Back in 2015, France became the first country to pass legislation against planned obsolescence – the deliberate act of shortening the lifespan of a product to force consumers to purchase replacements or newer models. This was part of a larger European Union initiative that requires appliance manufacturers and vendors to declare the lifespan of their products. Manufacturers and vendors would also be compelled by the 2015 legislation to disclose the duration for which replacement parts for a specific item will be manufactured. Since then, France has added a dense set of “right to repair” and durability tools to the initial legislation. Other European countries and the EU are now implementing their own repair and durability laws, but none have advanced as quickly or been as comprehensive as France.
France’s 2015 Break With Disposable Design
In August 2015, France enacted Law No. 2015‑992 on the Energy Transition for Green Growth, which introduced a new offense into the Consumer Code: ‘planned obsolescence’ as a criminal délit (punishable by fines and imprisonment). The law defines it as using techniques where the party placing a product on the market “deliberately intends to shorten [its] life span in order to increase its replacement rate.” This was the second attempt at defining the concept, following an earlier, more flexible version. The updated language makes it clearer that it refers to intentional, checkable strategies rather than just vague dissatisfaction with product quality. Violation can result in a maximum 2-year prison sentence and a fine of up to €300,000. Courts may also raise the fine to up to 5% of the company’s average annual turnover over the past 3 years if this amount more accurately reflects the gains achieved.
Consumer information and spare parts rules before the criminal ban
France had already begun implementing obligations on manufacturers regarding spare parts as part of an earlier consumer and“green growth” initiative in 2014. That legislation required manufacturers to inform distributors how long spare parts would be available and required retailers to pass that information to buyers in writing at the point of sale. A March 2015 decree required vendors to inform buyers of the duration of spare parts production, with non-compliance punishable by fines of €15,000. A related measure extended the repair-or-replacement period for faulty appliances to at least 2 years after purchase. In practice, these rules aim to address a key aspect of planned obsolescence: they make repairs challenging or uncertain, which naturally encourages replacement instead.
How planned obsolescence became a crime in France
The push to advance further originated within the legislature and civil society. Laetitia Vasseur, a parliamentary assistant working for Green senator Jean‑Vincent Placé, spent years bringing together consumer groups, environmental NGOs, and industry representatives to explore politically viable definitions and sanctions. In interviews, Vasseur describes using her economics and marketing background to speak the language of business and to frame durability as a competitive advantage rather than just a constraint. Lawmakers reintroduced the concept in 2015 through the broader energy transition law, designating planned obsolescence as a specific, named offense in the Consumer Code after an initial 2013 bill stalled. That move, according to legal analysts and NGOs, made France the first country in the world to treat planned obsolescence itself as a crime, rather than just a consumer‑law issue or an ethical dilemma.
What the 2015 Law Does, and Does Not Cover
The 2015 legislation has defined the scope in which instances the law is applicable. Short-lived or disappointing products are not targeted by this legislation. It targets deliberate manufacturing processes designed to shorten life for the purpose of accelerating replacement, and it sits alongside general rules on misleading commercial practices. This means that prosecutors or complainants need to demonstrate intent rather than just poor conduct or performance design. French legal commentators note that this evidentiary threshold is high and that courts are more likely to frame many borderline cases as deception or failure to inform than as planned obsolescence. Consequently, the law acts as both a deterrent and a warning: it communicates to manufacturers that France is prepared to consider extreme, intentional obsolescence as not only unethical but also a criminal offence.
Early test cases: printers and smartphones
Soon after the law came into force, an advocacy group, founded by Laetitia Vasseur, Halte à l’Obsolescence Programmée (HOP) (Stop Planned Obsolescence), began stress‑testing it in court. In 2017, the group filed a criminal complaint against printer manufacturers like Epson, HP, and Canon, alleging some devices had chips or software that falsely reported cartridges as empty or malfunctioning, citing 2015 planned‑obsolescence rules. The same year, HOP filed a separate complaint against Apple over iPhone performance throttling, arguing that an iOS update released just before the iPhone 8 slowed older phones in a way that effectively pushed consumers toward upgrades.
The Anti‑Waste and Circular Economy Law (AGEC)
In 2020, France shifted from solely punitive measures to a broader circular-economy approach with Law No. 2020‑105, known as the “Anti‑Waste for a Circular Economy” (AGEC) law. The law began to be implemented gradually starting in 2021 and is built around 5 key pillars: reducing unnecessary waste, helping products last longer, providing better information to consumers, reducing plastic usage, and encouraging production that aligns with circular economy principles. The new provisions include banning the destruction of unsold non-food items, demanding clearer environmental data, and strengthening extended producer responsibility (EPR) across sectors like electronics and IT equipment.
