On the implementation of the Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive (UWWTD) and risks to the security of supply of medicines

B100241/2026

European Parliament resolution on the implementation of the Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive (UWWTD) and risks to the security of supply of medicines

(2026/2652(RSP))

– having regard to Article 191 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), in particular the polluter pays principle,

– having regard to TFEU Article 168,

– having regard to Directive (EU) 2024/3019 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2024 concerning urban wastewater treatment (UWWTD),

– having regard to the Commission staff working document of 26 October 2022 entitled ‘Impact Assessment accompanying the document – Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning urban wastewater treatment (recast)’ (SWD(2022)0541),

– having regard to the Joint Research Centre’s 2025 publication entitled ‘Updated estimation of the costs of quaternary wastewater treatment in the EU – A comparison of cost models’,

– having regard to the question to the Commission on the implementation of the Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive and risks to the security of supply of medicines (O-000013/2026 – B10-0008/2026),

– having regard to Rules 142(5) and 136(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

A. whereas water pollution, including pollution from micropollutants, poses a growing and severe threat to ecosystems, biodiversity, and human and animal health and currently costs the EU over EUR 75 billion annually;

B. whereas ensuring safe and clean water for the population and for all other uses should be the main concern of public authorities when legislating and regulating in this field;

C. whereas costs for primary, secondary and tertiary treatment are already covered by public authorities and taxpayers, and not by those responsible for the pollution as envisaged by the ‘polluter pays principle’ enshrined in Article 191 TFEU; whereas the objective for future legislation in this field should be to expand the extended producer responsibility (EPR) principle also to treatment processes prior to quaternary ones;

D. whereas many wastewater treatment systems in the EU are currently not fully equipped to remove micropollutants, therefore making it necessary to introduce quaternary treatment to reduce and remove pollutants, in order to protect human and animal health and the environment in line with the One Health approach;

E. whereas the revision of the UWWTD introduced EPR provisions in line with the polluter pays principle, which require that at least 80 % of the costs of quaternary treatment be covered by the main sectors responsible for releasing the pollutants, namely the pharmaceutical and cosmetics industries; whereas the 80 % cost share already represents a compromise and a departure from the Commission proposal which had envisaged 100 %;

F. whereas the polluter pays principle is a legally binding principle enshrined in Article 191 TFEU that requires those responsible for environmental damage to bear the costs of preventing, controlling and remedying that pollution, rather than passing those costs on to taxpayers or society at large;

G. whereas, according to the Commission’s impact assessment and independent data, the potential increase in costs of products or the potential reduction of the profit margins of the industries placing products on the EU market due to the application of EPR would be marginal, and would not endanger the affordability, availability or accessibility of those products on the EU market;

H. whereas a second study was carried out by the Commission’s Joint Research Centre with the aim of clarifying and further investigating the potential costs to be covered by industrial sectors affected by the directive; whereas this new study largely confirmed the previous data and findings;

I. whereas the revision the UWWTD provides the possibility for Member States to apply proportionate measures to ensure that EPR obligations do not compromise the availability and affordability of medicines, including generic medicines, thereby balancing public health objectives with environmental responsibilities;

J. whereas manufacturers of generic medicines typically operate on a high-volume, low-margin economic model and therefore may be more sensitive to increases in costs, requiring a careful monitoring of the implementation of the directive;

K. whereas generic medicines are based on the same active ingredient as the reference medicinal product, which increases the challenge for generic manufacturers of addressing the pollution at source;

L. whereas Article 10 of the revised UWWTD makes monitoring and enforcement frameworks mandatory, and requires that the impacts of the directive, including on medicine prices, are duly surveyed;

M. whereas Recital 20 of the UWWTD confirms that the directive already provides for regular evaluation based on monitoring data and scientific evidence, including the possibility to update the scope of the system where necessary, thereby providing sufficient flexibility within the existing legal framework without the need to reopen the directive;

N. whereas the revised UWWTD requires the Commission to carry out a comprehensive evaluation by the end of 2033 and again by the end of 2040, offering an opportunity to consider the impacts of the directive and, if necessary, propose adjustments;

