The European Parliament's ENVI committee on 23 June 2026 debated the forthcoming EU Circular Economy Act, with MEPs and stakeholders diverging on the balance between binding reduction targets for primary resource use and the need to safeguard competitiveness. The Act, due later in 2026, is framed by the Commission as a tool to link circularity with competitiveness, resilience, and strategic autonomy.
Pierfrancesco Maran (S&D) argued the Act should respond to geopolitical shocks and supply risks, calling for harmonised rules, demand for recyclates, and digital product passports. Janez Potocnik (UNEP) pushed for upstream material footprint reduction over recycling targets, while Marike Hoffmann (Environmental Action Germany) backed binding targets for primary resource use. Sara Matthieu (Greens/EFA) supported footprint targets to reduce import dependence. In contrast, Anna Zalewska (ECR) demanded a cost analysis and warned that new taxes could harm competitiveness. Josep Puxeu (Ecoembes) argued that more rules do not guarantee efficiency.
On single market fragmentation, Carsten Wachholz (Ellen MacArthur Foundation) pressed for harmonised definitions and interoperable digital systems, echoed by Pascal Arimont (EPP) and Ana Vasconcelos (Renew). Marie Castelli (Back Market) argued the Act risks becoming a recycling act, urging support for reuse and repair. Emmanuel Katrakis (Galloo Group) defended recycling targets and called for EU-wide end-of-waste criteria. On extended producer responsibility (EPR), Hoffmann urged financing for prevention and repair, while Castelli warned against producer control. Trade diverged between European preference (Maran, Annalisa Corrado S&D) and open alignment (Wachholz). Financing gaps were highlighted by Hilde Sijbring (Dutch Banking Association) and the European Commission Representative, who noted an annual investment gap above EUR 82 billion.
The debate exposed a cleavage between those prioritising binding upstream reduction targets (S&D, Greens, environmental NGOs) and those emphasising cost control and competitiveness (ECR, industry representatives). The outcome will affect recyclers, refurbishers, producers, banks, and member states. Parliament seeks a leading role in shaping the Act.