RAM ratings and fee modulation
From Year 2 of the scheme, the disposal fee stops being one number per material and becomes three. The same tonne of plastic costs different amounts depending on how recyclable the packaging is judged to be. That judgement is made under the Recyclability Assessment Methodology, the RAM.
Modulation starts in Year 2 of the scheme. The first modulated fees apply to disposal fee calculations for the 2026 to 2027 financial year, calculated using data on packaging supplied in 2025.
Red, amber, green
Every item of in-scope packaging is assigned one of three ratings, with red the least recyclable and green the most. The ratings are self-reported by producers, and the environmental regulators check them.
- Red: least recyclable. Pays a premium above the base fee.
- Amber: the middle. Amber-rated material sees no change in its household packaging waste disposal fee as a result of modulation. The base fee is set at the amber rate.
- Green: most recyclable. Receives a discount, of a size discussed below.
The base fee published for each material is the amber rate. It is not an average that red and green sit around; it is the rate an amber-rated tonne actually pays.
Recyclability, assessed under the Recyclability Assessment Methodology (RAM) v1.1, per regulation 64(7)(c). The source states the most recent version of the RAM will be used at the point each year's invoices are generated. Note the second half of that: the version of the RAM in force when invoices are generated is the one used, not the version that was current when you assessed the packaging.
This site does not hold the RAM itself. What makes a given piece of packaging red rather than amber is a substantial separate document, so nothing here should be read as telling you what rating your packaging will get.
The modulation factors
Red-rated packaging is charged a multiple of the household waste disposal fee element, and the multiple rises every year: 1.2 times in 2026 to 2027, 1.6 times in 2027 to 2028 and 2.0 times in 2028 to 2029.
Read that as forward cost pressure rather than as three years you can cost today. A red rating gets more expensive each year even if the base fee never moves, so the case for improving a rating strengthens over time.
Base fees have not been published for 2027 to 2028 or 2028 to 2029, confirmed or illustrative. A multiplier with nothing to multiply cannot produce a figure, and applying it to another year’s rates would break the rule that a calculation uses its own year’s rules. That is why the calculator offers 2025 to 2026 and 2026 to 2027 and no further.
ConfirmedEvery factor in this table.
| Assessment year | Red | Amber | Green |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 to 2027 | × 1.2 | × 1.0 | Not knowable in advance |
| 2027 to 2028 | × 1.6 | × 1.0 | Not knowable in advance |
| 2028 to 2029 | × 2.0 | × 1.0 | Not knowable in advance |
Applying a later year’s factor to an earlier year overstates the fee, and the gap is large: the top factor in the table is materially higher than the first.
- These factors are set by the modulation policy statement covering 2026 to 2027 through 2028 to 2029. A revised statement will be published to cover years after 2028 to 2029.
- A calculation for a given assessment year must use that year's factor. Do not apply 2.0 to a 2026 to 2027 calculation.
- The statement says PackUK will continue to adjust the modulation factor if doing so serves the policy objective, with a decision on future factors at the first review point, no later than 2028.
Modulation does not increase the total of all household packaging waste disposal fees paid. It changes how those costs are allocated by material.
That is the design in one sentence. Modulation does not raise more money overall; it redistributes the same total between producers according to how recyclable their packaging is.
Source: PackUK Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) for packaging: producer disposal fees modulation statement (PackUK (Scheme Administrator), published on GOV.UK). Retrieved 2026-09-05. Source last updated 2026-02-17.
Why the green rate cannot be known in advance
The red premium is a fixed multiplier, published years ahead. The green discount is not a published number at all, and cannot be, because of how it is funded.
The discount is funded by a redistribution pot. Red-rated packaging pays a premium, that premium is pooled, and the pool is then shared across every tonne of green packaging on the market as an equal percentage discount.
That makes the discount a function of two market-wide numbers: how much red-rated tonnage was reported, and how much green-rated tonnage it is being spread across. A producer knows neither, because both depend on what every other producer reported. PackUK cannot publish the figure either until the reporting year closes.
The modulation statement is explicit that final modulated fees can only be published once all data has been submitted for a given reporting year.
The two ends of the range are not the same kind of number. The amber fee is a real ceiling: if no red-rated packaging were reported at all, the pot would be empty, the discount would be zero, and green would pay the amber rate. The lower end is only a projection. If more red tonnage is reported than PackUK modelled, the pot grows, the discount deepens, and the fee falls below it.
The green disposal fee for a material equals that material's disposal fee multiplied by (1 - d), where d is a single discount shared across all materials. d is the total premium charged on red material across all materials, divided by the total green tonnage across all materials weighted by each material's disposal fee.
i | The series of the 8 material categories. |
|---|---|
Red_PS | The quantity, in tonnes, of RAM red-rated material supplied in the market. |
Green_PS | The quantity, in tonnes, of RAM green-rated material supplied in the market. |
RedMod | The modulation factor applied to RAM red-rated fees: 1.2, 1.6 or 2 depending on assessment year. |
DisposalFee | The disposal fee for each material category (the amber/base rate). |
GreenDisposalFee | The RAM green-rated fee charged per tonne, different for each material category. |
The two terms nobody can supply at calculation time are Red_PS and Green_PS. Both are market-wide tonnages that only exist once every obligated producer in the country has reported.
