COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT Accompanying the document COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) …/… laying down ecodesign requirements for external power supplies, wireless chargers, wireless charging pads, battery chargers for portable batteries of general use and USB Type-C cables, pursuant to Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Commission Regulation (EU) 2019/1782
Date: 2025-10-13
Institutions: Directorate-General for Energy, European Commission
Subjects: EC conformity marking, EU energy label, ecodesign, electrical equipment, energy consumption, energy production, energy saving, market approval, technical specification, telecommunications equipment

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 13.10.2025  SWD(2025) 289 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT  Accompanying the document COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) …/… laying down ecodesign requirements for external power supplies, wireless chargers, wireless charging pads, battery chargers for portable batteries of general use and USB Type-C cables, pursuant to Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Commission Regulation (EU) 2019/1782 {C(2025) 6759 final} - {SEC(2025) 264 final} - {SWD(2025) 288 final}  
 
 
Impact  assessment  on  a   Regulation  laying  down  ecodesign  requirements  for  external  power 
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 
supplies (EPS) and repealing Regulation (EU)  2019/1782 

A. Need  for action 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT 

Why?  What  is the  problem  being addressed? 

Accompanying the document 
Each year over 400 million EPS are sold in the EU. They supply electricity to electronic and electric end-
devices  such  as  laptops,  smartphones,  wireless  routers  and  electric  toothbrushes.  Their  energy 
efficiency is regulated under Regulation (EU) 2019/1782 setting ecodesign requirements. The regulation 
COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) …/… 
contains  a  requirement  for  it  to  be  reviewed  in  the  light  of  technological  progress.  The  review  clause 
identifies a number of specific requirements to be addressed relating in particular to energy efficiency at 
laying down ecodesign requirements for external power supplies, wireless chargers, wireless 
10% load, the scope and aspects relating to the circular economy in particular interoperability. 
charging pads, battery chargers for portable batteries of general use and USB Type-C 
The  regulation  has  been  evaluated  and  found  to  have  been  effective  in  reducing  EPS  energy 
cables, pursuant to Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council 
consumption.  It  is  also  found  to  remain  relevant,  but  the  changing  market  for  powered  products  and 
and repealing Commission Regulation (EU) 2019/1782 
evolving semiconductor technologies were identified as offering unexploited potential for further energy, 
environmental and consumer benefits. 

Executive Summary Sheet 
Separately, through an amendment of the Radio Equipment Directive 2014/53/EU, the EU has made a 
first  step  towards  a  common  charging  solution  for  electronic  devices.  This  mandated  a  common 
connector and charging protocol for a range of electronic devices in particular smartphones, laptops and 
tablets. It was recognised at the time of the adoption that a parallel need existed to regulate EPS used to 
power these and similar devices. 

The  intervention aims to  identify the  optimal ecodesign requirements for EPS to contribute to the EU’s 
energy efficiency and environmental goals, support a more circular economy and avoid barriers to EPS 
in the single market. The requirements of the Ecodesign Directive mean that the stringency of the energy 
efficiency  requirements  should  be  set  at  the  level  to  achieve  the  lowest  lifecycle  cost  for  consumers, 
delivering cost savings while contributing to the overall EU goals. 

At present the energy consumption of the roughly 2  billion  EPS in the EU  amounts to about 11.6 TWh 
which  is  about  0.5%  of  EU  final  electricity  consumption.  Energy  and  pollutant  emissions  also  occur 
during their manufacture. The greenhouse gas emissions from their production and use are estimated to 
be about 2 Mt CO2eq annually. 

What  is this  initiative  expected to achieve? 
The  initiative  is  expected  to  result  in  more  efficient  EPS  that  will  use  less  electricity  to  power  the  end-
devices and thus save consumers money on their electricity bill. It will also result in lower pollutant and 
greenhouse gas emissions from the electricity generation.  

Through  the  interoperability  requirements,  the  initiative  will  reduce  consumers  need  to  purchase  new 
EPS with every powered product and lower their expenditure. Through the lower purchases of EPS there 
will be a reduced need for materials and lower energy and pollutant emissions form manufacture. 

