We are already certified elsewhere. Do we still need a consumer trustmark?

That depends on what the existing certification covers, and on whether you want to claim anything towards consumers.

The distinction that matters

A chain-of-custody or mass-balance certificate documents the route of the material, not the property of the individual product on the shelf. Schemes such as ISCC PLUS, GRS or RCS are built to make flows and origin traceable across several stages. That is a different question from: does this particular pack contain the share printed on the front?

A claim on the packaging needs evidence whose subject is exactly that claim. A chain-of-custody certificate therefore does not replace a consumer trustmark, and a consumer trustmark does not replace a chain of custody.

When you need nothing in addition

When you make no claim towards consumers. Anyone documenting recycled content only for business customers, or substantiating it for a quota, is fine with the evidence they have. EmpCo bites where something is asserted towards consumers, including through a mark, a symbol or a design.

When the additional step is worth it

When the claim is to go on the pack, into the shop or into advertising. What counts then is whether the mark meets the requirements for a certification scheme and whether a consumer can verify it.

The short route there

Where a certification already exists, the chain does not have to be rebuilt. The flustix sub-licence system transfers existing evidence onto the specific product under defined conditions. Existing test reports and analyses are credited, as far as scope, method, accreditation and currency fit.