The repairability index: scoring how fixable products are
The mandatory repairability index, which became effective on January 1, 2021, is one of the most visible tools under the AGEC law. The index was initially applied to 5 product families: front-loading washing machines, smartphones, laptops, televisions, and electric lawnmowers. It scores each product from 1 to 10 based on criteria such as disassembly, availability, and price of spare parts, access to repair documentation, and product‑specific features. Manufacturers must calculate the score according to a detailed method established by France’s environmental agency ADEME, and retailers must display it at the point of sale and online for products marketed to French consumers, including via foreign websites targeting the French market. This moves the fight against planned obsolescence upstream: by making repairability visible and comparable, it gives consumers a simple signal and forces brands to compete on durability as well as price and features.
From legal threat to market incentives
NGOs such as HOP argue that a criminal ban alone would never result in enough cases to shift the market because intentional obsolescence is difficult to prove, and litigation is slow. The repairability index approaches the problem from a different standpoint. Rather than simply prosecuting, it employs transparency and reputational pressure. Scores are based on standardized grids, and low scores stand out in crowded aisles and online listings. This approach also provides companies with a positive narrative: they can advertise high scores and use them to differentiate themselves from cheaper, less repairable imports. The index is positioned as an “anti-waste” measure in French policy documents, promoting design for repair and reducing electronic waste, a rapidly growing waste stream worldwide.
Repair fund and financial support for fixing instead of replacing
France has also started experimenting with direct financial incentives to repair rather than replace, framed as a response to planned obsolescence. In December 2022, a national “repair fund” was established to subsidize repairs of certain electrical and electronic devices, funded by small levies on producers under extended producer responsibility programs. Customers who visit a certified QualiRépar repair shop can take advantage of fixed discounts, such as about €25 off repairs for smartphones and €45 off laptops, while the repairers receive some reimbursement from the fund. According to French surveys, about 70% of consumers say they do not repair their devices because the cost seems too high compared to replacing them. By lowering that cost and pairing it with the repairability index, the government is trying to turn the cultural and legal attacks on planned obsolescence into clear economic options.
Durability index: the next step beyond repairability
French policymakers and activists have stated that repairability alone is insufficient, as a device that is technically repairable but fails prematurely and frequently still generates waste. As a result, France is currently developing a durability index that will include criteria such as robustness, reliability, and upgradeability in addition to repairability. According to government and non-governmental organization statements, beginning in 2024-2025, products already covered by the repairability index will be required to receive a durability score, which will reflect not only how easy they are to repair but also how long they can be expected to last under normal use. The stated goal is to export this model, first to the EU for harmonization and then possibly outside of it, because durability metrics benefit consumers and responsible manufacturers. This marks another shift away from punishing extreme planned obsolescence and toward designing a market that rewards the inverse: long-lasting products.
Enforcement in Practice: Apple, Printers and the Politics of “Planned”
Apple’s handling of older iPhones has been the most visible enforcement of this legislation so far. In 2017, reports surfaced that certain iPhone models slowed down after receiving an iOS update, coinciding with the release of new devices. Apple admitted introducing a power-management feature that slowed phone performance with older batteries, citing the desire to prevent unexpected shutdowns rather than force upgrades. The 2015 French law allowed HOP to sue for planned obsolescence and deceptive business practices. In 2020, the French DGCCRF fined Apple €25 million and required it to post a statement on its French website for one month, admitting to “deceptive commercial practice” in updating consumers’ information. NGOs saw the public confession as significant as the fine, demonstrating that major brands in France take reputational damage seriously.
Printer cartridges and the chip question
Printer makers have also been targeted. HOP filed a criminal complaint against Epson, Canon, and HP in 2017 for allegedly creating false low ink or cartridge errors and containing chips that limited cartridge reuse. Due to their short usable life and push to buy new cartridges or printers, the complaint claimed that such designs were planned obsolescence. Legal analyses at the time questioned French prosecutors’ interpretation of “deliberate” techniques and the feasibility of court-level intent proof in complex technical products. The 2015 law allows for the investigation of technical design choices that were once considered commercial, even though each manufacturer’s results have not been made public.
How often is the planned obsolescence crime actually used?
