving many unable to take back possession of their properties in reasonable circumstances. Court backlogs have provided an additional layer of concern, with delays in processing evictions claims already persisting in many parts of England, and many landlords calling for significant improvements in order to allay their concerns.

Some industry leaders such as Propertymark and the National Residential Landlords Association have warned that the proposed provisions could lead to landlords withdrawing from the sector, in turn limiting supply and driving up rents. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government’s own impact assessment does not predict an exodus of landlords from the sector. Indeed, landlords have been subject to a raft of regulatory and tax changes since 2015, but these have not resulted in significant divestment from the private rental market, which many had predicted at the time. There is no question that these reforms are significant, but the longer-term impact of them may not be seen for many years to come.

Leasehold Reform

The Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 (LAFRA 2024) was passed by the previous Conservative government to strengthen leaseholders’ rights. However, its implementation has become the responsibility of the Starmer government as many of the reforms within the act require secondary legislation before they come into effect. This is a significant task given the high number and complexity of the provisions within the act.

In March 2025, the government implemented measures set out in LAFRA 2024 strengthening Right to Manage (RTM) provisions. Prior to March, landlords had been able to recover the costs of dealing with the RTM claim from the RTM company at the end of the process. Now, in a non-contentious claim, the landlord cannot recover any of its costs from the RTM company or the participating leaseholders.

The government is also consulting on the charges leaseholders – and homeowners on freehold estates – pay and the services they receive. One of the most significant challenges for leaseholders under the previous system was the inconsistent format of service charge demands. Once implemented, the new format will require landlords and managing agents to ensure that all demands on leaseholders are consistent, clear, and easy to understand. Any deviation from this prescribed format will render non-payment or late payment provisions in the lease unenforceable, providing a powerful incentive for landlords to comply.

While measures in the LAFRA 2024 will reduce excessive fees for leaseholders, many leaseholders may not fully understand their new rights under the reforms given the complexity of the act. Property agents will need to stay up-to-date with the regulations to guide tenants effectively, especially when it comes to disputes or questions about lease terms. Agents who manage leasehold properties will also need to maintain clear communication with freeholders, ensuring that lease terms comply with the new rules.

Despite the work already undertaken, the government intends to introduce further reforms. The Minister for Housing and Planning, Matthew Pennycook, has long favoured moving away from the leasehold system. As a result, the government has proposed a Leasehold and Commonhold Reform Bill, which will be introduced to parliament before the end of 2025. The bill would aim to make commonhold the default tenure for new flats and allow individual properties within a building or larger development to be owned on a freehold basis.

High quality property managing agents are likely to benefit from the proposed measures. Pennycook has made it clear that agents already play a key role in managing multi-occupancy buildings and freehold estates, and their importance will only increase with the proposed commonhold reforms.

Under the proposed model, agents would be employed by commonhold associations to assist in the day-to-day management of a building, and it is anticipated that almost all new commonhold developments, especially larger or more complex buildings, will be established with a managing agent to help run the site on their behalf. This could drive demand for agents with a strong track record of block management. The government is also considering whether it should be mandatory for a managing agent with appropriate expertise to look after high-risk buildings. Furthermore, the government is consulting on proposals for mandatory qualifications for agents and is highly likely to include measures regulating training and standards for agents in the proposed commonhold bill.

So far, the government made significant progress in enacting its leasehold reform agenda. Despite legal challenges to LAFRA 2024 and opposition from landlords to reforms, Matthew Pennycook and Angela Rayner seem determined to press ahead. Therefore, we can expect major changes to leasehold, commonhold and freehold regulation over the course of this parliament that will present new obstacles and opportunities for the housing sector.

Lighting a path to a smoke-free future: the government’s plans to end smoking in the UK

Smoking remains one of the leading causes of preventable deaths in the UK, with over 200,000 smoking-related deaths each year. With the Tobacco and Vapes Bill currently undergoing its legislative stages in Parliament, carving a clear direction of travel for the future of smoking in the UK, businesses have a unique opportunity to align with the government’s public health ambitions and unlock a wealth of new opportunities as part of the national push to reduce smoking rates.

The landmark bill aims introduce a smoke-free generation by banning the sale of tobacco products to anyone born on or after 1 January 2009, meaning affected individuals will never be legally able to purchase a cigarette. While some argue that this is a ‘nanny state’ intrusion into personal freedoms, the main provisions of the bill have long been discussed and were first trailed by the previous Conservative government. There is therefore a consensus across parliament that this is a necessary measure which will deliver long-term benefits to the general public and a struggling public health system.

