Changes from report parliamentary committee draft to plenary report

Added4. Underlines that the responsible person in the EU acting on behalf of non-EU traders for product compliance often lacks the capacity to provide consumer redress or compensation, particularly when acting as an authorised representative; recognises, furthermore, the lack of harmonised requirements to ensure these actors can fulfil their obligations; urges the Commission to accelerate its in-depth evaluation of the effectiveness of the provisions relating to the ‘responsible person for products placed on the Union market’, and also to build upon the results of the interim report on Article 4 of the MSR; calls on the Commission to consider the introduction of a mandatory requirement for non-EU traders to appoint a responsible person in the EU with increased legal and financial liability to ensure that consumers are not left without redress, while ensuring a level playing field between EU and non-EU companies; urges the Commission, furthermore, to establish operational requirements for responsible persons, which may include aspects related to their economic solvency or ability to effectively carry out their respective tasks;

Added5. Stresses that the NLF must evolve to support the integration of the requirements of the circular economy and digitalisation, as highlighted in the fitness check and the evaluation of the NLF; notes that this includes ensuring that conformity assessments effectively address the challenges posed by rapidly advancing technologies, such as software and hardware updates, product connectivity and artificial intelligence, which have the potential to alter essential product characteristics after they have been placed on the market, while also supporting competitiveness and simplified compliance procedures;

Added6. Calls on the Commission to ensure the proper application of the NLF, which must be consistent with existing Union legislation, including with provisions strengthening consumer protection in relation to the use of artificial intelligence and automated decision-making; recalls, in this regard, the existing provisions in the General Data Protection Regulation and the Artificial Intelligence Act to the effect that consumers must be clearly informed when decisions are made using artificial intelligence or automated processing, in particular when personal data are involved and that consumers should have the option to seek human intervention in such cases;

Added7. Stresses the importance of effective and consistent implementation of the MSR as a cornerstone of the NLF; underlines the essential role played by national market surveillance authorities in ensuring the safety and compliance of products placed on the EU market, including those sold online; calls for the strengthening of their operational capacity and coordination, both at national and EU level, in particular through better risk-based planning and joint actions, and calls on the Commission to assess the need for an EU market surveillance authority; highlights the need to ensure adequate resourcing for market surveillance authorities, improved cooperation, enhanced information exchange and the use of digital tools; encourages the Commission and the Member States to continue supporting cooperation mechanisms such as the EU Product Compliance Network, and to ensure consistent enforcement practices across sectors and borders, in order to ensure a well-functioning market surveillance system, which is crucial for safeguarding consumer protection, fair competition and trust in the single market;

Added8. Notes that the evaluation of the MSR is not yet part of the NLF revision but should be finalised by December 2026 together with a proposal for a revision; emphasises that the MSR plays a pivotal role in enhancing the effectiveness of market surveillance across the EU; suggests maintaining the use of the MSR risk assessment to identify high-risk products and monitor the compliance history of economic operators, in particular those from third countries; invites the Commission to assess the feasibility of a risk-based alert notification system for operators with a history of poor compliance performance that could enable reinforced market surveillance monitoring; suggests introducing a more proactive and digitally enabled supervisory mechanism entrusted to national authorities designated by the Member States, with the aim of ensuring more effective and consistent oversight; stresses, in this context, the importance of updating the MSR to streamline and standardise market surveillance authorities’ actions and information exchange in the EU; recommends developing key performance indicators to systematically and objectively evaluate compliance;

Digital product passport (DPP)

Change 3

Changed4.9. Highlights the benefits of a horizontal and interoperable DPP as a tool providingthat can provide access to harmonised information on product characteristics, product conformity, supply chains, energy efficiency, detailed sustainability performance metrics, and essential data on product composition, durability, reparability, reusability, recyclability, maintenance costs,costs and price and availabilityavailabilities of spare parts; notes that the specific information to be included in the DPP must consider the product category with different access rights depending on the actors involved; believes that the DPP should bebecome the go-to point for bothconsumers, consumersauthorities and authorities;businesses along the value chain;

Change 4

Removed5. Emphasises the value of the DPP in empowering consumers to make informed choices; underlines its potential to promote sustainable consumption in line with the EU’s climate and environmental goals;

Added10. Considers that the DPP should replace existing declarations of conformity in order to streamline conformity requirements; welcomes, in this context, the forthcoming regulation on toy safety, which will allow economic operators to fully rely on the DPP instead of drawing up declarations of conformity;

Removed6. Stresses that a horizontal DPP would significantly enhance the work of market surveillance and customs authorities, as it would enable the efficient screening of essential product compliance information for conformity checks;

