Nobody sends you an invoice for chasing a supplier eleven times, or for the three days spent rebuilding an evidence pack the week an auditor books in. That cost is already in your business. This page works out how big it is — with your numbers, not ours.
Move the sliders to match your business. Nothing is submitted anywhere and nothing is stored — the calculation runs in your browser.
Every packaged product needs its own technical file.
Each one has to be asked, chased and checked separately.
PFAS, heavy metals, composition, recyclability, food contact.
Fully loaded — salary, employer costs, overhead.
Request, two follow-ups, check it is the right document, file it.
Certificates lapse and suppliers change material.
Assembling evidence into something you can hand over.
Plan you would be on
€199 a month · €2,388 a year
Doing this by hand costs you
€2,586 a year more
That is 131 hours — 3.5 working weeks — given back to someone whose job is not filing PDFs. Every €1 of subscription replaces €2.08 of admin time.
159
Hours a year, by hand
vs 28 with ComplyGood
120
Documents to keep current
across 20 suppliers, every year
€4,974
Admin time removed
against €2,388 of subscription
Annual hours at your numbers. Grey is what you spend today; green is what is left once the system does the chasing.
Collecting documents from suppliers
50h 14h
120 documents across 20 suppliers — request, chase, receive, check it is the right document, file it
Mapping documents to SKUs
15h 2h
150 SKUs — recording which certificate covers which product, and noticing when one does not
Technical files and Declarations of Conformity
50h 6h
Article 38 technical documentation and a signed EU Declaration of Conformity per packaging unit
Re-collecting documents as they expire
20h 3h
40% of documents each year — certificates expire, suppliers change material, formulations move
Preparing for an audit or inspection
24h 4h
1× a year — assembling evidence into something you can hand over
14 days. If your supplier list is in better shape than you feared, walk away.
Every figure above comes from the sliders on the left — change them and the answer changes. The defaults are deliberately cautious.
ComplyGood is not assumed to reduce anything to zero. A person still opens every certificate, checks it is the right one, and signs the Declaration of Conformity. What goes away is the chasing, the filing, the mapping, the re-collection when it expires, and rebuilding the evidence pack each time somebody asks for it.
We do not count the cost of getting it wrong — withdrawn stock, a lost listing, corrected EPR fees. Those are real and they are below, but they are not in this number.
This is the part that surprises people. It is not one certificate per supplier. It is a file per packaging unit, and you have to be able to produce it on request.
| Document | Why | Applies to |
|---|---|---|
| PFAS conformity statement | Article 5(5) — from 12 August 2026 | Food contact only |
| Heavy metals declaration | Article 5 — lead, cadmium, mercury, chromium VI | All packaging |
| Material composition breakdown | By weight and material, per packaging unit | All packaging |
| Recyclability assessment | Article 6 — design for recycling | From 2030 |
| Recycled content evidence | Article 7 — plastic packaging targets | From 2030 |
| Packaging minimisation assessment | Article 10 — empty space ratio | All packaging |
| Food contact declaration | Regulation 1935/2004 and 10/2011 | Food contact only |
| Article 38 technical documentation | Produced for market surveillance on request | All packaging |
| EU Declaration of Conformity | Signed by you, not your supplier | All packaging |
Multiply that by your SKU count, then again by every supplier who changes a material or lets a certificate lapse. Then remember the technical documentation has to be retained for ten years.
Not features against features. The actual work, as it happens on a Tuesday.
By hand
You email. Nothing. You email again two weeks later. They send the wrong document. You explain what PFAS means. They send it to a colleague who has left.
With ComplyGood
One link, no account, no password. The system asks, then chases at 14, 30 and 45 days without you thinking about it. You see who has opened it and who has not.
By hand
A shared drive, an inbox, someone’s laptop, and a spreadsheet that says which is which — last updated by someone who has since changed roles.
With ComplyGood
Filed against the SKU it covers, versioned, with the superseded copy kept. Every document has an owner, a date and an expiry.
By hand
You notice when a customer asks. The certificate expired in March. Nobody looked at the spreadsheet column since January.
With ComplyGood
The SKU turns amber 60 days out and red on the day. The supplier is emailed at 90, 60 and 30 days before you are involved at all.
By hand
Someone builds it in Word from the data they can find, per packaging unit, and hopes the material weights match what was declared for EPR.
With ComplyGood
Generated from the SKU record you already maintain, so the technical file, the Declaration of Conformity and the EPR return cannot disagree with each other.
By hand
Three days of assembling PDFs, chasing gaps, and writing a covering note that explains why two of them are missing.
With ComplyGood
Generate the pack. The audit trail already shows who uploaded what, when, and what was superseded — timestamped and attributed.
PPWR leaves penalties to each Member State, so any site quoting you a specific fine is guessing. We are not going to. Here is what the Regulation and the market surveillance framework actually let happen, which is the part worth planning around.
The whole SKU, immediately
Market surveillance authorities can require non-compliant packaging to be brought into conformity, withdrawn or recalled under Regulation (EU) 2019/1020. The cost is not the fine — it is the stock you cannot sell and the line you cannot run.
10 days, typically
You must be able to hand over the technical documentation for a packaging unit when an authority asks. Assembling it from scratch after the request has arrived is how a paperwork problem becomes a compliance finding.
Contract by contract
Grocery and hospitality buyers are pushing PPWR evidence down the chain ahead of the deadlines. Being the supplier who cannot answer the questionnaire is a commercial loss long before it is a regulatory one.
Annually, compounding
Extended producer responsibility fees are calculated on the tonnage and materials you declare under Article 45. Declare from a stale spreadsheet and you either overpay every year or face a correction with arrears.
Varies by country
PPWR requires each Member State to lay down penalties that are effective, proportionate and dissuasive. The amounts differ by country and are still being transposed — which means nobody can tell you today what your exposure is, only that it is not zero.
If you do not have PFAS certificates for your food-contact packaging today, no software can conjure them — lab testing takes weeks and your suppliers have a queue. What you can do between now and the deadline is establish exactly where you stand, get the requests out with a dated, attributable record that you asked, and be able to show an inspector the gap and the action rather than a shrug. That distinction is the difference between a finding and a problem.