The rise in demand for healthier lifestyles and the growing number of people looking to quit smoking present significant opportunities for businesses in the health and wellness sector. Companies offering smoking cessation products like nicotine replacement therapies (NRTs), or even digital health apps designed to support quitting, stand to benefit from growing demand for their services. Moreover, businesses that create products that promote overall wellbeing, such as fitness equipment, health supplements or stress-management tools can provide an alternative for individuals who are trying to improve their health after quitting smoking.

Furthermore, with employee wellbeing being a key focus for this government across a number of fronts, including the Employment Rights Bill, incorporating smoking cessation support into corporate health programmes is essential. Offering incentives for employees to quit smoking or providing access to cessation resources can help improve workplace health, increase productivity and reduce absenteeism due to smoking-related illness. Companies that invest in these types of employee-focused health programmes also benefit from a healthier, more engaged workforce.

It was confirmed in December 2024 that the government is investing an additional £70 million in 2025-26 to support local authority-led smoking cessation services. Given this investment, there is an increasing demand for qualified professionals and organisations that can offer expert advice, counselling and support for individuals attempting to quit smoking. Healthcare providers, private clinics or digital health platforms focused on smoking cessation are well placed to position themselves as a partner to government and highlight how initiatives can be rolled out and improved as ministers progress with their smoke-free ambitions.

To support the public understanding of new legislation, those who can offer both creative campaigns and innovative products aimed at raising awareness about the dangers of smoking, or promoting the benefits of quitting should focus on engaging with integrated care boards (ICBs) as they look to manage local service and improve outcomes. A 2023 report from Action on Smoking and Health found that tobacco control was perceived to be an above average or high priority in 14 of the 29 surveyed ICBs, underlining the necessity of appropriately resourcing ‘stop smoking’ services.

The passage of this legislation is not just a step toward improving public health – it is also a catalyst for innovation and business growth. Companies that can align with these objectives, whether by providing smoking cessation products, supporting corporate health programmes or developing creative campaigns have an opportunity to thrive in an increasingly health-conscious market. Given the government’s overall focus on prevention in its healthcare agenda, it is vital that businesses engage with the Department of Health and Social Care, ICBs, NHS trusts and other stakeholders to provide expertise on the rollout and efficacy of anti-smoking campaigns that will form a crucial part of this government’s potentially transformative approach to public health.

What does the future hold for crypto regulation?

Positioning the UK as a leader in the global market

UK policymakers and regulators have expressed their intention to encourage growth, innovation and competition in the digital assets industry. However, the government also wants to protect consumers and maintain market integrity. This is a balance that policymakers and regulators in other jurisdictions have found difficult to strike. The previous Conservative government wanted to make the UK a global hub for cryptoasset technology and investment – a goal shared by Keir Starmer.

Accelerating the timeline for reform

In 2018, HM Treasury (HMT) and the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) began coordinating a phased regulatory approach, initially focusing on stablecoins before introducing new regulations for the wider cryptoassets industry.

Since the 2024 general election, the FCA’s approach has shifted slightly. The government has indicated its support for most of the reforms set out prior to the general election. However, Starmer is less focused on stablecoins than his predecessor and is likely to accelerate the timeline for the regulation of the wider cryptoasset industry, rather than adopt the phased approach.

The government is aware that other international hubs have also taken significant steps in regulating digital assets. The EU’s Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) became fully applicable in December 2024 and has introduced a comprehensive regulatory regime for the European bloc’s digital asset market. Given the EU continues to work on secondary legislation to supplement MiCA and also requires crypto firms to align with other EU rules on governance and data-sharing, the EU’s new regime is likely to significantly increase the regulatory burden on firms. The second Trump administration has already signalled that it will take a much more lenient approach in the US compared to the Biden administration. Trump has issued an executive order directing agencies within his administration to create a regulatory framework that supports the cryptoassets industry and limits unnecessary government intervention.

Firms operating across multiple jurisdictions need to be cognisant of how the UK’s approach differs with other cryptoasset hubs to ensure compliance. The government is likely to favour an approach that places the UK somewhere between the EU and the US. While the UK’s eventual cryptoassets regime is likely to provide stronger consumer protections than a Trump-inspired US regime, it is unlikely to be as prescriptive as the EU on the categorisation of cryptoassets, the scope of regulated activities, and disclosure obligations for cryptoasset issuers.

Implementing the new regulatory regime

In November 2024, the FCA published a “Crypto Roadmap” of key dates for the development and introduction of the UK’s cryptoasset regime. The roadmap sets out a series of consultations focused on different aspects of the future regulatory regime to be held over the course of 2025 and during the first quarter of 2026, with the final rules published in 2026. This includes the completion of a consultation on the proposed creation of an information sharing platform for industry stakeholders (to be approved by HMT) to prevent market abuse and boost compliance with future regulation. The FCA also plans to consult on a governance regime in autumn 2025 including further measures to ensure crypto firms adhere to the FCA’s Consumer Duty and its Senior Managers and Certification Regime (SMCR). This would likely require individuals in senior roles at firms be approved by the FCA or the Prudential Regulatory Authority.