Added11. Emphasises the value of the DPP in empowering consumers to make informed choices, thereby building consumer trust and facilitating circular product flows; underlines its potential to support sustainable consumption in line with the EU’s climate and environmental goals and to contribute to engaging consumers in favour of a sustainable economy in the single market;

Removed7. Calls for the integration of the DPP into the NLF as a mandatory requirement for all products made available on the Union market, including second-hand products;

Added12. Stresses that a horizontal DPP would significantly enhance the work of market surveillance and customs authorities, as it would enable the efficient screening of essential product compliance information for conformity checks; underlines that market surveillance authorities should ensure that economic operators always provide the required data and that it remains constantly accessible to consumers, public authorities, refurbishers and repairers, in accordance with the time limits, access rights and other relevant provisions set out in the corresponding legislation; emphasises that the Commission should provide tailored assistance, clear guidelines, streamlined procedures and capacity-building tools for relevant economic operators, especially SMEs, in order to facilitate the implementation of the DPP;

Removed8. Recognises that the CE marking may be misleading for consumers, who often mistakenly perceive it as a safety or quality certification; points out that, in order to avoid such misconceptions and to streamline the flow of information via the DPP, the CE marking should be removed;

Added13. Invites the Commission to establish an ambitious strategy of ensuring interoperability between the DPP and existing databases, including the EU Safety Gate, the Information and Communication System for Market Surveillance, Certex, and the future EU customs data hub, as well as with mechanisms developed under the Consumer Protection Regulation; believes that data contained in the DPP should be machine-readable and easily transferrable between these systems, in order to ensure that products identified as unsafe or non-compliant by one market surveillance or customs authority are automatically flagged to everyone;

Removed9. Calls on the Commission to use harmonised methodologies for environmental, durability and social impact assessments, with a view to supporting the establishment of an EU-wide sustainability index for each product within DPP, which integrates indicators, such as the carbon footprint, material sourcing ethics, and long-term environmental impact;

Added14. Calls on the Commission to assess the feasibility of the progressive integration of the DPP into the NLF as a horizontal requirement for all relevant products made available on the EU market; notes, however, that the DPP is still at early stages of development and requires a gradual approach to ensure that economic operators can adapt to comply with the applicable requirements, with a view to achieving full implementation;

Added15. Recognises that various companies are actively developing DPP solutions tailored to second-hand goods and that the technological tools to monitor the life cycle of such products are already available; calls on the Commission to assess such initiatives and consider whether a gradual introduction of the DPP for second-hand items could, once the DPP for new products is fully implemented, contribute to promoting circular economy business models, build consumer confidence, support environmental objectives, while upholding safety standards, by enabling both market surveillance authorities and consumers to assess the legitimacy, quality and performance of second-hand products; emphasises, nevertheless, the specific implications associated with second-hand products, where the capacity of the seller, often a consumer, to correctly update the DPP may be limited; notes, therefore, that for operators such as refurbishers, remanufacturers and importers of second-hand goods, it may prove difficult to obtain the original information; calls on the Commission to consider the DPP and the related requirements in the context of circular products and to assess how they can best promote the circular economy;

Added16. Considers that the DPP should be implemented in a way that supports economic operators by simplifying their compliance obligations, allowing more mandatory information to be communicated digitally, reducing paper-based information requirements and offering a single tool for all product compliance and information-related requirements; stresses, however, that information which is vital to ensure consumer safety should also be provided in a paper-based format for users, who may not possess the necessary digital literacy or technical means to access such information;

Added17. Recognises that the CE marking has been beneficial in enabling manufacturers to demonstrate product conformity, which can then be assessed by market surveillance authorities; recognises the need to improve awareness of the CE marking and the risks of a misleading safety or quality label for consumers; points out that, in order to avoid misconceptions and to streamline the flow of information via the DPP, the Commission should assess the feasibility of applying the CE marking in ways that are appropriate for different product categories and assess whether or not the CE marking should be applied in physical format on the product or rather expressed only through the DPP;

Added18. Calls on the Commission to consider streamlining the relevant CE marking information via the DPP, in order to enhance transparency and provide comprehensive product information; believes that the Commission should step up its efforts to ensure that the data carriers of the DPP (such as QR codes, barcodes or RFIDs) incorporate appropriate and proportionate technical security measures aimed at significantly reducing the risk of counterfeiting specific to each product category, with a view to ensuring the authenticity and integrity of the data, preventing unauthorised duplication, and reinforcing market surveillance mechanisms, thereby contributing to greater sustainability and enhanced consumer protection;