Taken together these energy efficiency and interoperability requirements  contribute to the EU’s energy, 
climate and environmental objectives.  

The  interoperability  requirements  are  expected  to  substantially  increase  consumer  convenience  by 
ensuring that EPS are reusable with different devices and can readily be substituted by another in case 
of failure or loss.  

What  is the  value  added  of action  at the  EU level? 

The Ecodesign Directive, which provides the framework for regulating the performance of EPS and other 
energy-related  products,  was  adopted  to  ensure  EU  added  value.  It  empowers  the  Commission  to 
regulate the environmental performance of these products while ensuring that the requirements are the 
same across the single market thus avoiding any barriers to the free movement of products. 

By  establishing  ecodesign  requirements  at  EU  level,  more  environmentally  friendly,  energy  efficient 
products are made available throughout the EU, in all Member States. This market is many times larger 
than that in a single member state and thus  creates a far greater incentive for industry to innovate and 
develop products that satisfy the requirements in the most cost-effective manner. 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
There  is  therefore  clear  added  value  in  establishing  ecodesign  requirements  at  EU-level.  Without 
harmonised  EU level requirements, Member States could be incentivised to lay down national product-
specific  minimum  requirements  in  the  framework  of  their  national  environmental  and  energy  policies 
creating  barriers  to  trade.  This  was  the  case  for  many  products  before  ecodesign  measures  were 
established at EU level. 

B.  Solutions 

What  legislative  and  non-legislative  policy  options  have  been  considered?  Is  there  a  preferred 
choice  or not? Why? 

A  wide  range  of  possible  measures  have  been  explored  through  dialogue  with  stakeholders  in  the 
Ecodesign  and  Energy  Labelling  Consultation  Forum  and  bilateral  meetings  as  well  as  through  written 
comments. Those explored measures have addressed energy efficiency, interoperability and durability of 
EPS. 

A  voluntary  agreement  was  considered  but  the  product  is  characterised  by  a  very  large  number  of 
manufacturers  and  so  for  such  an  agreement  to  be  established  covering  a  large  market  share  is 
implausible.  Industry  has  not  expressed  interest  in  such  an  agreement  and  so  this  option  has  been 
discarded.  

Various other measures were discarded after a preliminary analysis including: 

•  Repairability requirements. 
•  Harmonisation and active efficiency limits for wireless charging. 
•  EU Energy Label. 
•  Mandatory unbundling of the EPS from the powered product. 
•  Scope extension to EPS for lighting equipment and e-bikes. 
• 
•  USB  requirements  for  EPS  powering  certain  product  categories,  including  wet-use  applications, 

Information requirements on efficiency. 

vacuum cleaners, toys and audio devices. 

Policy options packaging different  measures to explore a range of energy efficiency levels  and circular 
economy  angles  were  assessed.  A  preferred  option  was  selected  that  ranked  best  when  scored  on  its 
energy efficiency to achieve the lowest life cycle consumer cost, its effectiveness at reducing energy use 
and emissions, its cost efficiency and its coherence with other EU policy. The preferred option combines 
the following measures: 

•  Extension  of  the  scope  to  wireless  chargers,  single-cell  battery  charging  devices,  active  PoE 

• 

injectors and standalone USB EPS. 
Interoperability requirements for EPS with an output power below 240W, powering end-devices such 
as: IT and telecom equipment (e.g. wireless routers), consumer and office electronics (e.g. computer 
monitors,  set-top  boxes,  gaming  consoles),  single-cell  battery  charging  devices,  wireless  charging 
pads. 
Information requirements on interoperability including a Common Charger EU logo. 

• 
•  Minimum efficiency requirement at 10% load operation for EPS > 10W. 
•  More stringent active average and no-load energy efficiency requirements. 
•  Standby power consumption limit for wireless charging pads. 
•  Externalisation of power supply circuitry for wireless chargers and single-cell battery chargers. 
•  Durability requirements, in particular detachable output cables. 

The  preferred  option  will  lead  to  around  an  additional  35  to  40%  of  the  EU  EPS  market  becoming 
interoperable on top of the approximately 50% that is expected to be as a result of the Radio Equipment 
Directive requirements. 