The cryptoassets industry is likely to benefit from Chancellor Rachel Reeves’ decision to urge regulators to accelerate efforts to support growth and innovation. As part of a wider deregulation push, Reeves tweaked the FCA’s secondary objective to make it clear that the regulator must do more to make the UK financial services markets more competitive than other countries. Although the FCA’s CEO Nikhil Rathi is concerned that deregulation could lead to ‘bad actors slipping through the net’, he has said that he is willing to consider the easing of some consumer protections to reduce the regulatory burden. This could be significant for the cryptoassets industry. Larger firms are currently better placed to comply with expected new regulatory measures, while smaller firms may not have the internal structures and resources to do so, potentially forcing them out of the market or creating opportunities for consolidation.

We’d be delighted to share our perspectives on what the government’s crypto and fintech reforms could mean for you and how you can engage with policy debates. Please contact joshua@gkstrategy.com if you would like to discuss the reforms with the GK team.

What does the Renters’ Rights Bill mean for the future of rented housing?

GK Associate Director, Will Blackman, explores what the government’s new Renters’ Rights Bill means for the future of rented housing in England.

The government’s Renters’ Rights Bill completed its passage in the House of Commons this week and is expected to receive Royal Assent in the coming months following the completion of its Lords’ stages. What does this significant piece of legislation mean for the private rented sector and the housing market as a whole?

The origins of this bill go back several years. The Theresa May government in 2019 first consulted on reforms to rebalance the rights and responsibilities of landlords and tenants, which included the ability of landlords to issue Section 21 notices, or so-called ‘no-fault’ evictions. This change continues to sit at the heart of the bill and is intended to give greater stability and security of tenure to tenants. It also provides landlords with reformed and expanded grounds for seeking possession of their properties under Section 8 of the Housing Act 1988. This includes cases where the landlord wishes to sell or to move into the property themselves. Other measures include stricter requirements around rent increases, the creation of a new ombudsman, new requirements on landlords to remedy mould and damp problems and a new right for tenants to request a pet.

The last Conservative government introduced its own version of this legislation – the Renters’ Reform Bill – however this fell away following the dissolution of Parliament ahead of the General Election. The Labour government’s version of the bill – now the Renters’ Rights Bill – includes some significant differences to its predecessor, almost all to the benefit of tenants rather than landlords. For example, tenants must now be in three months of rent arrears before landlords can seek possession, rather than the two months proposed by the Conservatives; the grace period after which landlords can seek possession in order to sell the property has also been doubled from six to twelve months and the notice period extended from two to four months. Moreover, the current version of the bill gives tenants new rights to terminate a tenancy from day one with two months’ notice – something previously not allowed under the last bill until at least four months after a tenancy started. This would have effectively created a minimum six-month term.

These reforms are the most significant changes to the regulation of the private rented sector for over 35 years. The residential landlord sector has been careful not to be seen opposing the legislation outright given the unhelpful optics around this. However, many individual landlords are concerned that the balance has tipped too far away from them, potentially leaving many unable to take back possession of their properties in reasonable circumstances. Court backlogs have provided an additional layer of concern, with delays in processing evictions claims already persisting in many parts of England, with many landlords calling for significant improvements in order to allay their concerns.

Some industry leaders such as Propertymark and the National Residential Landlords Association have warned that the proposed provisions could lead to landlords withdrawing from the sector, in turn limiting supply and driving up rents. The Ministry of Housing, Communities, and Local Government’s own impact assessment does not predict an exodus of landlords from the sector. Indeed, landlords have been subject to a raft of regulatory and tax changes since 2015, but these have not resulted in significant divestment from the private rental market, which many had predicted at the time.

However these changes play out in the long term, individual and institutional investors in the private rented sector will need to grasp this new regulatory landscape quickly, especially given its wide-ranging impacts for the sector and the prospect of significant disruption to their portfolio. It is the case that home ownership remains unaffordable for many and this is unlikely to change in the near term. However, as the government looks to tip the balance in favour of tenants, it is vital that investors engage with the new regulatory landscape to ensure they are well prepared and can take steps to insulate themselves from any emerging risks.

To discuss the government’s housing policy reforms in more detail, please contact Will Blackman at will@gkstrategy.com

Navigating changes to food and drink packaging: A guide for investors

Mark Field, director and founder of Prof Consulting Group, outlines what investors need to know about packaging in the food and drink sector

Setting the scene

Food and drink packaging is undergoing major transformation with innovations at each stage of the value chain. By responding to regulatory, consumer, and supply chain challenges, companies are finding new ways to reach customers and help them shop more sustainably. The role of packaging is to keep food and drink intact, safe and fresh along its journey from producer to consumer. It provides a space to communicate information to customers and to represent a brand. Carefully managed, it is a window to showcase a company’s values, but poor execution risks significant brand damage.

