What Happens If You Don't Comply With ESPR?
ESPR non-compliance penalties include market withdrawal orders, product recalls, fines calibrated to turnover (with EU member states setting specific amounts), and publication of enforcement decisions — effectively naming non-compliant companies publicly. Market surveillance authorities across all 27 member states have the power to act, and the ESPR gives them stronger tools than the Ecodesign Directive it replaced.
If you sell physical products in the EU and are covered by the Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation, understanding the enforcement architecture is not optional. This article covers how enforcement actually works, what the consequences look like in practice, and which aspects of the regulation are most likely to trigger scrutiny first.
How ESPR Market Surveillance Works
The ESPR does not create a single European enforcement authority. Instead, it relies on national market surveillance authorities (MSAs) in each member state, operating under a framework coordinated by the European Commission. This structure has important practical implications for manufacturers.
Who Enforces the ESPR?
Each member state designates one or more national market surveillance authorities. In Germany, this includes the Federal Network Agency (Bundesnetzagentur) for energy-related products. In France, the DGCCRF handles many consumer product categories. In the Netherlands, the NVWA. These authorities act within their jurisdiction but are part of a coordinated EU network.
The EU Product Safety Regulation and the Market Surveillance Regulation (2019/1020) — both of which interact with the ESPR — establish information-sharing mechanisms between member states. A finding in one country can trigger inspections in others. Non-compliance discovered at a German border does not stay in Germany.
What Powers Do Market Surveillance Authorities Have?
Under the ESPR and the overlapping Market Surveillance Regulation, MSAs can:
- Require access to technical documentation within a specified timeframe (typically 10 days for initial documentation, with extensions possible)
- Demand access to the product's Digital Product Passport and verify that it is accurate and accessible
- Purchase products anonymously on the open market for testing
- Conduct physical inspections at premises, including at importers, distributors, and retailers
- Order immediate cessation of making products available on the market
- Order mandatory recalls from consumers for serious safety or environmental non-compliance
- Impose fines and publish enforcement decisions
The right to purchase products anonymously is significant. Manufacturers should assume that any product available in the EU market can be tested against ESPR requirements without notice.
What Counts as Non-Compliance?
Non-compliance with the ESPR can take several forms, and they attract different levels of enforcement response.
Substantive Non-Compliance
Failing to meet the actual performance thresholds set in a delegated act — for example, a product's recycled content falls below the minimum percentage, or its repairability score is below the required level. This is the most serious category and the one most likely to trigger withdrawal or recall orders.
Documentation and Information Non-Compliance
Placing a product on the market without the required technical documentation, without a valid Declaration of Conformity, or without a functioning Digital Product Passport. Even if the product itself meets all performance requirements, missing documentation is independently enforceable. This is also the easiest form of non-compliance for authorities to identify quickly — they do not need to test the product, just check whether the passport works and whether documentation is available.
DPP Accuracy Non-Compliance
A Digital Product Passport that contains inaccurate or outdated information. The ESPR requires that DPPs reflect the actual characteristics of the product and are kept current. Authorities can verify DPP data against physical product testing. If your passport says 30% recycled content and the product contains 12%, that is an enforcement risk — and potentially a consumer protection issue on top of an ESPR issue.
Labelling Non-Compliance
Missing or incorrect product labels, QR codes that do not resolve to the correct passport, or energy labels that do not match actual performance. Labels are visible at point of sale and easy for authorities to inspect without specialist equipment.
Penalties: The Member State Picture
The ESPR requires member states to set penalties that are "effective, proportionate and dissuasive." It does not set a single EU-wide fine level. This creates variation across jurisdictions, but the direction across member states is towards larger fines, not smaller ones.
How Penalty Structures Work
Most member states base ESPR-adjacent penalties (under the existing Ecodesign Directive enforcement frameworks, which the ESPR builds on) on one or more of the following:
- A flat maximum fine per violation (ranging from tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of euros depending on the member state)
- A percentage of annual turnover — typically capped in the 2–4% range for serious violations in the most stringent jurisdictions
- Per-day fines for continuing violations after an initial enforcement order
- Criminal liability for directors in some member states for the most serious infringements
Germany, France, and the Netherlands have historically been the most active enforcers of ecodesign requirements and are expected to lead on ESPR enforcement as well. The practical advice is not to assume that being caught in a lenient member state will shield you from significant consequences.
Publication of Enforcement Decisions
The ESPR — consistent with EU market surveillance trends — requires that enforcement decisions be made publicly accessible. This matters more than the fine in many cases. A published withdrawal order naming your product and company damages reputation with distributors, retailers, and B2B customers in ways that a fine does not. For brands that compete partly on sustainability credentials, a published ESPR enforcement action is a significant reputational event.
