Learn About Bulk Mailing and Tracking → USPS still trying to end Bound Printed Matter
Scott
Postage $aver Software
Updated August 3, 2026
Last year, the Postal Regulatory Commission (PRC) denied a request by USPS to end Bound Printed Matter postage rates.
USPS cannot eliminate BPM rates without approval by the PRC, so the PRC's denial appeared to end the threat of losing BPM rates.
But now USPS is challenging that denial in federal court. The court could determine that the PRC did not correctly analyze the request, and order it to reconsider.
USPS and the PRC engaged in mediation toward finding a settlement. But they gave up, and the court has now set a schedule for written arguments to be submitted.
USPS has submitted its arguments to the court. The PRC will respond, and then final briefs by both parties will be due October 13.
Meanwhile, the new "Heavy Printed Matter" category has lower rates than BPM for promotional mailers.
As part of its proposal to eliminate BPM, USPS has introduced a new category of Marketing Mail that looks very much like BPM, but can't be used for order fulfillment.
It also cannot be used for "books", although USPS has not defined what they consider to be a book. That's confusing, because to me, most any printed material that is bound and either weighs more than 20 ounces or is more than 3/4" thick (both of which are requirements for the Heavy Printed Matter rate) seems to be a book.
Heavy Printed Matter rates are slightly less than the rates for Bound Printed Matter parcels, but higher than Bound Printed Matter flats. Heavy Printed Matter rates also have a small additional discount for nonprofits.
We're preparing a chart comparing the two services and will post it here.
Our Postage Saver for Parcels software has been updated to support Heavy Printed Matter and will continue to support Bound Printed Matter rates as long as they are available.
About the USPS Proposal
The USPS proposal to eliminate the Bound Printed Matter rates would particularly slam sellers of paperback books who could face much higher postage rates. It will also mean higher postage rates for hardback book sellers, catalog mailers and others using BPM rates. Here is the original proposal by USPS.
We filed comments opposing the USPS proposal, as did many other mailers and mailer organizations.
In its order denying USPS' request, the PRC concluded that:
"the minimal benefits to the Postal Service of removing BPM Flats and BPM Parcels from the Market Dominant product list, … are easily outweighed by the lack of enterprises in the private sector engaged in the delivery of the product; the opposition of the users of BPM Flats and BPM Parcels to the removal of the products; and by the impact of the proposed removals on small business concerns. Additionally, the proposed removals would materially harm mailers by abusing the Postal Service’s market power to impose a monopolistic rate increase.
Either one of these findings is sufficient justification for the Commission’s conclusion that the proposed removal of BPM Flats and BPM parcels is inconsistent with the standards of 39 U.S.C. § 3642. Accordingly, the Commission denies the Request."
Here is the entire PRC decision.
We will update this post as the process continues.
Questions? Get in touch.
USPS still trying to end Bound Printed Matter rates
ScottPostage $aver Software
Updated August 3, 2026
Last year, the Postal Regulatory Commission (PRC) denied a request by USPS to end Bound Printed Matter postage rates.
USPS cannot eliminate BPM rates without approval by the PRC, so the PRC's denial appeared to end the threat of losing BPM rates.
But now USPS is challenging that denial in federal court. The court could determine that the PRC did not correctly analyze the request, and order it to reconsider.
USPS and the PRC engaged in mediation toward finding a settlement. But they gave up, and the court has now set a schedule for written arguments to be submitted.
USPS has submitted its arguments to the court. The PRC will respond, and then final briefs by both parties will be due October 13.
Meanwhile, the new "Heavy Printed Matter" category has lower rates than BPM for promotional mailers.
As part of its proposal to eliminate BPM, USPS has introduced a new category of Marketing Mail that looks very much like BPM, but can't be used for order fulfillment.
It also cannot be used for "books", although USPS has not defined what they consider to be a book. That's confusing, because to me, most any printed material that is bound and either weighs more than 20 ounces or is more than 3/4" thick (both of which are requirements for the Heavy Printed Matter rate) seems to be a book.
Heavy Printed Matter rates are slightly less than the rates for Bound Printed Matter parcels, but higher than Bound Printed Matter flats. Heavy Printed Matter rates also have a small additional discount for nonprofits.
We're preparing a chart comparing the two services and will post it here.
Our Postage Saver for Parcels software has been updated to support Heavy Printed Matter and will continue to support Bound Printed Matter rates as long as they are available.
About the USPS Proposal
The USPS proposal to eliminate the Bound Printed Matter rates would particularly slam sellers of paperback books who could face much higher postage rates. It will also mean higher postage rates for hardback book sellers, catalog mailers and others using BPM rates. Here is the original proposal by USPS.
We filed comments opposing the USPS proposal, as did many other mailers and mailer organizations.
In its order denying USPS' request, the PRC concluded that:
"the minimal benefits to the Postal Service of removing BPM Flats and BPM Parcels from the Market Dominant product list, … are easily outweighed by the lack of enterprises in the private sector engaged in the delivery of the product; the opposition of the users of BPM Flats and BPM Parcels to the removal of the products; and by the impact of the proposed removals on small business concerns. Additionally, the proposed removals would materially harm mailers by abusing the Postal Service’s market power to impose a monopolistic rate increase.
Either one of these findings is sufficient justification for the Commission’s conclusion that the proposed removal of BPM Flats and BPM parcels is inconsistent with the standards of 39 U.S.C. § 3642. Accordingly, the Commission denies the Request."
Here is the entire PRC decision.
We will update this post as the process continues.
Questions? Get in touch.
