I sell products under my own brand — what obligations do I incur?
Whoever puts their brand on a product becomes the manufacturer
Whoever places on the market a product made by another company under their own name or brand assumes the same obligations as the manufacturer of that product. This is the starting point of Article 27 of the ESPR (Regulation (EU) 2024/1781): it is not the party running the factory that is decisive, but the party whose name or brand appears on the product or packaging. For the law, it makes no difference that the actual production takes place elsewhere — whoever presents themselves outwardly as a manufacturer also bears the responsibilities that come with it. This is an established principle in European product legislation and the ESPR follows that pattern: it is about who gives the product its identity in the market, not who operates the machines.
For own brand and private label, not for ordinary resale
This rule particularly affects companies that operate private label: a wholesaler that has a foreign factory manufacture products and then sells them under its own brand name, a retailer that operates a house brand, or an importer that removes the name of the original manufacturer from the packaging and replaces it with their own name. In all those cases, the responsibility that normally lies with the factory shifts to the party whose brand is visible to the customer. This does not apply to a reseller who sells a product unchanged under the name and brand of the original manufacturer — that party remains in the role of distributor, with a lighter set of obligations than the manufacturer. The tipping point lies in the question of whether the own brand or own name appears on the product or packaging, not in the question of who physically made the product.
When this applies depends on the product group
The ESPR is a framework regulation: Article 27 establishes who the manufacturer is and what those obligations entail, but which concrete requirements apply to a product and from when, is determined separately per product group. This only comes into play for a specific product group once implementing rules have been established for that group that set requirements for the product and the digital product passport. There is no exact date per product group in Article 27 itself, and that date also differs per product group. What is certain: as long as no product-specific requirements apply to a product group, the manufacturer role under the ESPR does not arise for those products either. For products that already fell under older ecodesign legislation, other obligations may continue to apply in the meantime.
What this means for the brand holder, in practice
The first step is to check whether the own brand or own name actually appears on the product or packaging, or whether the product is sold unchanged under the name of the original manufacturer — that distinction determines whether Article 27 applies. After that, it is useful to look at whether the product group in question already falls or will fall under product-specific ESPR requirements, because without those requirements there is no passport obligation to prepare for yet. If that is the case, attention shifts to the relationship with the factory that actually makes the product: the brand holder then needs data on materials, composition and origin in order to meet the requirements, and that data has to come from somewhere. In practice, this means making agreements with the production partner about what information is to be provided, in what form and how current it remains — because the brand holder is the one who will be held accountable, not the factory that remains anonymous to the end customer. The next question is how that data ends up in a passport that meets the requirements, including the QR code that refers to that passport, and how that passport remains available for the period specified for it.
Where this is set out: Article 27 of the ESPR
This division of responsibility follows from Article 27 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1781, which describes the obligations of manufacturers and thereby establishes that whoever places a product on the market under their own name or brand is considered a manufacturer for the purposes of those obligations. The product-specific requirements — and thus the moment when this applies to a specific product group — follow from separate delegated regulations per product group, not from Article 27 itself.
Whoever sells under their own brand is well advised to map out now which products this concerns, which production batches are behind them and what data those batches can provide — so that no delays arise when the requirements for the relevant product group become concrete.
Where this is based on
The regulation itself is on EUR-Lex. We provide references for each claim; you do not have to take our word for it.
What you must do concretely
What is expected of you
Placing a product on the market under its own brand means, according to the ESPR, that the company itself is regarded as the manufacturer — even if someone else carries out the production. Article 27 of the ESPR (Regulation (EU) 2024/1781) sets out the obligations that apply. Those in doubt whether this qualification applies to their own situation will find more background at Am I an importer or manufacturer according to the ESPR?.
Ensuring the product complies with the requirements
The obligation to ensure that the product complies with the applicable requirements rests with the company that owns the brand, not with the factory that manufactured the product. For a company of 10 to 100 employees, this means in practice that someone within the organisation bears final responsibility for the content of the passport, even when the underlying technical data comes from a production partner. Outsourcing production does not change this position.
Preparing and maintaining the digital product passport
The manufacturer prepares the digital product passport and ensures that it remains accessible for the required period. In practice, this means there must be a process to collect data from the production partner, verify it, and convert it into a passport per product or product group. For companies operating under their own brand, this data often comes from a third party — which requires extra attention to the accuracy of what is taken over. See also who is liable for the product passport in the case of private label products.
Keeping technical documentation
In addition to the passport itself, Article 27 expects that underlying technical documentation is available and can be shown on request. For a company without its own production facilities, this means that agreements with the factory are necessary regarding which documents are shared and how long they are retained — this is not automatically fixed in a standard purchasing agreement.
Taking corrective measures in case of non-conformity
When it becomes apparent that a product does not comply with the requirements, the obligation to take corrective measures rests with the manufacturer, that is, the company under whose brand the product is sold. This requires an internal process: who within the company decides on a recall or adjustment, and how quickly can this be initiated if a production partner does not respond immediately.
Providing information to supervisory authorities
On request from a market surveillance authority, information and documentation must be provided demonstrating that the product is compliant. For a company of this size, this means there must be a contact point that knows where the data comes from and can quickly request it from the production partner, even if that partner is located outside the EU — a situation that touches on the question of My manufacturer is located outside the EU — who arranges the digital product passport then?.
Where things go wrong in practice
A number of situations regularly occur with companies selling under their own brand:
- The production partner supplies incomplete or outdated data. The passport is compiled based on what is supplied, but no one checks whether this data is current after an adjustment in the production process.
- Multiple brands, one factory, one passport that is copied everywhere. Differences between variants — a different material, a different finish — are not reflected in the passport of each brand separately.
- Unclear responsibility within the company. During a takeover or reorganisation, knowledge disappears about where the underlying data comes from, while the passport meanwhile remains online. This also applies explicitly to what happens to the product passport if my company is taken over.
- Sales via a marketplace under own brand, without anyone managing the passport. The idea exists that the marketplace is responsible for this, while the obligation remains with the brand holder — see What does the digital product passport mean if I sell products via an online marketplace?.
- Incorrect data taken over without own verification. When an error in the passport comes to light, there is debate about who should have flagged it — the party that owns the brand or the party that supplied the original data. More on this at who is liable if the product passport contains incorrect information.
What you can document
For companies selling under their own brand, it is practical to arrange a number of matters in writing, so that the responsibility under article 27 remains manageable within the organisation itself:
- An agreement with the production partner setting out which technical data are supplied, in which format and how frequently these are updated.
- An internal designation of who within the company is responsible for assessing and releasing product passport data before it is published.
- A procedure for identifying and correcting errors in the product passport, including who informs the production partner thereof.
- Agreements on storage of technical documentation, also when production is carried out by an external party.
- An overview per product variant and brand, so that one product passport is not accidentally used for multiple versions.
- A checkpoint at sale through third parties or marketplaces, so that it is clear that the obligation remains with the brand owner, even if the sale runs through a different channel.
These arrangements are closely related to the questions that arise when a distributor or trader is involved in the sale — see What obligations does a distributor or trader of products have? for the distinction between that role and that of the brand owner itself.
This is not legal advice. This page provides general information about the regulations that this platform concerns. We do not know your situation. If you are in doubt about your own case, consult a lawyer or the competent supervisory authority.
Written with AI on the basis of the sources above, checked by a human on 2026-08-22. Is something incorrect? Let us know — corrections are given priority.