The 2015 criminal provision has rarely been used in consumer disputes involving short product life, with most cases falling under ordinary consumer protection and misleading practice rules, according to legal commentators and activists. This matches the law’s drafting: the definition is narrow and requires evidence of deliberate intent to shorten lifespan, which is difficult to prove without internal documents, whistleblowers, or clear technical patterns. The repairability index, repair subsidies, and public campaigns help shift markets, while the law acts as a “threat in reserve” to shape corporate risk calculations. NGOs like HOP say the French model’s combination of hard law and soft nudges is unique.
NGOs as enforcers and agenda‑setters
Another feature of the French approach is the central role of some civil society organizations. HOP, founded in 2015, has positioned itself as both an enforcement catalyst and a policy architect. It aggregates consumer complaints, commissions legal analysis, and chooses Apple throttling and printer cartridges as test cases that can lead to case law or public debate. Additionally, it partners with companies to enhance their products, such as by joining a “Durability Club” of around 30 firms. This dual strategy, which uses litigation when necessary and cooperation when possible, reflects the 2015 and 2020 laws’ mixed enforcement landscape: some behaviors are punished, others are nudged, and NGOs help decide which is which.
The broader political economy context in France
France’s willingness to regulate reflects its political and legal culture. Consumers in France are used to strong statutory protections and visible state action in markets, from food safety to antitrust. Compared to other OECD countries, trade unions and NGOs influence public debate. French law prioritizes criminal or administrative enforcement over U.S.-style class actions with large private damages, resulting in greater reputational risk. The planned obsolescence ban is a symbolic criminal rule that expresses a social norm (“products should not be designed to die early”) and contributes to court dockets.
Beyond France: EU Right‑to‑Repair and Emerging Followers
The EU’s Green Deal and circular economy plans emphasize repair and durability. On 13 June 2024, the Directive on Common Rules Promoting Goods Repair was adopted and took effect on 30 July 2024. Starting July 31, 2026, member states must implement it. The directive encourages repair and reuse by imposing an “obligation to repair” on certain product groups, harmonizing online repair platforms, and giving consumers who repair instead of replace an extra year of legal guarantee. It advances France’s practical goal of prolonging product use without criminalizing planned obsolescence.
Reparability and ecodesign across the EU
The new repair directive supplements updated ecodesign rules that require washing machines, dishwashers, and displays to be designed so that key parts can be replaced with common tools and that professional repairers can access spare parts for a minimum period. France’s repairability index follows this trajectory and is often cited in policy discussions as an early national example of practicalizing “repairability” at the point of sale. There are plans to harmonize indices by the European Commission, but the first EU proposals might not consider French criteria, like the price of spare parts. French actors, including HOP, argue that a reparability score that ignores cost risks creates the illusion of repair without making it plausible for most consumers.
Read More: France Introduces Artificial Heart That Could Last A Lifetime Without Donors
Other countries experimenting with similar tools
While France remains the most aggressive, it is not alone. Italy, for example, has debated measures inspired by the French index and has introduced rules improving spare‑part access in line with EU ecodesign legislation. EU member states like Germany, the Netherlands, and Belgium have strengthened their right-to-repair rules or consumer guarantees ahead of the 2024 repair directive. Countries outside Europe have passed or are considering right-to-repair laws, requiring manufacturers to provide parts, tools, and documentation to independent repairers, especially for electronics and agricultural equipment. The term “planned obsolescence” is more common in public debate than in legislation. France is unique in that it combines repair tools with a criminal ban on intentional lifespan-shortening.
Is planned obsolescence really becoming obsolete?
A decade after the first French debates, it would be overstating the case to claim that planned obsolescence has disappeared. Average lifespans for smartphones, laptops, and other consumer electronics remain short in practice, typically three to six years, and economic incentives for churn are still strong. Even in France, much depends on how aggressively authorities enforce the law and how consumers respond to indices and repair discounts. However, the policy direction is clear: between the 2015 criminal provision, the AGEC law, the repairability and upcoming durability indices, and the new EU repair directive, the regulatory environment in Europe is moving away from secrecy and throwaway design and toward transparency, repair, and longer use.
Other countries are implementing elements of this package, particularly those under the EU umbrella, but none currently combine all of these instruments with the same legal and cultural force. For the moment, if you are looking for a jurisdiction actively trying to make planned obsolescence socially and legally unacceptable, France is still the place to watch.
Read More: How France Is Fighting Food Waste Through Supermarket Donations