PFAS Clothing Ban 2026: State & EU Tracker
Every US state law and the EU REACH proposal restricting PFAS in apparel, with effective dates, exemption phase-outs, and compliance implications for brands selling nationally.
California, New York, Maine, Vermont, Connecticut, Colorado, Washington, and Minnesota all restrict intentionally added PFAS in apparel as of 2026. California AB 1817 (Jan 2025) and New York S6291A (Dec 2024) are the binding floor for national brands. The EU REACH ban targets full effect by 2030.
1. The regulatory landscape in plain language
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, are a class of over 12,000 synthetic compounds used in apparel for water repellence, stain resistance, and moisture management. They are persistent in human bodies and in the environment, which is why they are called forever chemicals. The regulatory case for restricting them in apparel rests on epidemiology connecting long-term PFAS exposure to thyroid, immune, cholesterol, and cancer outcomes.
State-level US bans on intentionally added PFAS in apparel are now the enforcement reality. Federal preemption has not happened. Enforcement instead rolls out state by state, through state Attorneys General and consumer-protection lawsuits. For broader plastic-free activewear context, see our plastic-free activewear pillar guide.
2. The full state-by-state US tracker
- California · AB 1817. Prohibits manufacture, distribution, sale, or offer for sale of new textile articles containing intentionally added PFAS. Main provisions effective January 1, 2025. Severe-wet-conditions outdoor apparel exemption phases out January 1, 2028.
- New York · S6291A. Bans sale of apparel with intentionally added PFAS. Effective December 31, 2024. Severe-wet-conditions outdoor exemption phases out December 31, 2027.
- Maine · LD 1503. The nation's first comprehensive PFAS-in-products law. Apparel phase-in continues through 2029 with category-specific dates.
- Vermont · S.25. Prohibits sale of textiles with intentionally added PFAS. Effective July 1, 2026.
- Connecticut · HB 6486. Restricts PFAS in apparel and outdoor gear with phase-in starting 2026.
- Colorado · HB 22-1345. Restricts PFAS in covered products including apparel. Phase-in through 2027.
- Washington · SHB 1047. Includes apparel in covered consumer products. Phase-in through 2027.
- Minnesota · Amara's Law. Broad PFAS-in-products restriction. Apparel covered with phase-in through 2028.
- Rhode Island, Oregon, Massachusetts. Active legislation in 2026 sessions, expected to pass with effective dates through 2027 to 2028.
- European Union · Universal PFAS Restriction under REACH. Proposed by Germany, Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, Sweden. ECHA review ongoing. Anticipated full effect 2030. See bluesign's PFAS regulatory roundup.
3. California AB 1817 is the de facto US floor
California's market is large enough that almost no national apparel brand maintains a separate California-only SKU set. As a result, AB 1817 has become the binding US floor. A garment that passes California passes everywhere in the US. The law applies to apparel, footwear, accessories, and household textiles. The compliance bar is straightforward: no intentionally added PFAS at the finished-product level.
The "intentionally added" phrasing matters. Trace contamination from a contaminated raw material does not necessarily violate the law, but added DWR or stain-finish chemistry does. Brands typically demonstrate compliance through total-fluorine testing below detectable limits or through OEKO-TEX Standard 100, bluesign, or equivalent certifications that restrict PFAS as part of their criteria.
4. Enforcement is happening, brand by brand
The most prominent enforcement action so far is the Texas Attorney General's April 2026 PFAS investigation into Lululemon. Texas does not have a PFAS-specific apparel ban, but Attorney General Ken Paxton invoked the Texas Business and Commerce Code, which carries penalties of up to $10,000 per violation. Legal analysis from Pillsbury walks through the legal theory.
Civil class actions are running in parallel. A class-action against Lululemon alleges greenwashing tied to sustainability marketing inconsistent with PFAS findings. Shareholder pressure is also active: As You Sow filed a microfiber-shedding resolution against Lululemon in December 2025.
5. The EU REACH proposal
The EU's universal PFAS restriction proposal under REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals) was filed in January 2023 by five member states: Germany, the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. It targets restrictions on the manufacture, use, and placing on the market of PFAS across consumer applications including apparel.
The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) is reviewing the proposal through 2025 and into 2026, with category-specific phase-ins anticipated. The headline brands selling into the EU should plan for is full effect by 2030, with select categories phased earlier. For brands building 5-year forecasts, EU REACH is the regulatory horizon to plan against.
