PFAS Regulation in the UK and European Union: November 2025 Overview

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) – so-called 'forever chemicals' – are receiving ever-increasing attention, both from the public and the authorities.  While many businesses and industry sectors now have to consider their exposure to PFAS-related risks, the regulatory landscape for PFAS is highly fragmented.  This can make it difficult for businesses to know what steps to take in relation to PFAS even though the trend is clearly towards increased and targeted regulation – if not outright bans in some cases – on these substances. 

Below, Aonghus Heatley, a senior UK and EU-qualified environmental and products lawyer in Fieldfisher's London office, provides an overview of key elements of the current regulatory framework in the UK and European Union and offers some practical recommendations.

What are PFAS?

PFAS are a class of thousands of synthetic chemicals that have a wide range of industrial, professional and consumer uses including surface coatings for textiles, food contact materials and packaging, cleaning agents, paints, varnishes, polishes and waxes and in pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, medical devices and products. PFAS are stated to be critical in the so-called 'industries of the future' including semiconductors and green technologies. 

PFAS are so widely used because they have a number of desirable properties including being stable under intense heat and having oil resistance, water resistance and low chemical reactivity.   There are also limited alternatives to PFAS for many applications.  However, a majority of PFAS are persistent – they do not break down – in the environment.  Further, some PFAS are known to 'bioaccumulate' in people, animals and plants and are linked to a range of health problems including kidney and testicular cancers, thyroid disease, ulcerative colitis, high cholesterol and pregnancy-induced hypertension.

How are PFAS currently regulated in the UK?

At the outset, it is important to note that, for many relevant regulatory purposes, the UK is now divided between Great Britain (GB, namely, England, Wales and Scotland) and Northern Ireland (NI).  Under the post-Brexit Northern Ireland Protocol, Northern Ireland remains subject to many EU regulatory regimes, including some that regulate PFAS.  What follows is therefore the position in relation to GB, with a particular focus on England.

UK REACH

PFAS fall within the scope of the UK's post-Brexit Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (UK REACH) regime.  This regime, administered by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), applies in all parts of the UK other than Northern Ireland which remains subject to EU REACH. 

UK REACH encompasses all individual chemical substances on their own, in mixtures or in articles. Manufacturers and importers of substances are required to understand the hazards of the substances they are supplying to the GB market.  It aims to ensure that chemicals are used in a way that minimises unacceptable risks to human health and the wider environment.

If the risks associated with a chemical cannot be managed, the authorities can restrict its use in certain ways: they can limit, ban or set conditions on the manufacture, placing on the market or use of a substance or group of substances.  Such UK REACH restrictions (the list of which maintained by the HSE can be viewed here) are currently in place for two types of PFAS:

• PFOA and its salts (entry number 68); and
• perfluorinated silane (entry number 73). 

It is important to note that not all substances which are banned or restricted are listed in the UK REACH restriction list.  Other restrictions exist under other provisions of UK law (some of which are discussed below as they can apply to PFAS). 

The HSE has identified 36 individual PFAS registered under UK REACH and anticipates that another 40 could eventually become registered.  However, this does not provide a complete picture with respect to the PFAS market in GB as it is likely that some PFAS are manufactured or imported below the UK REACH registration threshold of 1 tonne per year per manufacturer/importer or that PFAS are present in finished or semi-finished goods ('articles' in UK REACH terms).  Registration is also not required for mixtures (formulations), although the substances that comprise a mixture must be registered if the aggregated import volumes for any of those substances reach 1 tonne or more per year.

Substances of very high concern under UK REACH

A number of PFAS are also on the UK REACH Candidate List of substances of very high concern (SVHC).  Once added to the UK REACH Candidate List, an SVHC may – but will not do so in all cases – go forward and be included in the UK REACH Authorisation List after which businesses cannot generally use the substance beyond a sunset date unless they are granted an authorisation.  This means that such substances are eventually phased out of all non-essential uses.

Inclusion on the Candidate List can trigger both an obligation to notify the HSE and a supply-chain communication obligation.

Proposed UK REACH restrictions

In August 2025, the HSE opened a six-month consultation on a potential UK REACH restriction on PFAS in fire-flighting foams.  The consultation runs until 18 February 2026.

The consultation followed the production of a report (an 'Annex 15 dossier'), examining whether a UK REACH restriction should be introduced into Great Britain (England, Scotland and Wales).  As noted above, EU REACH continues to regulate the access of chemicals to the Northern Irish market.

The HSE's conclusion is that "the use of PFAS in [fire-fighting foam] presents a risk to the environment, and human health via the environment, that is not adequately controlled by measures already in place" and that a "restriction under UK REACH is appropriate to address the identified risks". 

In broad terms, the restriction proposed by the HSE is "on the placing on the market and use of PFAS as a constituent in firefighting foam, where PFAS will be defined as “any substance that contains at least one fully fluorinated methyl (CF3) or methylene (CF2) carbon atom without any hydrogen, chlorine, bromine, or iodine atom attached to it”", subject to several transitions for placing on the market and use.

Interestingly, the HSE stated that it will consider whether any complementary measures during transitional measures to minimise emissions.  These could include PFAS management plans and labelling to alert users to the presence of PFAS and to assist in the proper handling of relevant materials.    

Persistent Organic Pollutants

Certain PFAS are now, subject to exemptions, banned as a result of restrictions on the manufacture, sale and use of products containing persistent organic pollutants (POPs).  POPs are organic substances that persist in the environment and bioaccumulate in living organisms.

