From 1 November, every low-value EU e-commerce parcel needs a product identifier on its customs declaration: the carrier files it, but only the brand's own catalogue can supply one that is actually correct

What changes, and on which date

The requirement is narrower than it sounds. It applies to business-to-consumer distance-sale consignments valued at €150 or less entering the EU, the same bracket the Union's duty reform already targets. For each item in the parcel, the declaration has to carry two identifiers that are mandatory regardless of the product: a merchant product identifier and a non-standardised manufacturer product identifier. A third, standardised identifier, typically a GTIN, EAN or UPC, only has to be declared where one actually exists for that product; where none exists, firms advising on the reform describe a specific code used to state that absence, rather than leaving the field empty. Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2026/1022, which amends the Union Customs Code's own Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/2446, is the instrument cited for these definitions, opening voluntary filing from 1 July 2026 before the requirement becomes mandatory on 1 November 2026.

None of the firms reviewed for this article could point to a published penalty schedule tied specifically to a missing product identifier. What they describe instead is an operational consequence: a declaration the customs system cannot validate does not clear, which functions as its own form of enforcement regardless of whether a formal fine follows.

The carrier files the declaration; the brand's own catalogue has to supply the data

Most coverage of this deadline is written for the party that submits the customs declaration: the postal operator, courier or customs broker acting as declarant. Their checklist is real, systems need to accept a new data field, carriers need to map it into their customs messaging, but it treats the identifier as something to transmit, not something to produce. The merchant and manufacturer identifiers, and the fact of whether a standardised GTIN exists at all for a given SKU, are not data the carrier holds. They sit in the brand's own product master data, wherever that is kept, a PIM system, a spreadsheet, a marketplace listing built by a third-party seller.

That is the gap a carrier-readiness checklist cannot close. A customs broker's system can be fully upgraded for 1 November and still have nothing correct to transmit if the brand cannot tell it, SKU by SKU, which products carry a GTIN, which were deliberately never assigned one, and which simply were never checked. A bundle, a private-label item sourced from a contract manufacturer, or a marketplace listing aggregated from several suppliers are exactly the cases where that answer is least likely to already be clean in a brand's own systems.

Why it matters for brands

Brands selling directly to EU consumers, from outside the EU or through a non-EU warehouse, through their own site or through marketplace listings, are the ones whose product data this ultimately depends on, even though they rarely touch the customs declaration itself. The responsibility is split in a way plain readiness checklists miss: the carrier or customs broker is the declarant of record and files the data, but the brand is the only party that can say, with authority, whether a given SKU has a standardised identifier, what its manufacturer identifier is, and whether that information is current after a packaging change, a new supplier, or a private-label relaunch. A brand that cannot answer those three questions per SKU before 1 November is exporting a data gap to whichever carrier moves its parcels, one that surfaces as held or delayed shipments at the EU border rather than as a finding in the brand's own systems.

Frequently asked questions