The leaders at the Chamber of Commerce Southern New Jersey make it clear: They support the principles of Extended Producer Responsibility and environmental responsibility.

They also are clear on this: They feel the Packaging Product Stewardship Act (S-3398; A-5009), as written, does not follow the spirit of the idea — and raises several red flags.

Want more? An economic study commissioned by CCSNJ, estimates the legislation would result in an estimated $323.5 million annual cost increase for producers — translating to more than $1 billion in added consumer costs each year, or approximately $1,649 per household over five years.

Here’s the background.

According to CCSNJ, the proposed legislation would prohibit the inclusion of feedstocks derived from advanced recycling in meeting recycling goals. It also will impose unrealistic plastic reduction targets and add unrelated chemical bans through amendments to New Jersey’s Toxics in Packaging law, potentially removing essential products from store shelves.

CCSNJ President Christina Renna said these added costs, coming at a time when inflation, energy prices, and other living expenses continue to rise across the state, do not add up.

“New Jersey families are hurting financially, and this is not the time to make their lives even more expensive,” she said. “We urge lawmakers to consider the real impact on working families and businesses already stretched thin.”

Renna said the bill goes well beyond traditional EPR.

“Instead of a thoughtful, data-driven approach, it imposes sweeping mandates that will raise costs across the board,” she said. “A statewide needs assessment should be the first step before enacting a program of this scale.”

Assemblyman Bill Spearman (D, Woodbury) has sponsored such legislation. A-4902 directs the Department of Environmental Protection to perform a comprehensive statewide assessment and establish the “Statewide Recycling Needs Assessment Advisory Council.”

Renna said CCSNJ strongly supports this approach as a necessary foundation for a well-designed and effective EPR framework.

She points to the York University study commissioned by CCSNJ.

It reinforces the need for caution. In addition to the annual $1 billion consumer impact, the report warns that unchecked cost increases could suppress consumer spending and harm small businesses statewide.

The study found:”

The direct financial burden on producers is estimated at $323.53 million annually, based on the medium cost scenario modeled in this study. When factoring in the consumer spending multiplier effect, conservatively assumed at 3x, the total economic impact escalates to $1.035 billion per year. Over a five-year period, this translates to a per-household cost of approximately $1,649.93. These costs stem from producer obligations to fund the collection, recycling, and disposal of packaging materials, as well as associated administrative and educational expenses.”