The worked example from the modulation statement
Reproduced from the source's Annex so the arithmetic can be checked. These are not market figures. A simplified market of 3 categories only, with a red modulation factor of 2.
On those assumptions, with a red factor of 2, the redistribution pot comes to £178,300 spread across a green base of £853,000, giving a discount of 20.903% applied to every green tonne of every material. Rigid plastic’s green fee comes out at £334.58.
It is useful only for checking that the arithmetic comes out right.
What this means for planning
You can budget a red-rated line precisely, because the multiplier is fixed and published. You cannot budget a green-rated line to a number. The most you can say is that it will not exceed the amber fee, since the discount cannot be negative, and that it will probably land somewhere near the modelled figure.
The calculator on this site therefore shows green lines as a range and refuses to give a single figure. The range is open at the bottom: the modelled low end is a projection, not a floor.
The published rates for 2026 to 2027
Illustrative, not confirmedEvery rate in this table.
These are estimates published in December 2025 for planning only. The source states they 'are likely to change significantly as producers submit more data and compliance is monitored by regulators'.
| Material | Green | Amber (base) | Red |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aluminium | £245 | £270 | £325 |
| Fibre-based composite | £475 | £525 | £630 |
| Glass | £185 | £205 | £245 |
| Paper and card | £190 | £210 | £250 |
| Plastic | £415 | £455 | £545 |
| Steel | £260 | £290 | £345 |
| Wood | £410 | £450 | £540 |
| Other | £205 | £225 | £270 |
Every green figure in that column is doubly uncertain: the whole table is illustrative, and the green column additionally depends on market data that did not exist when it was modelled.
Source: Year 2 illustrative waste disposal fees: Extended producer responsibility for packaging (PackUK (Scheme Administrator), published on GOV.UK). Retrieved 2026-09-05. Source last updated 2025-12-19.
Unrated packaging
Packaging without a rating is charged at the red rate. This is not a penalty invented by this calculator; it follows from red being the treatment for packaging not shown to be better. If you have not assessed your packaging under the RAM, assume red for planning.
Medical packaging
PackUK has taken account of the legislation applying to medical packaging under regulation 64(10), but recognises some medical packaging is recyclable, so it is not exempt from fee modulation. It is treated differently rather than exempted.
It is reported under its own codes, 'red - medical', 'amber - medical' and 'green - medical', and the rules around the red code are the part to read twice:
- Fees for medical packaging assessed as 'green - medical' or 'amber - medical' are modulated in accordance with those RAM ratings.
- Medical packaging assessed as red must be reported as 'red-medical' unless it is not possible to use more recyclable packaging due to legal rules and restrictions. That case is called 'red by virtue of a regulatory requirement' (RBVORR).
- If the product is RBVORR, it should be reported as 'amber-medical'.
- Evidence supporting the recyclability assessment must be provided in both cases: reporting as amber-medical on RBVORR grounds, and reporting as red-medical because RBVORR does not apply.
- Where medical packaging is assessed red but not as a result of a regulatory requirement, it is subject to modulation in the same way as any other red-rated material.
The distinction being drawn is between packaging that is hard to recycle because of how it was designed, and packaging that is hard to recycle because the law requires it to be that way. Only the second gets the amber treatment, and it needs evidence.
Why Year 2 fees here are still illustrative
No confirmed 2026 to 2027 base or modulated fees were found on GOV.UK on 5 September 2026.
The December 2025 illustrative publication said confirmed Year 2 fees were expected in June 2026. That date has passed without a publication. Do not read the illustrative set as nearly final.
PackUK has said confirmed Year 2 fees will follow compliance monitoring after the 1 September 2026 resubmission deadline, and will be published later in 2026. It has also said it will issue no further illustrative fees before then. No date has been given.
Searched on 5 September 2026:
- GOV.UK search API queried for: 'EPR packaging base fees', '2026 to 2027 base fees packaging', 'year 2 waste disposal fees', 'modulated disposal fees', 'EPR packaging 2026 fees confirmed', 'base fees per tonne', 'PackUK fees'.
- GOV.UK search API listed all Defra content ordered by publication date to 5 September 2026.
- The 'Extended producer responsibility for packaging' GOV.UK collection (last updated 25 August 2026) was read in full; its only fee documents are the 2025 base fees and the December 2025 Year 2 illustrative fees.
Re-check at https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/extended-producer-responsibility-for-packaging. Until a confirmed set is published, treat every Year 2 figure in the calculator as a working assumption rather than a number to budget against.