2 

 
 
 
Who supports which option? 

Stakeholders  and  experts  from  national  authorities,  industrial  associations,  environmental  NGOs  and 
consumer  groups  were  consulted  extensively  during  the  review  process.  An  initial  set  of  options  were 
presented  to  the  Ecodesign  and  Energy  Labelling  Consultation  Forum  in  February  2023.  A  second 
Consultation Forum Meeting  was held  in November 2023. The preliminary analysis, the evaluation  and 
all relevant documents were made available to participants online, including minutes, presentations, and 
stakeholder’s position papers. Bilateral meetings were also held with industrial associations and technical 
experts.  

Environmental  and  consumer  NGOs  were  strongly  in  favour  of  more  stringent  efficiency  and  the 
introduction of interoperability and durability requirements. Member State positions were more nuanced, 
with  some  favouring  stricter  efficiency  requirements  and  others  sceptical  of  durability  requirements. 
Business and industry tended to be more sceptical in relation to the efficiency requirements at 10% load 
and the interoperability and durability aspects. 

The majority of reactions were received in response to the interoperability measures. In particular some 
Member  States  and  industry  associations  raised  potential  safety  issues  for  EPS  operating  in  wet 
environments  (e.g.  bathrooms),  or  requiring  specific  electrostatic  discharge  protection  (e.g.  vacuum 
cleaners). Concerns were raised also regarding lighting applications. Clarity was requested regarding the 
requirements  for  battery  charging  devices.  Arguments  were  presented  in  favour  of  an  applicability 
threshold  for  the  new  10%  load  requirements.  Environmental  NGOs  requested  stringent  efficiency 
requirements, also for wireless charging and additional durability requirements for cables. 

C. Impacts of the preferred option 

What are the benefits and costs of the preferred option (if any, otherwise main ones)? 

The main benefits that are expected from the preferred option are lower energy use, both during use and 
in manufacture, and associated with that, lower greenhouse gas and pollutant emissions. Less material 
will be used both in the manufacture of EPS, as a result of greater EPS reuse, and from combustion of 
fuel to generate electricity. 

In  quantitative  terms,  the  preferred  option  is  expected  to  save  each  year  by  2035  around  3%  EPS 
lifecycle  energy  consumption,  9%  of  related  GHG  emissions  and  around  13%  of  related  pollutant 
emissions,  all  compared  to  BAU.  These  benefits  will  come  at  a  reduction  in  consumer  expenditure  of 
around €100m per year by 2035. Societal lifecycle cost savings are estimated to be somewhat higher at 
around €130m per year. 

The  interoperability  requirements  will  lead  to  a  considerable  increase  in  consumer  convenience  that,  if 
monetised, is estimated to deliver additional benefits to consumers of a comparable order of magnitude. 

Will there  be significant  impacts  on national  budgets  and administrations? 

There  are  no additional  impacts on national budgets or administrations.   For manufacturers, the envisaged 
measures would lead to an extremely limited additional administrative burden, due only to requirements to 
print specific  additional information. These  additional costs for  integrating the Common  Charger  logo  on 
the  EPS  nameplate  and  its  packaging  are  estimated  to  be  in  the  sub-cent  range  up  to  am  maximum  of 
€0.001  per  unit  sold,  amounting  to  a  maximum  of  around  €400k  per  year  for  all  EPS  placed  on  the  EU 
market. 

3 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Will there  be other  significant  impacts? 

This revision is expected to support innovation, as a result of setting minimum technical requirements and 
leaving  competition  in  how  to  satisfy  them.  It  supports  ongoing  market  trends  towards  higher  energy 
efficiency.  The  following  requirements  are  novel  and  are  expected  to  be  followed  in  other  markets  and 
jurisdictions: 

•  Energy efficiency requirements at 10% load. 
• 
•  Durability requirements increasing the overall quality and lifetime of EPS sold in the EU. 

Interoperability requirements ensuring compatibility of EPS to power a wide range of equipment.  

When  will the  policy be reviewed? 

D. Follow  up 

A review is envisaged  5 years after adoption of the revised Regulation.  At that point an evaluation of the 
Regulation would be performed based on market data and other information. 

4