Recall and Withdrawal Orders: How They Work
Market surveillance authorities have two main corrective tools:
Withdrawal means stopping the product from being made available in the market going forward. Products already in the distribution chain must be pulled. Products already with consumers are typically not recalled unless there is a safety dimension.
Recall means retrieving products already placed with end users. Recalls are more serious, more costly, and more reputationally damaging. Under the ESPR, recall powers are more likely to be used for substantive non-compliance — particularly where a product has been placed on the market in a manner that actively misleads consumers about its sustainability characteristics.
Both withdrawal and recall orders are typically communicated through the RAPEX/Safety Gate system, which shares information across EU member states. Once a product is flagged in Safety Gate, all member state authorities are notified and can act in their own jurisdiction.
Which Areas Face the Highest Enforcement Risk?
Based on the priorities reflected in preparatory studies and Commission communications, certain areas are likely to attract the earliest and most active enforcement scrutiny:
- Digital Product Passport accessibility: Authorities can check in seconds whether your DPP QR code works and whether the passport is populated. This is a low-effort, high-visibility enforcement action. See our guide on what a Digital Product Passport is to understand what "accessible" means in practice.
- Recycled content claims: Greenwashing on recycled content is already a focus area for consumer protection authorities. Under the ESPR, it becomes an ecodesign enforcement issue as well.
- Repairability scores for electronics: France already has a mandatory repairability index for electronics. ESPR will extend this logic EU-wide. French authorities have existing enforcement infrastructure and expertise.
- Textile fibre content accuracy: Labelling on textile fibre content is already monitored. ESPR requirements will add sustainability dimensions to what is already an inspected parameter.
Proactive Steps to Reduce Enforcement Risk
The best enforcement outcome is one you never encounter. Structural risk reduction involves:
- Completing your DPP requirements checklist well before delegated act compliance deadlines
- Implementing a functioning, accurate, and up-to-date Digital Product Passport — not a placeholder
- Maintaining accessible technical documentation that can be produced within 10 days
- Running internal audits against delegated act requirements at least annually
- Building data verification processes so that what your DPP says matches what your product contains
- Engaging your supply chain so that input data is accurate, not estimated
If you are assessing technology options for compliant DPP implementation, our platform features page covers what a production-ready system looks like, and our pricing overview gives you a realistic sense of cost.
Frequently Asked Questions
What are the maximum fines for ESPR non-compliance?
The ESPR does not set a single EU-wide maximum fine. Instead, it requires member states to set penalties that are effective, proportionate, and dissuasive. In practice, fines under ecodesign enforcement frameworks vary from tens of thousands of euros for minor documentation violations to percentage-of-turnover penalties (typically up to 2–4%) for serious substantive non-compliance in the most active enforcement jurisdictions.
Can a product be recalled under the ESPR even if it is not dangerous?
Yes. Unlike traditional product safety recalls, ESPR recall powers extend to products that do not meet ecodesign performance requirements even where there is no safety hazard. Recalls for non-safety ecodesign non-compliance are more likely for serious or systematic violations — particularly where substantive requirements are not met and the non-compliance has misled consumers about a product's sustainability characteristics.
How do market surveillance authorities find non-compliant products?
Authorities use several methods: random market sampling (purchasing products anonymously), complaint-triggered investigations, cross-border alerts through the EU Safety Gate system, and DPP verification checks. The last method — checking whether a product's DPP is accessible and accurate — requires minimal effort and is likely to become a routine part of market surveillance sweeps.
Does ESPR enforcement apply to products sold online?
Yes. The ESPR explicitly addresses online marketplaces and distance selling. Products sold online to EU consumers must comply with ESPR requirements just as physically stocked products do. Online marketplace operators have obligations to ensure that products offered on their platforms comply with ESPR requirements, and non-EU sellers face equivalent obligations when they target EU consumers.
Who is responsible for ESPR compliance: the manufacturer, importer, or distributor?
Primary responsibility lies with the manufacturer. However, the ESPR — like the broader EU product regulation framework — assigns obligations to importers and distributors when they place products on the EU market. If the manufacturer is established outside the EU, the importer takes on many manufacturer obligations. Distributors have responsibilities not to make non-compliant products available and to cooperate with market surveillance authorities.
Enforcement Is Coming — Plan Accordingly
The ESPR enforcement machinery will not be fully operational on day one. Market surveillance authorities need time to develop ESPR-specific competencies, testing protocols, and coordination mechanisms. But the trajectory is clear: enforcement will ramp up, it will be coordinated across member states, and the most visible non-compliance — missing or inaccurate DPPs — will be the easiest to catch.
The most practical thing a manufacturer can do is understand the full framework by reading the ESPR regulation guide, then work through the compliance steps methodically. The costs of early preparation are small compared to the costs of a withdrawal order or a published enforcement decision.