On this page
Chemical-recycling wording on pack: what the logo does not prove
Status
Mixed. Scheme logos (ISCC PLUS and others) are voluntary. Recycled-content mandates in Regulation (EU) 2025/40 Article 7 and in California beverage law are legislation. Whether chemically recycled input counts toward those minima depends on calculation rules; the EU implementing act on methodology was not located as adopted for this article. This page is the on-pack companion to the mass-balance article, which sets out the accounting.
chemically recycled · advanced recycling · circular polymersPrescribed or licensed wording — not production artwork
Marks and reference graphics are shown for identification, academic research and commentary. The image does not grant permission to apply a scheme mark to packaging; consult the issuing body's current eligibility and artwork rules. Licensed marks are not reconstructed as production files.
The sentence on the pack
The mass-balance article answers the accounting question: can a pack containing no recycled molecules carry a “30% recycled” claim? This companion is about what actually prints, and what a reader is entitled to take it to mean. Three graphic families appear: a scheme logo (often ISCC PLUS); a percentage plus a method word; and narrative such as “advanced recycling”.
ISCC PLUS, as set out in the companion article, offers three attribution options — free attribution, fuel-use-excluded, and proportional — of graduated stringency. “An ‘ISCC PLUS certified’ statement does not itself disclose which option was applied; that information is recorded in the certificate” (characterised from ISCC’s public explanation, as cited in the mass-balance article). A logo on pack is therefore a participation-and-audit mark, not a disclosure of the allocation rule that produced the percentage next to it. SCS’s recycled-content standard accepts mass balance but requires the chain-of-custody model to appear in all claims, including on-product logos (SCS Standards, n.d., as cited in the certification and mass-balance articles). Where SCS is the scheme, the pack is supposed to say which model was used. Where ISCC PLUS is the scheme, the pack often does not.
Legislation versus scheme versus proposal
ISCC PLUS and SCS are schemes. They are not statutes. The statutes that bite on the same packs are recycled-content mandates — Regulation (EU) 2025/40 Article 7 in the Union, California’s beverage-container minima in the United States — which count post-consumer material and leave the treatment of chemical recycling and attribution to calculation and verification rules. The EU methodology, including chemical recycling, is delegated to implementing acts “whose content has been closely contested within the sector” (Regulation (EU) 2025/40, as characterised in the mass-balance article). No such implementing act was located as adopted for this article as of 22 August 2026. Until it exists, an on-pack “chemically recycled — counts toward PPWR” statement is a proposal about future compliance, not a present legal characterisation.
Directive (EU) 2024/825 adds a second legislative layer for the logo as a logo. A sustainability label that is not based on a certification scheme meeting the Directive’s conditions, and is not established by public authorities, is a banned commercial practice from 27 September 2026. A converter’s invented “advanced recycling” badge, without a third-party scheme behind it, is exposed on that ground regardless of the underlying chemistry. A named ISCC PLUS or SCS mark is a different object, still subject to the Directive’s scheme conditions and to ordinary truth-in-advertising rules about what the certificate actually covers.
What a reader may take the wording to mean
In the mechanical case, “30% recycled” can be read as a statement about the pack as sold: three parts in ten of this object were something else before. In the chemical-recycling case under free attribution, the same words are a statement about a ledger: three parts in ten of a certified input stream were allocated to this SKU. The companion article quotes the ECOS / Zero Waste Europe / Rethink Plastic Alliance objection that free attribution “could allow for the liberal allocation of recycled feedstock to the final product of their choosing, regardless of its true content” (ECOS et al., 2021). The on-pack consequence is that the consumer-facing sentence does not encode the difference. Without a chain-of-custody disclosure of the SCS type, or a named attribution option, the reader cannot tell which proposition they are being offered.
FTC Green Guides recycled-content claims must be substantiated for the product as sold; the Commission has not definitively addressed attributed chemical-recycling content (16 CFR Part 260, as characterised in the mass-balance article). That is a claims-law question in the United States, not a labelling-format question, and it is flagged here because dual-market packs often carry the same lock-up in both jurisdictions.
Traps
Do not read an ISCC PLUS logo as a government recycled-content stamp, as a disclosure of the attribution option, or as proof that PPWR Article 7 will accept the tonnes. Do not treat “advanced recycling” as a defined legal term — it is trade wording. Do not print a percentage without naming the method and the chain-of-custody model. Do not reconstruct scheme artwork. The millimetre rules that exist in this atlas for statutory marks (Triman, SUPD, Japan’s identification marks) have no counterpart here: ISCC and SCS publish licence conditions, not Official Journal annexes.
References
ISCC (n.d.) Mass balance and attribution: understanding the difference.. Available at: Open source (Accessed: 22 August 2026).
SCS Standards (n.d.) Recycled Content Standard (SCS-103).. Available at: Open source (Accessed: 22 August 2026).
Regulation (EU) 2025/40 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 December 2024 on packaging and packaging waste. OJ L, 2025/40, 22.1.2025.. Available at: Open source (Accessed: 22 August 2026).
Directive (EU) 2024/825 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 February 2024. OJ L, 2024/825, 6.3.2024.. Available at: Open source (Accessed: 22 August 2026).
ECOS, Zero Waste Europe and Rethink Plastic Alliance (2021) Determining recycled content with the 'mass balance approach' — joint position paper, 10 February. Available at: Open source (Accessed: 22 August 2026).
Note on sources and verification
This article does not re-litigate the mass-balance accounting dispute; it cross-refers. ISCC attribution options and the non-disclosure of the option on the logo follow ISCC’s public explanation as already cited in the mass-balance article. SCS’s on-product disclosure rule follows SCS-103’s public description as already cited in the recycled-content certification article. PPWR Article 7 minima and the unimplemented calculation act follow Regulation (EU) 2025/40 and this atlas’s implementing-act watch: no adopted methodology act was located as of the verification date. EmpCo’s sustainability-label ban is from Directive (EU) 2024/825. House wording examples are illustrative of circulating trade language, not quotations from a named brand.
Last verified: 22 August 2026.