O. whereas significant discrepancies exist between estimates of costs generated by the industry and those estimates produced by the Commission that indicate that even in the scenario of a full cost pass-through, the impact on medicine prices would amount to EUR 2.64-3.20 per person per year by 2045; whereas the Commission’s estimate was reconfirmed by a second study into the subject by the Joint Research Centre published as a technical report in December 2025, which took into account the final text adopted by the co-legislators;

P. whereas the revised UWWTD allows Member States significant flexibility over the design of EPR schemes and to establish methodologies for calculating contributions, enabling them to design EPR schemes in ways that ensure proportionality and avoid unintended consequences, including risks to the supply of medicines;

Q. whereas the directive provides for a lengthy implementation timeline, with certain provisions not fully applying until 2045, allowing for the gradual implementation of the directive and its quaternary treatment obligations, namely 20 % coverage by 2033, 60 % by 2039, and full coverage by 2045;

R. whereas the EPR provisions in the UWWTD are essential to ensure that citizens and taxpayers do not bear the financial cost of pollution for which they are not responsible;

S. whereas the application of EPR has a steering impact on affected sectors, encouraging the development of ‘benign by design’ products that are less harmful to ecosystems and public health, which in turn reduces long-term costs;

T. whereas the costs related to the contributions to the quaternary treatments are based on products placed on the market, including therefore all products, whether produced inside or outside the EU; whereas this directive will therefore neither distort the market nor place EU producers or the sector’s overall competitiveness at a disadvantage;

U. whereas the Commission’s impact assessment shows that, in the absence of EPR, the estimated annual costs of quaternary treatment of approximately EUR 1.186 billion per year by 2040 would have to be covered primarily through higher water charges and from public budgets, thereby shifting pollution costs from industry to citizens and taxpayers;

1. Reaffirms its strong support for the objectives and full implementation of the UWWTD and underlines the necessity of addressing water pollution including micropollutants, as a matter that can no longer be ignored;

2. Stresses that the introduction of quaternary treatment is essential to protect health, safeguard ecosystems, and combat emerging risks such as antimicrobial resistance; strongly supports, in this regard, the full application of EPR under the revised UWWTD;

3. Stresses that the cost of advanced wastewater treatment should not fall on taxpayers or consumers, but should instead be shared fairly and proportionate manner among the sectors responsible for water pollution;

4. Recalls the long and gradual implementation timeline for the EPR and quaternary treatment obligations; recalls that the technical aspects of EPR provisions, as well as national EPR organisations, can be adjusted at both EU and national level to ensure fairness and effectiveness; calls furthermore on the Commission and the Member States to make full use of the directive’s existing provisions to ensure that evidence and reliable data are fully taken into account in its implementation; rejects calls for a ‘stop the clock’ on the application of the EPR provisions, stressing that the initial cost burden is minimal given the gradual nature of the targets; underlines furthermore that such an approach would not resolve the underlying issues, but would merely delay the necessary investment and postpone decisions on effective and sustainable solutions;

5. Recalls in this regard, that the Commission should regularly evaluate whether other products and sectors that have a significant impact on the toxic load in wastewater should be brought within the extended producer responsibility system, so as to ensure that the associated costs are fairly attributed and not borne by citizens;

6. Acknowledges the specific case of generic medicines, the complexities linked to changing formulations and access to treatments in general, and, as required under the revised UWWTD, calls for the careful and continued monitoring of the impact of the directive on their affordability and availability of supply with the objective of avoiding unintended disruption or price increases;

7. Calls on the Member States, when designing and implementing national EPR schemes, to carefully assess and mitigate potential negative impacts on the availability of medicines, with particular attention to generic medicines;

8. Recalls the flexibility already provided for in the directive and calls on the Member States and the Commission to address duly justified, evidence-based concerns regarding any unintended consequences of the directive;

9. Stresses its strong support for the polluter pays principle and calls in this regard for the impacted sectors to engage constructively in the application of the UWWTD and to acknowledge their environmental responsibility;

10 Emphasises that water pollution imposes a cost that must be paid and that shifting the cost burden onto citizens, taxpayers, patients, consumers and municipalities would be unacceptable; recalls that these costs should be borne in a fair and proportionate manner by those contributing to pollution;

11. Recalls that the Commission’s impact assessment concluded that EPR represents the fairest and most effective financing model for quaternary treatment, ensuring stable investment while avoiding additional pressure on public budgets and water charges;

12. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.