Rechtsstand: 21 September 2026 — the date every statement on this page was checked against the sources below.
Not on its own, unless it has a Sitz or Niederlassung in Germany. Compliance software can calculate your volumes, watch your deadlines and keep your records — VerpackDG § 5(1) allows you to engage third parties for almost everything. But the Bevollmächtigter für die erweiterte Herstellerverantwortung is a statutory role, and under Article 3(1)(20) of Regulation (EU) 2025/40 it must be established in the member state where you make packaging available. A platform incorporated in Sweden, Belgium, Estonia or the United Kingdom cannot fill that role in Germany from there. It can perfectly well appoint or partner with a German-established representative on your behalf — and many do. The question to ask is not “do you cover Germany?” but “which German entity signs the Vollmacht, and what is its Handelsregister number?” Sources (4)
VerpackDG § 5VerpackDG § 5VerpackDG § 6VerpackDG § 6VerpackDG § 9VerpackDG § 9
Regulation (EU) 2025/40 (PPWRegulation (EU) 2025/40 (PPWR)
Two different things are being sold
The confusion is understandable, because both are described as “handling your EPR”. They are not the same duty and they are not interchangeable.
| Compliance software / service | Bevollmächtigter | |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | A commercial service you buy | A statutory role defined by law |
| Where it may sit | Anywhere | Germany — Article 3(1)(20) PPWR |
| Legal effect | None on its own. The duties stay yours | Counts as the producer for the duties it takes on, § 5(3) |
| Acts | In your name, as your helper | In its own name — im eigenen Namen, § 5(3) |
| Named in LUCID | No | Yes, and ZSVR must confirm it, § 5(5) |
| May file your § 9 volume reports | No — § 5(1) sentence 2 | Yes |
You can have the first without the second. If you have no German establishment, the second is not optional.
Where the establishment rule comes from
Two layers say the same thing, and it is worth knowing which is which.
EU law defines the role. VerpackDG § 3(1) states that its definitions apply in addition to those in Article 3 of Regulation (EU) 2025/40, so the definition of the representative is the EU one. Article 3(1)(20) defines the authorised representative for the extended producer responsibility as a person established in the member state where the producer makes packaging available for the first time. Article 45(3) then requires the appointment, by written mandate, in each such member state.
The German regulator says it plainly. ZSVR, the competent authority for the register, states that the representative can be any service provider with a registered office or branch in Germany, and adds two practical conditions most buyers never think to check: the representative must already hold its own authorised-representative login and ID in LUCID before you can select it, and it must be a person external to your company.
That last point rules out an arrangement some groups try: a colleague in your own company cannot be your Bevollmächtigter. ZSVR says to enter that person as the contact on your producer registration instead.
What a platform abroad can legitimately do
A great deal, and it is worth being precise rather than dismissive. § 5(1) sentence 1 is permissive:
Original (German)„Die nach der Verordnung (EU) 2025/40 sowie nach diesem Gesetz Verpflichteten können Dritte mit der Erfüllung ihrer Pflichten beauftragen“English translation (ours)“Those obliged under Regulation (EU) 2025/40 and under this Act may engage third parties to fulfil their duties”
So software anywhere in the world may classify your packaging, weigh your materials, calculate what you owe, prepare your figures, watch your deadlines and store your evidence. None of that requires a German entity.
Sentence 2 is the limit:
Original (German)„Satz 1 gilt nicht für die Registrierung nach § 6 und nicht für die Abgabe von Datenmeldungen nach § 9.“English translation (ours)“Sentence 1 does not apply to registration under § 6 or to the submission of data reports under § 9.”
Two duties may never be handed to a plain third party: registration under § 6 and the submission of volume reports under § 9. A platform may prepare your Mengenmeldung down to the last gram; it may not be the one that files it.
Why a representative may file when a service provider may not
This is the part that looks contradictory until you read § 5(3).
Original (German)„Der Bevollmächtigte für die erweiterte Herstellerverantwortung gilt im Hinblick auf die wahrzunehmenden Verpflichtungen als Hersteller im Sinne dieses Gesetzes. Die Aufgabenerfüllung durch den Bevollmächtigten für die erweiterte Herstellerverantwortung erfolgt im eigenen Namen.“English translation (ours)“For the obligations to be performed, the authorised representative for extended producer responsibility counts as the producer within the meaning of this Act. The authorised representative for extended producer responsibility performs those tasks in its own name.”
The representative is not a Dritter helping you. For the duties in its mandate it is the producer, in its own name. That is why the § 5(1) carve-out does not bite it, and why its own dual-system contract and its own filings are valid where a service provider's would not be.
One duty stays with you whatever you buy. § 5(2) mandates the representative with your obligations „mit Ausnahme der Registrierung nach § 6“ (“with the exception of registration under § 6”) — registration in LUCID is excluded from the mandate. ZSVR calls it a höchstpersönliche Pflicht, a strictly personal duty. Nobody can register you in LUCID: not a platform, not a representative, not us. Any offer to do so describes something the statute does not permit. It is free and it takes minutes.
Two roles share one name
PPWR uses the words “authorised representative” for two different jobs, and a contract can name the wrong one in good faith.
- Article 3(1)(19), the authorised representative — the product-conformity role under Article 17. It concerns whether the packaging itself is lawful: recyclability, labelling, the Declaration of Conformity and the technical file.
- Article 3(1)(20), the authorised representative for the extended producer responsibility — the Article 45 role. It concerns who finances the collection and recycling of the waste, and it is the one § 5(2) VerpackDG requires.
They can be different companies and they answer different questions. A mandate that appoints the first does not satisfy the second. If a quotation says “EU authorised representative” without a number after it, ask which article it means.
Five questions to ask any provider
Ours included. The answers are checkable, and a provider that will not answer in writing has told you something.
- Which legal entity signs the Vollmacht, and what is its Handelsregister number? Not “we cover Germany”. A German entity with a real German address. ZSVR publishes no list of representatives, so this check is yours to make.
- Do you already hold an authorised-representative ID in LUCID? Without it you cannot be selected in the register at all, and the naming is what § 5(5) makes effective only on ZSVR's confirmation.
- Who files the § 9 volume reports? If the answer is “you do, in our tool”, that is software, not representation. Both are legitimate. Only one discharges § 5(2).
- Is the mandate a written power of attorney in German? § 5(4) requires eine schriftliche Vollmacht in deutscher Sprache. A tick-box in an onboarding flow is not that document. Ask to see the German text before you pay.
- Is the dual-system contract in your name or mine? Under § 5(3) the representative contracts in its own name. If the contract is in your name, you are participating yourself and buying help, which is a different product with a different failure mode.
When a platform is the right answer
Often. This page is not an argument against software, and buying one is not a mistake.
If you sell into six member states, you have six separate representative duties under Article 45(3), each requiring an entity established in that country. A platform that holds those relationships and gives you one contract and one dashboard is solving a real problem, and a Germany-only specialist — us included — is the wrong shape for it. What matters is that somewhere behind the interface there is a German-established entity named in your LUCID account, and that you know which one it is.
The arrangement to avoid is not the platform. It is the one where nobody can tell you the answer to question 1.
Sources
Every claim above comes from one of these. Primary law and the competent authority first; no provider marketing pages.
- VerpackDG § 5 — read 2026-09-22
- VerpackDG § 6 — read 2026-09-22
- VerpackDG § 9 — read 2026-09-22
- Regulation (EU) 2025/40 (PPWR) — read 2026-09-22
- ZSVR — Bevollmächtigung — read 2026-09-22
Razvan Toma is the founder of EPR Germany Rep and of EPR France Rep, the French sister service. He reads the statutes and the regulator's own guidance directly, and publishes what they say — including when it means telling a visitor they do not need to buy anything.
Razvan on LinkedIn ↗