The PFAS Manifesto has been launched. Signed by over 100 organisations, HEJSupport is calling for the EU Commission to introduce a broad restriction on PFAS by 2030 and to apply the polluter-pays principle to ensure the cost of PFAS clean-up falls on the polluter.
PFAS are a group of over 10,000 human-made chemicals that, due to their longevity in the environment, pose a serious threat to human health and the environment.
A universal PFAS restriction is the only way to halt this damage and protect current and future generations.
Read the full manifesto here: www.banpfasmanifesto.org/en/
Background
In January 2023, five EU Member States submitted a proposal to the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) to progressively restrict all PFAS substances. The proposal would prohibit the manufacture, import, and use of PFAS, allowing sufficient transitional periods only where no alternatives exist. The harder it is to replace PFAS, the longer the transition period—ranging from 1.5 years for most consumer products to up to 13.5 years for complex technical uses. Once all transitions expire, emissions are expected to drop by 95%. However, the proposed restriction does not cover PFAS used as active substances in biocides, pesticides, or pharmaceuticals. During a six-month public consultation in 2023, more than 5,600 comments were submitted to ECHA, leading to an updated background document published in August 2025. The revision added eight newly identified sectors using PFAS, including printing, sealing, machinery, medical applications (excluding drugs and devices), explosives, military uses, technical textiles, and industrial solvents and catalysts. However, these branches should not be evaluated further in the process.
The revised document includes significant weakenings. It introduces broader exemptions for PFAS production and use, longer transition periods, and new allowances for continued PFAS manufacturing in the EU under certain emission limits. It would even permit PFAS exports outside the EU. From a civil society perspective, these changes mark a substantial rollback compared to the original restriction proposal. Allowing exports and relying on emission limits for substances that do not degrade in the environment is unjustifiable. Such measures fail to prevent PFAS pollution or its harmful effects, especially since emission reduction efforts have proven ineffective in the past.