Added19. Calls on the Commission to evaluate the possible use of harmonised methodologies in the DPP for environmental, durability and performance measurements, with a view to supporting the possible establishment of EU-wide sustainability indicators adapted to each product’s characteristics, integrating relevant metrics, such as traceability, recyclability and performance in terms of circularity; stresses that this index should be directly and easily accessible through the DPP via a data carrier, such as a QR code, placed on the product, enabling consumers to access clear, structured, standardised and verifiable information about the product, so as to enhance consumer trust and awareness; believes that EU businesses would also benefit from it, as the use of harmonised methodologies would facilitate the development of their own sustainability indexes and reduce compliance costs, while increased transparency would enable them to compete on the basis of quality and sustainability rather than price or volume;

Added20. Stresses the potential for integrating DPP with waste hierarchy principles in a way that could be supported by appropriate indicators in order to prioritise reuse over recycling; highlights the need to ensure that manufacturers retain key product details for extended periods;

Sustainable business models and consumption patterns

Change 5

Removed10. Supports the alignment of the NLF with broader EU strategies promoting sustainability, reparability and the design of products with extended lifespans;

Added21. Supports the alignment of the NLF with broader EU initiatives promoting sustainability, repairability and the design of products with extended lifespans, such as Ecodesign, the Right to Repair, Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition, the Standardisation Regulation and the Waste Framework Directive, thereby encouraging consumers to transition away from unsustainable consumption patterns, while ensuring that the revision of the NLF will foster digitalisation and simplified procedures, and will enhance the competitiveness of EU businesses;

Change 6

Changed11.22. StressesInvites thatthe integratingCommission to assess the feasibility of integrating extended producer responsibility (EPR) schemes within the NLF wouldin alloworder theto adoptionadopt ofa harmonised measures,framework, which could include measures such as financial incentives and repair vouchers,vouchers; tobelieves enhancethat the Commission should evaluate whether clear definitions and delineations of responsibilities within the NLF can prevent overlaps and ensure that EPR provisions reinforce, rather than duplicate, sectoral and waste legislation, foster competitiveness by streamlining compliance requirements, in particular of locally produced goods with a lower environmental footprintfootprint, increase transparency, and increaseensure transparency;fair competition in the internal market;

Change 7

Changed12.23. Strongly believes that durability is pivotal to promoting high-quality, long-lasting products, andand, thatin manufacturersline shouldwith bethe requiredESPR, the NLF should seek to ensure the continuedthat availabilitymanufacturers ofmake spare parts and maintenance services available over an extended period;period depending on product categories, ensuring products remain functional and reducing the frequency of premature disposal;

Change 8

Removed13. Calls on the Commission to assess the feasibility of a ban on advertising for products, companies or brands linked to fast fashion, including on social media platforms and through influencer marketing;

Added24. Further calls on the Commission to establish harmonised provisions within the NLF regarding the recycling and proper disposal of products at the end of their life cycle, taking into account the requirements set in the ESPR and in the Waste Framework Directive; suggests that this could include provisions related to take-back schemes and dedicated support measures to promote the refurbishment, reuse and sustainable management of digital devices and other products;

RemovedSecond-hand sellers, refurbishers and repairers

Added25 Is concerned by the environmental, social and economic impact of fast fashion and ultra-fast fashion, and their actual and potential consumer protection implications; underlines that such practices pose important compliance challenges to Union product legislation and may also raise issues of fair competition; notes with concern that many products placed on the market fail to meet EU chemical and safety requirements, while economic operators often face limited accountability; calls on the Commission to assess the feasibility of developing clear and harmonised definitions of ‘fast-fashion’ and ‘ultra-fast fashion’ to address the specific risks associated with these business models, ensuring a level playing field for all market participants and preventing regulatory fragmentation within the internal market; further calls on the Commission to assess provisions that would ensure the availability of fully effective tools to address the challenges posed by the proliferation of ‘ultra-fast’ and low-quality products, including more robust conformity assessment procedures and enhanced enforcement tools, to secure an internal market which guarantees the highest levels of consumer protection, while allowing the growth of innovative products and ideas and reducing any unnecessary administrative burden on responsible businesses and compliant products;

Removed14. Stresses the need to establish harmonised definitions of ‘refurbishers’, ‘repairers’, ‘sellers of pre-owned products’, as well as ‘charity and social economy actors’; notes that, in the absence of these common definitions, such actors may be erroneously classified as manufacturers or importers and thereby deemed non-compliant with the obligations applicable to those categories, potentially exposing them to sanctions;

