On this page
Indiana: sustainable packaging labelling
Indiana requires resin-identification codes on covered plastic bottles and rigid containers. Its Environmental Marketing Claims Act also regulates the meaning and substantiation of specified green claims and requires businesses to maintain supporting information.
Executive summary
Indiana combines a conventional mandatory resin-code law with an unusually explicit environmental-marketing recordkeeping statute. Chapter 13-20-19 requires covered plastic bottles and rigid plastic containers sold in the state to display a code identifying their resin. Chapter 24-5-17 defines common environmental terms, coordinates those definitions with federal FTC standards and requires a person making covered claims to maintain information supporting the representation.
The two regimes should remain separate in compliance records. A resin code is required because the package meets a physical definition and capacity threshold. A claim file is required because the business has chosen to make an environmental representation. Displaying the resin number does not substantiate a statement that the package is recyclable in Indiana.
Legal status at a glance
| Requirement | Status | Operational meaning |
|---|---|---|
| Plastic resin-identification code | mandatory | Covered bottles of at least 16 fluid ounces and rigid containers of at least eight fluid ounces use the prescribed 1-7 code. |
| Recyclable, recycled, compostable and related claims | claim-dependent | State definitions defer to a different applicable FTC definition, making current federal guidance central to interpretation. |
| Environmental-claim support records | mandatory when claim made | A claimant must maintain the statutory categories of information supporting specified environmental representations. |
| Unsubstantiated covered claim | prohibited | A knowing violation is treated as a deceptive act under Indiana consumer-protection law. |
Plastic bottle and rigid-container code
Indiana Code chapter 13-20-19 prohibits sale of a plastic bottle with a capacity of at least 16 fluid ounces, or another rigid plastic container with a capacity of at least eight fluid ounces, unless it carries the prescribed resin code. The code uses a three-sided triangular arrow with a number in the centre and letters beneath. The categories run from PETE 1 through OTHER 7, including the multilayer category described by the statute.
If a label or base cup uses a resin different from the container body, the code follows the primary basic material. The current text does not state a five-gallon upper threshold, so a company should not import that limitation from another state's similar statute. The physical article and capacity should be measured against Indiana's own definitions.
Environmental marketing definitions
The Environmental Marketing Claims Act addresses representations involving consumer goods, packages and advertising. It supplies definitions for terms including biodegradable, compostable, photodegradable, recyclable, recycled and ozone friendly. Critically, the statute provides that when a Federal Trade Commission rule or guide defines a term differently, the federal definition applies. The current Green Guides therefore matter more than a mechanical reading of older state wording in isolation.
This coordination provision reduces, but does not eliminate, interpretive risk. The Green Guides distinguish a claim about the product from one about the package, require qualifications when collection access is limited and apply different conditions to compostable and degradable claims. A package review should identify the exact claim, the component to which it refers, the expected consumer takeaway and the evidence for each element.
Required substantiation records
Section 24-5-17-12 requires the claimant to maintain information supporting a covered environmental marketing claim. The statutory categories include the reasons the representation is believed to be true; information about significant adverse environmental effects associated with production, distribution, use and disposal; measures taken to reduce those effects; relevant environmental permit violations; and information supporting whether the good is recycled, recyclable, biodegradable, photodegradable, compostable or ozone friendly.
This is broader than retaining a supplier certificate. A defensible file should connect the final consumer-facing words and imagery to material specifications, test standards, collection-access data, calculation methods, chain-of-custody or recycled-content records, relevant qualifications and approval history. The record should be updated when the package, market infrastructure or legal standard changes.
Disclosure and governance implications
The Act contemplates public access to the claim information in the circumstances stated by law. Businesses should therefore write substantiation records as compliance documents that can be understood outside the product team. Unsupported conclusions, confidential assumptions and citations without retained source copies make the file less useful during an inquiry.
Claims governance should assign one owner for the legal interpretation and another for the underlying technical evidence. Marketing approval should be withheld until the file exists. The statutory record obligation is triggered by the representation; it should not be reconstructed only after a regulator or consumer asks for support.
Who bears the obligation
The resin chapter regulates sale of the covered package, so the manufacturer, importer and seller should ensure that packaging entering Indiana carries the code. The marketing-claims chapter applies to the person making the covered representation. Depending on the supply chain, that can include a brand owner, private-label retailer, importer or other advertiser.
Contract language can require a supplier to provide resin or compostability evidence, but the entity authorising the Indiana-facing claim should confirm that the evidence answers the actual representation. A generic warranty of legal compliance does not replace the statutory information file.
Enforcement and remedies
A knowing violation of the Environmental Marketing Claims Act constitutes a deceptive act under Indiana's Deceptive Consumer Sales Act. That classification can support public enforcement and, where statutory conditions are met, consumer remedies including actual damages and attorney's fees. The precise remedy depends on the conduct, knowledge standard, claimant and procedural route.
The resin-code requirement arises under the environmental title and should be tracked separately. Businesses should avoid presenting one generic Indiana penalty because the statutes regulate different conduct and use different enforcement structures.
Practical artwork checklist
Confirm whether the package is a covered bottle or rigid container and record its capacity and predominant resin. Inspect the molded or printed geometry against the Indiana code. Then inventory every environmental word, certification, icon and implied message. For each claim, determine the current FTC meaning, identify the relevant product or component, assemble every category of information required by section 24-5-17-12 and set a review date.
Primary sources and verification
Indiana General Assembly. Indiana Code, laws and current title downloads. Official code portal
Indiana Code. Chapter 13-20-19, plastic bottle and rigid plastic container coding. Current consolidated chapter
Indiana Code. Chapter 24-5-17, Environmental Marketing Claims. Current consolidated chapter
Indiana Code. Section 24-5-17-12, required claim information. Current consolidated section
Indiana Code. Section 24-5-17-14, deceptive-act treatment. Current consolidated section
Federal Trade Commission. Guides for the Use of Environmental Marketing Claims, 16 C.F.R. Part 260. Official Green Guides
Federal Trade Commission. Environmental Claims: Summary of the Green Guides. Business guidance
Current FTC definitions should be read with the Indiana coordination provision before approving a claim. Last verified: 21 August 2026.