When the Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation (ESPR) was adopted in July 2024, one provision captured particular political and media attention: the ban on the destruction of unsold goods.
At the time, the ambition seemed clear. The EU wanted to put an end to the practice of destroying new, unsold consumer products, especially clothing and footwear, and push companies towards reducing overproduction and better anticipate demand.
Now, after months of uncertainty and negotiation, the European Commission has adopted the final secondary legislation clarifying both the reporting requirements and the conditions under which destruction may still take place. As confirmed in the Commission’s official press release, the ban on destroying unsold apparel and footwear will apply to large companies from 19 July 2026, with medium-sized companies following from 2030.
The rules are no longer hypothetical. They are final.
In this article, we will unpack what has actually been agreed, how the final text differs from earlier drafts, and what brands need to be doing now. We first covered the proposed ban on the destruction of unsold goods back in 2024, when the ESPR provision was still in draft form and its scope and implementation remained uncertain. Now that the secondary legislation has been adopted, it’s time to look at what has changed and what the final framework really means in practice.
Want someone with deep experience and connections in the EU to help guide your sustainability strategy? Get in touch!
From Political Ambition To Workable Compromise
The original political vision behind the ESPR ban was ambitious: to effectively end the destruction of unsold consumer goods and drive a systemic shift in how companies design, distribute and manage products.
The final rules reflect something more nuanced.
On the one hand, they create real obligations, real reporting requirements and a clear prohibition that will soon apply to large apparel brands. On the other hand, the detailed delegated act introduces a series of exemptions and clarifications that make the regime far more operationally feasible than many had expected.
This is the EU’s simplification agenda in practice.
Compared to earlier drafts:
- Documentation retention has been reduced from ten years to five years.
- The obligation to obtain limited assurance on reporting data has been removed.
- Clarifications have been added around technical feasibility, cost-effectiveness and the application of the waste hierarchy.
From a business perspective, this is welcome news. The framework is more workable and less administratively burdensome than initially expected. From an environmental perspective, however, it is fair to say that these rules are a modest first step. The final rules do not eliminate the possibility of destruction; they regulate and condition it.
The outcome can best be described as an effective compromise: manageable for companies, but less transformative than we originally envisaged.
Pillar 1: Reporting Obligations: Transparency Starts Now
The first pillar of the new regime is reporting.
Under Article 24 of the ESPR, enterprises must report annually on unsold consumer products discarded in the previous financial year. For many larger companies, this obligation already applies even before the formal reporting format becomes mandatory.
The newly adopted Implementing Act clarifies:
- The standard reporting format to be used (applicable from March 2027)
- The product categories in scope
- The required disclosures, including:
- Number and weight of discarded products
- Share sent to reuse, recycling, recovery or disposal
- Reasons for discarding
- Prevention measures taken
Importantly:
- Donations are not considered “discarded” for reporting purposes.
- Companies may use estimates (which must be clearly indicated).
- Supporting documentation must be retained for five years.
While the formal reporting template applies from 2027, the obligation to report unsold goods already applies one financial year after the ESPR entered into force. For many large brands, this means reporting this year on last year’s data.
If this is the first time your organisation is engaging with these requirements, your compliance timeline is already tight. The reporting pillar is not just administrative. It requires transparency and to generate comparable data as it may lay the groundwork for possible future tightening of the rules.
Pillar 2: The Ban On Destruction, With Important Exceptions
The second pillar is the ban itself.
From 19 July 2026, large companies will be prohibited from destroying unsold apparel, clothing accessories and footwear, unless a specific derogation applies. Medium-sized companies will follow from 2030.
The Delegated Act adopted in February 2026 specifies the circumstances under which destruction remains permitted. These include, among others:
- Products that are unsafe or non-compliant with EU law.
- Products infringing intellectual property rights, including counterfeits.
- Products that are damaged, contaminated or otherwise unfit for use, where repair is technically unfeasible or not cost-effective.
- Products offered for donation to at least three social economy entities within the EU, but not accepted.
- Products donated or prepared for reuse where no recipient can ultimately be found.
In all cases, companies must be able to substantiate the derogation applied and keep documentation for five years. The waste hierarchy must be respected, meaning recycling should be prioritised over energy recovery or disposal where destruction is unavoidable.
Taken together, these exemptions mean that destruction has not disappeared entirely from the system. It is restricted, documented and conditioned, but not fully eliminated. Again, this reflects compromise: operational flexibility for companies, but a less absolute environmental outcome than initially proposed.
What Brands Should Be Doing Now
For large apparel brands selling into the EU, two dates matter above all:
- Now: reporting obligations are already live for many companies.
- 19 July 2026: the ban on destruction applies to large enterprises.
Compliance is not simply about avoiding unlawful destruction. It requires:
- Reliable internal data collection systems.
- Clear categorisation of products and treatment routes.
- Documented quality assessment and remediation processes.
- Governance mechanisms to justify and gather evidence for any derogation used.
Companies that have not yet mapped their unsold goods flows — from warehouse to final treatment — should consider doing so as a matter of urgency.
The political message is clear: the era of opaque destruction practices is ending. Transparency and traceability are now expected.
A Realistic Step, But Not The Final Word
The unsold goods rules illustrate the tension currently shaping EU environmental policy: ambition tempered by simplification and competitiveness concerns. The final framework is more feasible and proportionate than many companies had anticipated. At the same time, it does not fully deliver on the early political narrative of “ending destruction”.
Whether this is a transitional phase or a settled equilibrium will depend on future reviews and how the rules operate in practice. The Commission is required to review the regime within five years of application. For now, the direction of travel is clear: greater scrutiny of unsold goods, stronger reporting, and conditional limits on destruction.
For companies, the message is equally clear: the rules are final, the deadlines are approaching, and preparation cannot wait.
How Ohana Can Support
At Ohana, we work with brands, industry associations and sustainability leaders to translate EU regulatory developments into practical, workable strategies.
Reach out to our expert consultants if you would like to:
- Clarify whether and how the unsold goods rules apply to your organisation,
- Stress-test your reporting approach, or
- Assess how to operationalise the derogations framework in a defensible and proportionate way.
For large companies, the timelines are no longer distant; reporting obligations are already in motion and the destruction ban applies from July 2026. Waiting is not a neutral option.
For medium-sized companies, there is more time before the ban applies in 2030, but that time should be used strategically to build internal systems, governance structures and a clear compliance roadmap.
The shift from ambition to implementation has begun. If preparation has not yet started, now is the moment to put a structured plan in place.