AddedSecond-hand sellers, refurbishers, repairers and associated operators in the circular economy business model

Removed15. Highlights the fact that the establishment of common definitions should take into account the specific obligations that refurbishers and repairers are reasonably able to comply with;

Added26. Stresses, in particular, the need to establish harmonised definitions of ‘remanufacturers’ ‘refurbishers’, ‘repairers’, and, where appropriate, other emerging social, economic and circular economy actors; notes that, in the absence of these common definitions, such actors may be erroneously classified as manufacturers or importers and thereby deemed non-compliant with the obligations applicable to those categories, potentially exposing them to sanctions; believes that such definitions should be proportionate and that they will introduce more legal certainty and transparency concerning the rights and obligations of these economic actors; considers it necessary for these definitions to be harmonised in alignment with the definitions of the corresponding activities in the ESPR, where present, in order to ensure a uniform application of sustainability requirements;

Removed16. Calls for the establishment of an EU-wide certification mechanism for refurbishers;

Added27. Emphasises that the establishment of common definitions should take into account the specific obligations that economic operators, including refurbishers and repairers and other emerging economic operators are reasonably able to comply with, in the light of the nature and limitations of their respective business models; considers that enhanced legal clarity could help foster the development of the second-hand market and contribute to a more sustainable and resilient consumption model, with particular benefits for SMEs and local economic activities; highlights, in this regard, the importance of the rules established under the Right to Repair to make repairing products easier and more appealing for consumers;

Removed17. Recognises that the NLF does not grant independent refurbishers access to technical documentation or declarations of conformity; underlines that this regulatory gap hinders lawful and safe refurbishment, where such access is necessary to ensure conformity; believes that the DPP could close this gap;

Added28. Recognises the importance of enhancing consumer trust in second-hand products and calls for the establishment of an EU-wide certification mechanism for refurbishers and repairers; considers that such a mechanism should be based on common methodologies, which should be developed taking into account local specificities, with the aim of facilitating the development of sustainable and competitive business models that also boost the creation of good-quality jobs in the EU;

Removed18. Emphasises the need for a clear and harmonised definition of ‘substantial modification’, in order to distinguish it from routine repair or maintenance operations; calls on the Commission to develop a catalogue of common refurbishment and repair processes;

Added29. Recognises that the NLF does not grant independent refurbishers access to technical documentation or declarations of conformity; underlines that this lack of access hinders lawful and safe product refurbishment, particularly for complex products such as electronics and machinery, where such access is necessary to ensure conformity; believes that the DPP could close this gap by allowing actors engaged in legitimate repair and refurbishment activities access to relevant compliance and safety information necessary to lawfully restore products to a compliant state; considers that such access should be limited to what is necessary to ensure safety and to enable the proper performance of their tasks, while taking into account the protection of commercially sensitive information;

Removed19. Stresses the need for a harmonised approach to VAT reductions for reused, refurbished, repaired and second-hand products, including those sold by charities and on social economy platforms, as a mean to incentivise sustainable consumption, extend product life cycles and reduce waste;

Added30. Emphasises the need to develop a clear and harmonised definition of ‘substantial modification’ which can be used as a basis for product-specific legislation, distinguishing it from routine repair or maintenance operations; believes that a standardised assessment procedure for determining the substantial nature of a modification would enhance legal certainty and support second-hand economic operators; believes that there is an urgent need to develop guidelines subject to regular review of common refurbishment and repair processes, in particular for electronic devices, such as the replacement of screens, batteries or cameras, including an indication of compatible components, with a view to establishing a presumption of conformity with applicable legislation, thus fostering the development of circular business models and supporting the work of relevant authorities and economic operators;

Added31. Stresses the significant economic potential of recommerce – which involves refurbishers, repairers and other emerging actors – as a viable alternative to unsustainable consumption models; invites the Commission and consumer authorities to conduct awareness-raising campaigns on the benefits of reuse and recommerce alternatives;

Standardisation and conformity assessments

Change 9

Removed20. Believes that harmonised standards constitute a pivotal element of the single market in supporting public interest objectives set out in EU law;

Added32. Believes that harmonised standards constitute a pivotal element of the single market in supporting public interest objectives set out in EU law; underlines that the Commission is responsible for issuing standardisation requests with a view to safeguarding consumer interests, health, safety, environmental protection and data security, as well as fostering social inclusion, supporting competitiveness, promoting innovation, reducing unnecessary administrative burdens, and simplifying compliance procedures; notes, in this regard that it is the role of European standardisation organisations to respond to such requests, with the objective of taking into account the general public interest as enshrined in EU legal acts, and to help drive the Union’s strategic priorities, including the transition towards a climate-neutral economy, enhanced resource efficiency and the development of circular economic models;

