HEAD-TO-HEAD
Two-column comparison of Eco Partners BG and Ecobulpack published packaging EPR rates in Bulgaria, each figure linked to its source.
Eco Partners BG and Ecobulpack both run packaging EPR compliance in Bulgaria. Of 7 directly comparable material categories, Eco Partners BG is lower in 5 and Ecobulpack in 0. The biggest single gap is Wood (all packaging in the published scope), where Eco Partners BG is 6% cheaper than Ecobulpack (0.045 vs 0.048 EUR/kg). Gramta keeps both tariffs sourced and dated, reviewed 11 Aug 2026.
Dataset reviewed 11 Aug 2026
Reviewed by Daniel VaknineEach row is one material family in one published scope – scopes are never mixed. Where a scheme prices several tiers of the same family (colour, recyclability, format), the cell shows its range; expand the row to see every underlying sourced line. An empty cell means that scheme publishes no comparable rate there.
| Material or tariff line | Eco Partners BGSource | EcobulpackSource | Show the underlying tariff lines |
|---|---|---|---|
| Paper and cardboardAll packaging in the published scope | 0.082 EUR/kglowest | 0.084 EUR/kg | |
| PlasticAll packaging in the published scope | 0.087 – 0.11 EUR/kglowest2 tariff lines | 0.089 – 0.11 EUR/kg2 tariff lines | |
Tariff lines: Plastic, All packaging in the published scope |
|
| |
| GlassAll packaging in the published scope | 0.10 EUR/kglowest | 0.11 EUR/kg | |
| AluminiumSame rateAll packaging in the published scope | 0.11 EUR/kg | 0.11 EUR/kg | |
| Steel and other metalsAll packaging in the published scope | 0.045 EUR/kglowest | 0.047 EUR/kg | |
| Composite packagingSame rateAll packaging in the published scope | 0.12 EUR/kg | 0.12 EUR/kg | |
| WoodAll packaging in the published scope | 0.045 EUR/kglowest | 0.048 EUR/kg | |
| TextilesAll packaging in the published scope | 0.14 EUR/kg | No comparable published rate |
“Lowest” marks the scheme that is cheaper on every published tier of that category, at the precision shown. Ties and mixed results get no marker.
Add the materials you place on the market and a yearly weight for each. Gramta multiplies every scheme's current published rate, so you see the yearly difference in real money – not per-kilogram abstractions.
Add a material and a yearly weight to see each scheme's total.
Minimum, membership and base fees apply on top of (or instead of) per-kilogram rates, and they are comparable across every scheme regardless of tariff structure. Terms differ – some are annual, some one-off – so check each source.
None of the compared Bulgaria schemes publishes a minimum or base fee in the current dataset – the per-kilogram rates above are the whole published price.
The comparison above is one country, one year, per-kilogram rates only. Filing for real means classifying every product's packaging, applying minimums and modulation, and repeating it for every country you sell into – every year.
Send us your sales and your packaging details once. Gramta works out the fees for every country you sell in and keeps each report up to date and ready to file.
Get started with GramtaYes – on current published rates Eco Partners BG is the cheaper choice: it charges less in 5 of 7 directly comparable categories and more in none (as of 11 Aug 2026). The biggest gap is Wood (all packaging in the published scope), where Eco Partners BG is 6% cheaper (0.045 vs Ecobulpack's 0.048 EUR/kg). 2 categories are identical. Minimum fees and packaging scopes still differ, so confirm both against the linked tariffs before deciding.
Usually you can choose, but not on the per-kilogram rate alone. Schemes differ in packaging scopes, minimum and membership fees, eco-modulation tiers and contract terms, and some only accept certain packaging streams. Use the comparison to shortlist, then confirm scope and total cost against the scheme's own tariff – every rate here links to it.
Every rate is a published tariff line from the scheme itself, held in Gramta's sourced fee dataset with its effective period and review date (11 Aug 2026 for this page). Nothing is averaged or estimated: identical material families in identical published scopes are placed side by side, and anything not like-for-like is excluded and explained above.