EuPIA Charter on Raw Material Selection Tightens Safety Expectations for Printing Inks

EuPIA Charter on Raw Material Selection Tightens Safety Expectations for Printing Inks Lead Paragraph The European Printing Ink Association (EuPIA) has published the first edition of its EuPIA Charter on raw material selection and exclusion, replacing the previous exclusion policy and reinforcing voluntary safety commitments across the printing ink supply chain. Released in March 2026, the charter sets stricter criteria for hazardous substances used in printing inks and related products across Europe, including the EEA, EFTA and the UK. It requires companies that sign up to substitute certain high-hazard raw materials within defined timelines and introduces clearer risk assessment procedures where substitution is not immediately feasible.

EuPIA Charter strengthens voluntary chemical safety framework

The EuPIA Charter builds on an industry initiative that dates back to 1996, when European printing ink manufacturers began voluntarily excluding specific hazardous substances from formulations. The updated framework continues that approach while aligning more closely with current EU chemical hazard classifications and toxicological evidence. The charter applies to all printing inks and related products supplied for use in Europe and is designed to protect workers in ink manufacturing, employees in downstream printing facilities and users of printed articles. Importantly, it complements but does not replace binding chemicals legislation such as REACH and CLP. Individual companies, rather than EuPIA itself, commit to implementing the charter. Participating companies will be listed publicly on the EuPIA website.

Substitution rules for high-hazard substances

Group I substances require rapid phase-out

Under the EuPIA Charter, raw materials classified as genotoxic carcinogens or mutagens (Categories 1A and 1B), acute toxicity categories 1–3, or substances causing specific target organ toxicity from single exposure must be substituted within one year. No extension is normally permitted, meaning these materials must be removed from formulations once the substitution period expires. In rare cases where an occupational exposure limit exists, companies may request a one-year extension if a risk assessment and substitution plan are approved by the EuPIA Technical Committee.

Group II substances subject to risk-based evaluation

A second category covers substances such as non-genotoxic carcinogens, reproductive toxicants, endocrine disruptors affecting human health and substances causing organ damage after repeated exposure. These also have a default one-year substitution timeline if alternatives are available across industry. If substitution proves technically difficult, companies must conduct detailed exposure and risk assessments using derived no-effect levels (DNELs). Safe use must be demonstrated for relevant exposure scenarios including ink production and downstream applications.

Substances already excluded or scheduled for phase-out

The charter lists several materials already excluded from intentional use. These include pigment compounds containing metals such as cadmium, lead or mercury, certain azo dyes that can release carcinogenic amines, and solvents such as methanol or chlorinated hydrocarbons. Additional substances previously restricted under the earlier policy remain phased out. For example, the photoinitiator TPO (diphenyl(2,4,6-trimethylbenzoyl)phosphine oxide) must be fully phased out by April 2027, while Omnirad 379 faces a December 2027 deadline.

Implications for the wider chemicals and packaging ecosystem

The updated EuPIA Charter has implications beyond ink manufacturers. Raw material suppliers, packaging producers, brand owners and printers may need to review formulations, supply contracts and product safety documentation. As voluntary initiatives increasingly anticipate regulatory developments, the charter also signals how industry expectations around hazardous substances in printed materials are evolving. Companies involved in ink formulation or packaging supply chains may benefit from reviewing substance portfolios early to avoid disruption when substitution deadlines approach.