Shifts in the regulatory and commercial landscape

Regulation – responding to concerns about environmental pollution and climate breakdown, the regulatory landscape is shifting to place responsibility on producers for the packaging they put into the market.

In Europe, the upcoming PPWR is part of the region’s circular economy plan to value waste and minimise its environmental impact. The new regulation updates existing rules and aims to harmonise how packaging is managed throughout EU countries, making trade smoother. PPWR will require all countries to increase the share of reusable packaging which includes deposit return schemes, targets, economic incentives and minimum percentages of reusable packaging. In addition, 70% of all packaging by weight must be recycled by 2030. For some companies this might mean investing in new packaging equipment to handle new materials, for example, in the transition from plastic to paper. For others it can mean an entirely new way of selling, such as using returnable glass jars instead of plastic pots.

Nations in the UK are considering (England) or have implemented (Wales) deposit return schemes where consumers return packaging to a retail outlet and receive money back. This requires investment into infrastructure such as reverse vending machines. Others are working with digital technology to trace their products through the recycling system starting with the home curb side collection and rewarding customers who participate.

The UK’s plastic packaging tax charges a flat rate per tonne of plastic packaging with less than 30% recycled plastic. Companies must ensure they have accurate information on the packaging they buy to submit data to a government register.

Communication on packaging sustainability must be accurate and not mislead consumers according to the upcoming EU Green Claims Directive and the UK’s existing CMA’s Green Claims Code. One of the goals is to ensure that consumers are empowered to participate in the circular economy and can make informed choices. Consumers and NGOs are alert to greenwashing and don’t hesitate to call out companies who overstep the line.

A new UN treaty to regulate the production and disposal of plastic is expected at the end of 2024. Brands are calling for a limit to the amount of virgin plastic produced and for support on recycling and reuse systems.

Consumers – people expect companies to ensure their packaging is sustainable and research shows they want to participate in the transformation. According to global surveys, recycling packaging is the most popular sustainable behaviour, practiced by 62% of people. Companies can respond to these needs with clear and accurate disposal communication and with innovation in packaging formats.

Supply chains – extracting raw materials places undue pressure on natural resources and creates pollution that worsens climate and nature breakdown. Reducing the extraction of virgin raw materials, such as oil and timber, is urgent. Food and drink companies can limit their contribution to these challenges and take the opportunity to strengthen their resilience in the face of shortages and rising costs. UK and EU packaging leaders are moving from efficiency and lightweighting towards new materials, recyclable and recycled, and reusable packaging formats. For example, alcoholic drinks companies are experimenting with infinitely recyclable aluminium instead of glass, and being lighter, the product has fewer transport emissions.

Risks and opportunities

Companies who are unable to understand or keep pace with regulatory changes face increased costs resulting from levies on non-recyclable packaging, fines for misleading green claims and increased costs of excess packaging. Evidence shows that if customers are disappointed, companies will lose sales.

However, leading companies in the sector are embracing the transformation and innovating across the value chain. For example, with smart packaging technology using freshness tags; using alternative materials to plastic such as seaweed coatings and mushroom fibre cushioning; and using more reusable and refillable packaging. Infrastructure to support circularity is also growing, with refill stations, mobile and fixed reverse vending machines, and scanning and tracking technology increasingly prevalent. Cameras and cloud-based systems can be used to enable traceability and visibility over each process involved in collecting, recycling and cleaning packaging.

Companies that can promote and support convenient sustainable living will succeed in today’s crowded market. Many value-driven brands are entering the market and winning customers on this basis.

What should investors be asking?

Investors who want to understand the sustainability of packaging used by food and drink businesses should be asking management teams the following questions:

How does the business actively prepare for upcoming regulatory change and comply with existing regulations?

Does the business follow industry codes and benchmarks?

How does the business track the competitive landscape and identify gaps and innovations that resonate with consumers?

Does the business understand how customers use and dispose of their packaging?

Does existing packaging have clear recycle/reuse instructions?

Can the business substantiate claims on packaging sustainability?

Does the business know and manage the full life cycle along the value chain from raw material production through to disposal?

Does the business communicate their sustainability status openly e.g. on website linked to a QR code on packaging?

How does the business collaborate with stakeholders in all markets to ensure their packaging is reused/recycled correctly?

Prof Consulting Group helps to lead business to success in the UK and Australian food industry with its team of industry-leading experts and extensive range of services. For more information or to discuss how Prof. Consulting Group can support your business, please visit https://www.profcg.com/contact/