6. Compliance implications for brands
| Action | What it means | When |
|---|---|---|
| Chemistry audit | Inventory all PFAS sources across fabric, finishes, dyes, prints, trims | Now |
| SKU-level certification | Move to OEKO-TEX Standard 100 or bluesign on covered SKUs | Pre-2025 for CA-bound |
| DWR substitution | Replace fluorinated DWR with non-fluorinated alternatives | 2025-2027 phase |
| Supplier attestations | Require PFAS-free statements from fabric and trim suppliers | Now |
| EU REACH readiness | Plan to remove residual PFAS for EU markets | By 2028-2030 |
| Marketing alignment | Audit sustainability claims against verified test data | Now |
The simplest path through this for a brand is using a chemistry-restricted ingredient platform where PFAS exclusion is built into the polymer spec rather than retrofitted. OHZEHN-TEX™ licensees inherit compliance because the fabric is formulated PFAS-free at the polymer level. For ongoing regulatory tracking, follow our blog.
7. Frequently asked questions
Is PFAS banned in clothing in 2026?
Yes, PFAS in apparel is now restricted in multiple US states. California (AB 1817, effective January 1, 2025), New York (S6291A, effective December 31, 2024), Maine (LD 1503, phased), Vermont (S.25, effective July 1, 2026), Connecticut (HB 6486, 2026 phase-in), Colorado, Washington, and Minnesota all restrict intentionally added PFAS in apparel including activewear. The EU's universal PFAS restriction under REACH targets full effect by 2030.
Which US states have banned PFAS in clothing?
As of May 2026: California AB 1817 (effective Jan 1, 2025), New York S6291A (effective Dec 31, 2024), Maine LD 1503 (phased through 2029), Vermont S.25 (effective July 1, 2026), Connecticut HB 6486 (2026 phase-in), Colorado, Washington, and Minnesota all restrict intentionally added PFAS in apparel. Severe wet-condition outdoor gear exemptions phase out by 2027 to 2028.
What is California AB 1817?
California Assembly Bill 1817 prohibits the manufacture, distribution, sale, or offer for sale of new textile articles containing intentionally added PFAS. The main provisions took effect January 1, 2025. A narrow exemption for outdoor apparel for severe wet conditions phases out January 1, 2028. The law applies to apparel, footwear, accessories, and household textiles. Because California's market is large, most national brands now treat AB 1817 as the de facto US floor.
What about EU PFAS bans in clothing?
The European Union is finalizing a universal PFAS restriction under REACH, proposed by five member states (Germany, Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, Sweden). It targets restrictions across consumer applications including apparel. The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) is reviewing the proposal; full effect is anticipated by 2030 with category-specific phase-ins. Brands selling into the EU should plan for this on a 2028 to 2030 timeline.
Do PFAS bans apply to outdoor gear?
Most state laws include a narrow exemption for outdoor apparel designed for severe wet conditions, recognizing that PFAS-based durable water repellent (DWR) chemistry is still functionally hard to replace at the highest performance tier. Those exemptions phase out by 2027 to 2028 in California and New York. The outdoor industry is now in active substitution toward non-fluorinated DWRs. The NRDC PFAS scorecard rates most outdoor brands poorly on transition speed.
What does PFAS ban enforcement actually look like?
Enforcement is rolling out through state Attorney General actions and consumer-protection lawsuits, not federal preemption. The most prominent example is Texas AG Ken Paxton's April 2026 PFAS investigation into Lululemon, citing the Texas Business and Commerce Code, with penalties of up to $10,000 per violation. Civil class actions are running in parallel. Retailers are preemptively requiring PFAS-free attestations from brands selling into California and New York.
What do brands need to do to comply?
Three steps. First, audit current chemistry across the line including main fabric, finishes, dyes, prints, and trims. Second, document third-party PFAS testing or certifications (OEKO-TEX Standard 100, bluesign) at the SKU level. Third, replace any PFAS-containing components with verified alternatives, prioritizing California-bound SKUs for January 2025. A chemistry-restricted ingredient platform like OHZEHN-TEX™ simplifies the audit because PFAS exclusion is built into the polymer spec.
Are recycled polyester garments PFAS-compliant?
Not automatically. Recycled polyester refers to the source of the polymer, not the chemistry of the finishes. A recycled polyester garment can still be treated with intentionally added PFAS for water repellence or stain resistance. Compliance with California AB 1817 and similar state laws is determined at the finished-product level. Brands must verify the absence of intentionally added PFAS across all components and finishes, regardless of recycled-content claims.