The Three Year Anniversary of EU Battery Regulation

EU Batteries Regulation

Three years after entering into force, the EU Batteries Regulation (EUBR) is beginning to show where it is likely to have the greatest impact. So far, that impact has been felt primarily through compliance systems, traceability, recycling and circularity planning, and data governance, rather than any clear shift in battery chemistry or overall market structure. Many of the most “market-shaping” duties, including due diligence requirements, are still being phased in, or have been delayed to 2027/2028, meaning the full effect of the Regulation remains to be seen.

Perhaps the clearest impact to date is the move towards “data-first battery design”. Batteries increasingly need to be designed and documented with carbon footprint, material origin, performance and durability, state of health, recycled content and passport data in mind, particularly for EV, light means of transport (LMT) [CF1] and industrial batteries over 2 kWh.

Since August 2024, CE marking and a Declaration of Conformity have been required for batteries placed on the EU market. Market access therefore already depends on compliance with the Regulation. However, implementation has not been straightforward: many companies have had to clarify whether they are acting as supplier, manufacturer or importer, and technical documentation has often needed repeated revision. Smaller companies appear to have found this particularly difficult, which may also help explain the postponement of the due-diligence obligations. For many businesses, the practical challenge is no longer understanding whether the Regulation applies, but ensuring that technical documentation, data requirements and contractual responsibilities are properly allocated before products are placed on the market.

Companies are also preparing for the battery-passport requirements, which are due to apply from 18 February 2027. There are already numerous digital product passport (DPP) and battery-passport proof-of-concept and pilot initiatives. Companies such as Technovative Solutions Ltd (TVS) appear well placed in this space: TVS develops sustainability and circularity solutions that align closely with the DPP vision, helping manufacturers collect and manage data for compliance and consumer trust. We commented on this in our article on DPPs here.

The influence of the EUBR is not limited to Europe. For example, Shenzhen Precise Testing Technology has partnered with Minespider to help Chinese battery manufacturers produce EU-compliant battery passports, with the aim of streamlining battery flows between China and Europe.

Another requirement due to apply from 18 February 2027 relates to the removability and replaceability of batteries. While it is still early, some manufacturers already appear to be considering repairability and serviceability at the design stage. For example, the Pixel Watch 4 features a serviceable, replaceable battery and display, while Pixel Buds 2a include a charging case with a user-replaceable cell. Although these are consumer electronics examples, they illustrate the broader trend towards improving repairability and extending product life, which aligns with the EUBR's circularity objectives. That said, this area should be viewed carefully as the Regulation contains a number of exemptions covering certain products and use cases, including for certain medical devices and wet appliances, and for some products meeting specified charge-cycle criteria, such as iPhones that achieve 1,000 charge cycles while maintaining 80% capacity.

The EUBR also sits alongside other EU policy measures, including the Critical Raw Materials Act. At present, battery chemistry choices still appear to be driven mainly by cost, safety, supply-chain resilience and performance requirements, rather than by the EUBR itself. Recycled-content thresholds for batteries containing cobalt, lead, lithium or nickel do not apply until 2031, but many manufacturers are already planning ahead. Although though these thresholds remain some years away, they may already be influencing investment decisions around recycling, material recovery and battery circularity, helping to drive innovation before the requirements formally take effect.

We have also written two recent articles on the EU Battery Regulation and its potential positive impact on innovation in battery circularity, including recycling.

Beyond Europe

Recently, the US decided to restrict exports of CMMs and battery recycling materials, including black mass. The policy targets finished goods (such as permanent magnets and lithium-ion batteries) and industrial waste materials, aiming to ensure end-of-life CMMs can be reclaimed and recycled domestically rather than exported. It’s a key moment for the global battery supply chain: retaining these strategic resources domestically will help build resilient supply chains, strengthen national security and accelerate investment in local refining and recycling capacity.

In the EU, this sits alongside the broader Critical Raw Materials Act agenda. From December 2026, waste lithium-ion batteries and black mass are expected to be classified as hazardous waste, which would restrict export to non-OECD countries.

The UK has not enacted legal bans preventing export of battery black mass, but instead has the Critical Minerals Strategy with aims to reduce the UK’s overreliance on foreign imports of critical minerals.

Taken together, these developments suggest that major jurisdictions are increasingly treating battery waste, black mass and other recoverable critical minerals as strategic domestic resources, rather than simply waste streams. The US and EU appear to be moving towards stronger localisation of recycling and refining capacity, while the UK has so far taken a less interventionist, strategy-led approach.

Three years after entering into force, the EUBR remains primarily a market-access and compliance framework. However, as battery passports, due-diligence obligations and circularity requirements begin to take effect, the companies likely to derive the greatest value from the Regulation may be those already integrating compliance, data management and lifecycle planning into product development and business strategy. For now, the Regulation appears to be laying the foundations for change rather than delivering its most transformative effects.