Demand #5: Give bite to REACH - sanctions and control

ClientEarth asserts that current REACH enforcement is insufficient and inconsistent across EU Member States, creating an uneven playing field and failing to protect human health and the environment. The document details high non-compliance rates across registration, supply chain, downstream user, restriction, and authorisation obligations. It proposes a comprehensive reform package including a Commission-led EU audit system, the power for ECHA to revoke registration numbers ('no data, no market'), 'name and shame' transparency measures, and turnover-based fines of at least 8% for serious breaches of authorisation and restriction decisions.

• Non-compliance with REACH obligations is widespread across several key areas: 93% of industry dossiers checked by ECHA lacked vital hazard and exposure data; two-thirds of downstream users violate some obligations; 18% of products checked in 2018 failed restriction compliance (rising to 78% for online products in 2021); and 40% of inspected companies failed to comply with authorisation duties as of February 2023.
• The current enforcement framework incentivises non-compliance because sanctions are often too low to be dissuasive, with some countries relying on 'written advice' and others applying low administrative fines, such as in France where 70% of environmental law breaches receive low fines.
• There is a significant lack of consistency in how REACH is enforced across the EU, with some nations (Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Poland) using criminal law for major offences while others (France, Germany) focus on administrative sanctions, and maximum fines varying from below 200,000 EUR to 55 million EUR in Belgium.
• To improve detection and harmonisation, the document proposes a comprehensive EU audit system led by the Commission, similar to the fisheries control framework, to identify structural deficiencies and recurring non-compliance.
• The document recommends granting ECHA the power to revoke registration numbers to make 'no data, no market' a reality and suggests a 'name and shame' system where non-compliant companies are listed in a public, searchable database.
• For financial sanctions to be effective, the document argues that REACH should adopt turnover-based fines similar to GDPR or competition law, specifically proposing a maximum fine of at least 8% of annual global turnover for breaches of authorisation and restriction decisions.
• The document calls for an obligation for manufacturers or importers to provide access to pure chemical standards upon request to prevent companies from using patent claims to block environmental monitoring and scrutiny.

APA

ClientEarth (2023). Demand #5: Give bite to REACH - sanctions and control. https://www.clientearth.org/media/roobop5l/ce_reach-reform_demand-5_give_bite_to_reach_sanction-control.pdf

Chicago

ClientEarth. Demand #5: Give bite to REACH - sanctions and control. 2023. https://www.clientearth.org/media/roobop5l/ce_reach-reform_demand-5_give_bite_to_reach_sanction-control.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite press release |author=ClientEarth |title=Demand #5: Give bite to REACH - sanctions and control |date=March 2023 |url=https://www.clientearth.org/media/roobop5l/ce_reach-reform_demand-5_give_bite_to_reach_sanction-control.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@misc{clientearth2023demand, author = {{ClientEarth}}, title = {{Demand \#5: Give bite to REACH - sanctions and control}}, publisher = {ClientEarth}, year = {2023}, month = mar, url = {https://www.clientearth.org/media/roobop5l/ce_reach-reform_demand-5_give_bite_to_reach_sanction-control.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }