US State Battery Rules Compared With the EU Battery Passport

US battery rules are state led, with no federal battery passport matching the EU passport in Article 77, and a business that sells batteries in the United States needs a state by state reading rather than a single US reading. States have adopted battery stewardship, extended producer responsibility and e waste laws at different times, with different chemistries, different thresholds and different start dates, and California is only the most prominent example. The EU passport, by contrast, is a single Regulation with a single fixed date for specified categories across the EU. The structural difference, a single EU duty against a patchwork of state duties, is the first fact that a comparison must state, because it explains why a US file cannot be copied into an EU file.

The scope is a comparison at system level, with California used as the worked example because its laws are documented in the sources consulted, and with an explicit warning that other states differ. The guide does not state the law of any other state in detail, and it does not state a federal passport duty, because none is stated in the sources consulted. The position is stated as checked on 28 October 2026.

How are US battery rules organised?

US battery rules are organised by state, with each state setting its own stewardship or producer responsibility scheme, its own definitions of producer and covered battery, and its own collection and recycling duties. Most state battery laws, as summaries record, apply to a narrower set of chemistries or battery types than the EU Regulation, and they focus on collection and recycling rather than on a lifecycle record. The fragmentation means that a producer may be covered in one state, uncovered in another, and covered on different terms in a third, and the producer file needs a state register that records the position state by state. A national US summary that omits the state register misstates the system.

What do the California laws show?

California shows two laws that together create a dual framework, with AB 2440 creating a battery extended producer responsibility scheme for most batteries sold in California, with producer stewardship programmes beginning no later than 1 April 2027 as summaries record, and SB 1215 expanding the e waste programme to battery embedded products, with a point of sale fee from 1 January 2026 and reporting from July 2027 as summaries record. AB 2440 applies to producers of single use and rechargeable batteries, with exclusions including batteries over a certain weight and batteries in medical devices, cars and bicycles, while SB 1215 applies to manufacturers and retailers of battery embedded devices. The California example shows a collection and fee system, not a passport system, and no California passport duty is stated in the sources consulted.

Is there a US battery passport?

There is no US federal battery passport matching Article 77 stated in the sources consulted, and no California passport duty is stated either. A US producer that places batteries on the EU market therefore needs an EU passport where Article 77 applies, in addition to any state stewardship duties, and a US record created for state stewardship does not satisfy the EU passport, because the state record answers collection questions while the EU passport answers identity, history and lifecycle questions. The two records serve different purposes, and the EU file should be built from the Annex XIII structure, not adapted from a state stewardship report. A producer that assumes a state file satisfies the EU duty risks arriving at the EU placing date without a passport.

What does a US and EU comparison table look like?

A comparison table with jurisdiction labels keeps the state patchwork apart from the single EU duty. The table below uses California as the US example and labels it as such.

What should a business selling in the US and the EU do?

A business selling in the US and the EU should run a US state register and an EU file side by side, with the battery identifier linking the two, and with the jurisdiction label on every duty. The US register should record, for each state of sale, whether the business is a producer, which batteries are covered, what stewardship or reporting duty applies and what date it starts. The EU file should record the category, capacity and placing date tests for Article 77, the Annex XIII data collection and the passport creation. A shared identifier and a shared set of model facts serve both, but the duties should not be merged, because a satisfied state duty does not satisfy an EU duty, and vice versa.

What is uncertain about US state rules?

Uncertainty about US state rules arises because states continue to adopt and amend battery laws, because rulemaking for new laws is still in progress in some states, and because the interaction between state stewardship and state e waste law turns on product design details such as removability. A comparison written at one date can therefore become outdated for a particular state, and a business should check the current state law and rulemaking for each state of sale before acting. This guide states the California position as summarised in the sources consulted, with dates labelled as stated in those summaries, and it does not claim that the summary is the current rulemaking position for California. The uncertainty should be recorded in the state register with a recheck date.

What limits apply to this comparison?

The limits are that US law is state specific and changing, and this guide states only a system comparison with a California example. This guide gives general educational information only and is not individual legal advice. A business with a specific state sale should check the state law as checked on 28 October 2026 before acting.