International Paper (NYSE: IP) today announced that it has completed the transfer of its North America Consumer Packaging business to Graphic Packaging. As a result of the transaction, Graphic Packaging has assumed $660 million of IP debt. IP now holds a 20.5% ownership interest in the subsidiary of Graphic Packaging that holds the assets of the combined business. The transferred business includes approximately 3,900 employees, two coated paperboard mills and three converting facilities in the U.S., along with one converting facility in the U.K.
http://internationalpaper2015.q4web.com/news-releases/press-r/2018/International-Paper-Completes-Transfer-of-Their-North-America-Consumer-Packaging-Business-to-Graphic-Packaging/default.aspx
Related Posts
Total packaging papers & specialty packaging shipments in June increased 7% compared to June 2023. They were up 10% when compared to the same six months of 2023. The operating rate for unbleached packaging papers was 82.9%, up 1.1 points from June 2023 and up 4.5 points year-to-date. Shipments of the biggest subgrade in bleached packaging papers – food wrapping – were 25,500 short tons for the month of June, up 6.3% from the same month last year and down 0.9% year-to-date.
Georgia-Pacific seeks to grow its retail consumer tissue business through a $150 million investment in its facility in Halsey, Oregon. Investments at Halsey, which started in 2022, will increase production capacity for high quality bath tissue, with initial production expected in 2025. When the work at this facility is complete, Georgia-Pacific will have invested more than $200 million in paper machine and converting assets. “This truly is an investment in our customers and consumers who appreciate the quality of our products,” said Vivek Joshi, president of the retail tissue, towel, and napkin business for Georgia-Pacific. “It is a clear indication of Georgia-Pacific’s focus on growing our premium tissue business and creating products that consumers value.” The Halsey facility makes both bath tissue and paper towels for the consumer market, and the improvements will support Georgia-Pacific’s premium tissue offerings, such as Quilted Northern Ultra Plush® tissue, as well as customer branded tissue.
If you have an interest in packaging policy or sustainable packaging, you have likely heard the term “EPR” or “extended producer responsibility.” But what exactly is EPR, and how will it ultimately affect the types of packaging we use? In this Deep Dive, we will explore the current EPR landscape in the U.S. and what is likely to come over the next several years. A note of caution: this article is intended as a general overview of packaging EPR with some basic advice for companies trying to navigate the new legislative landscape. It should not be taken as legal advice, and we highly recommend that companies who think they are regulated “producers” seek legal counsel to better understand their responsibilities. Extended Producer Responsibility, or EPR, refers to a policy approach that shifts the responsibility for waste management of a given product from consumers/taxpayers and municipalities onto the producers of that product. Typically, the main goal of EPR is to minimize the environmental externalities of a product’s end of life – that is, minimize the unintended consequence of what happens to a product when we’re done with it. EPR prompts a society to start thinking on a large scale about where products end up when we’re done with them and how we can better manage them. EPR regulations are not new to the U.S. and have been around for over a decade to manage products like e-waste, mattresses, paint, tires, batteries, etc. Let’s take the example of paint. “Producers,” meaning paint manufacturers, are typically responsible for the paint up until the point where you, the consumer, purchase it. But there are some unintended consequences that come when you’re done with that paint can that likely has extra paint in it. While most paint is actually recyclable, many people throw it away or pour it down the drain, which can contaminate the environment with hazardous chemicals. Ultimately, consumers/taxpayers and the environment pay the costs to deal with this result, and paint companies don’t have an incentive to fix it.