Removed21. Stresses that the revision of the NLF should enhance the transparency, accountability and effectiveness of the standardisation process, which includes the allocation of EU funds to European standardisation organisations;

Added33. Welcomes the fact that the single market strategy recognises that businesses continue to face challenges due to the absence or delayed availability of timely and effective harmonised standards, leading to increased costs, legal uncertainty, reduced competitiveness, weakened market surveillance and slower adoption of new technologies; notes that this is also the case in rapidly evolving sectors such as artificial intelligence; expresses concern that, in the absence of adequate and applicable standards at the time of application of new legislation, manufacturers and innovators could face adverse consequences, as could consumers, since producers may self-certify their products under incorrect risk classifications, thereby undermining the objectives of Union law and compromising user protection;

Removed22. Underlines the need to review the functioning and clarity of existing conformity assessment modules in the light of persistent legal uncertainty and inconsistent application across sectors; believes that such a review should adhere to the principle that the level of risk associated with a product should determine the conformity assessment procedure required;

Added34. Underlines that the delayed publication of harmonised standards in the Official Journal remains a significant issue for various market participants and consumers and limits the ability of market surveillance authorities to enforce compliance; calls on the Commission to put in place maximum deadlines for standardisation requests and to streamline the standardisation process;

Removed23. Calls on the Commission to propose the mandatory accreditation of notified bodies, in order to ensure their competence, impartiality and independence across all Member States; considers this essential to address divergent practices, enhance legal certainty and strengthen confidence in the conformity assessment system;

Added35. Stresses the importance of standardisation in promoting the free movement of goods and reducing barriers within the internal market, as well as in enhancing the competitiveness of European businesses by facilitating compliance with Union law; underlines, in this context, the benefits of the long-standing public-private partnership between European institutions and European standardisation organisations, which has been instrumental in developing products that are safer and better aligned with the objectives of the digital and green transitions, while also ensuring that standards are market-driven, and thus developed in response to market needs and innovation, without compromising consumer safety;

Added36. Underlines the importance of standardisation for the international competitiveness of European businesses; calls on the Commission to step up its efforts to coordinate a common European approach to positions in international standardisation forums for all products subject to international standards; believes that a common European approach could be key to improving European coordination and engagement at international level in relation to standardisation with like-minded global partners; emphasises that the adoption of international standards should be facilitated if these standards are in line with EU policy objectives and strategic interests, in order to open up additional markets for European products, avoid unnecessary duplication, promote consistency in the global regulatory environment and facilitate international trade;

Added37. Stresses that the revision of the NLF should contribute to the greater inclusiveness, transparency and effectiveness of the standardisation process, both in the development and implementation phases, including in the allocation of EU funds to European standardisation organisations; recalls that ensuring substantial, long-term and stable financial support for civil society organisations and SMEs is essential to facilitate their effective participation in the standardisation process; considers that the revision of the NLF should be done in parallel with the revision of the Standardisation Regulation;

Added38. Stresses the importance of maintaining the principle whereby conformity assessment procedures serve to verify products’ compliance with the applicable requirements set out in EU harmonisation legislation under the NLF; believes that such procedures have been successful in ensuring product safety, performance and reliability while also contributing to the harmonisation of internal market rules; underlines, however, the need to assess the review of the functioning and the clarity of the existing conformity assessment modules, in the light of persistent legal uncertainty, inconsistent application across sectors and emerging risks stemming from technological developments, such as connected products; believes that such a review should adhere to the principle that the level of risk associated with a product should determine the conformity assessment procedure required; calls on the Commission to continue efforts to address these issues, including through better market surveillance, updated standards and streamlined processes for economic operators, particularly SMEs, thereby ensuring a future-proof system;

Added39. Stresses that notified bodies must operate in a competent, impartial and independent manner; expresses concern over the significant variation between Member States in how their competence is assessed, leading to persistent legal uncertainty and divergent practices; regrets that, in some cases, notified bodies issue conformity certificates without adequately verifying full compliance with all the relevant clauses of the applicable harmonised standards, which may seriously undermine the credibility of the standardisation system and significantly impede the effective work of market surveillance authorities; suggests that the Commission explore the possibility of the mandatory accreditation of notified bodies, in order to ensure their competence, impartiality and independence across all Member States; considers this essential to address divergent practices, enhance legal certainty and strengthen confidence in the conformity assessment system;

Added°

Added° °