POPs are regulated internationally under the Stockholm Convention and the Aarhus Protocol (both of which the UK is a signatory to).  These international treaties are implemented domestically in the UK by Regulation (EU) 2019/1021 which applies, as amended, as assimilated EU law.  Breaches of this law are enforced under The Persistent Organic Pollutants Regulations 2007 (the POPs Regulations). 

The POPs Regulations provide that a person who produces, places on the market or uses one of the designated POPs in contravention of the manufacture/sale/use prohibition is guilty of an offence (on a strict liability basis).  Both companies and responsible individuals, such as company directors, can incur liability.

The relevant PFAS are:

• perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS) and PFOS derivatives;
• perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), its salts and PFOA-related compounds; and
• perfluorohexane sulfonic acid (PFHxS), its salts, and PFHxS-related compounds.

As an example of an exemption, PFOA, its salts and PFOA-related compounds were allowed in fire-fighting foams, subject to a number of conditions, until 4 July 2025.  Under another exemption, the same substances were allowed in photolithography or etch processes in semiconductor manufacturing, also until 4 July 2025.

The GB POPs regime also governs the management of several POPs (those listed in Annex IV) in waste.  Where these POPs in waste are above specified concentration limits (which operators are under a duty of care to assess), the waste will be 'POPs waste' and the POPs must be destroyed or irreversibly transformed.  Operators must take all reasonable steps to avoid mixing POPs waste with other waste during storage, collection and treatment. 

In exceptional cases, wastes can otherwise be dealt with in accordance with a method listed in Part 2 of Annex V, provided that the conditions listed in Article 7(4)(b) are complied with.

Classification, Labelling and Packaging

A number of PFAS are subject to harmonised classification and labelling under the Classification, Labelling and Packaging of Substances and Mixtures (CLP) regime. EU CLP, with some amendments, has been retained in UK law as GB CLP. 

In broad terms, hazardous substances and mixtures placed on the GB market must be classified in accordance with CLP and the labelling and packaging rules of CLP must be followed.  The hazard classes in CLP cover physical, health, environmental and additional hazards.  Correct CLP label information and safe packaging must reach the final users of a substance/mixture, including consumers. 

The relevant PFAS include:

• PFOA;
• ammonium pentadecafluorooctanoate (APFO);
• perfluorononan-1-oic acid (PFNA) and its sodium and ammonium salts;
• nonadecafluorodecanoic acid (PFDA) and its sodium and ammonium salts; and
• perfluoroheptanoic acid (PFHpA).

Product Safety Law

Recent media reports have highlighted the prevalence of PFAS in many common consumer and household products.  These include some clothes – specifically, those with waterproofing – non-stick cooking utensils, fridges, air conditioners and medical devices.  PFAS can also be found in some forms of packaging.

Under The General Product Safety Regulations 2005 (the GPSRs, not to be confused with the new EU's General Product Safety Regulation), businesses have various obligations in relation to product safety including that only safe products are placed on the market (the 'general safety requirement').  Although the GPSRs are commonly understood as only imposing obligations on manufacturers, many obligations – including the general safety requirement – apply to other supply-chain participants to the extent that their activities may affect a product's safety characteristics. 

The GPSRs, which apply where there is no specific product safety regime (such as the toy safety regime) applicable to a product or to the extent that another regime does not go as far as the GPSRs, have broad scope.  They apply to all products that are intended for consumers or are likely, under reasonably foreseeable conditions, to be used by consumers.  In order to be considered safe, a product must, under normal or reasonably foreseeable conditions of use, either not present any risk or only the minimum risks compatible with its use.  A number of factors are taken into account in this assessment: the product's composition and the categories of consumers at risk when using the product, in particular children and the elderly.

As regulatory scrutiny of, and knowledge about the effects of, PFAS increases, products containing PFAS are likely to face challenges in meeting product safety standards.  A product that, due to the presence of PFAS, presents a safety risk could conceivably be found to be an unsafe product under the GPSR.  Placing an unsafe product on the market is a criminal offence under the GPSR. The offence is one of strict liability: responsible businesses and individuals can be found liable, even without proof of negligence or intent.  The only defence available is one of due diligence.

Companies manufacturing or selling products containing (or potentially containing) PFAS may need to consider undertaking – and then regularly updating – product safety risk assessments using, for example, the UK's new PRISM methodology or, for the EU/NI, the RAPEX methodology (although the former is essentially an extension of the latter).  Any such risk assessments would, in all likelihood, need to be based on robust third-party testing and chemical analysis, although the lack of robust scientific information on many PFAS will inevitably post challenges.  The advantage of having one's own risk assessment, however, is that it can help in rebutting a regulator's risk assessment, many of which are (at least in our experience) overly cautious due to information gaps.

It could also be prudent to assess the risks associated with using PFAS in manufacturing operations (for example, to ensure that applicable UK health and safety requirements under the Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 1974 are being complied with). 

Environmental Permits

PFAS fall within the scope of the environmental permitting regime established by the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016 (the EPRs).  The EPRs require, amongst other things, that businesses which manufacture potentially harmful substances such as PFAS to hold an environmental permit. 

Environmental permits should seek to give effect to the Environment Agency's statutory obligation under the EPRs, namely that it achieves a "high level of protection of the environment taken as a whole by, in particular, preventing or, where that is not practicable, reducing emissions into the air, water and land". 

This is given practical effect through the imposition of general permit conditions such as the setting of emissions limits, the requirement that operational sites are cleaned up once activities cease and for pollution incidents to be reported.  These general permit conditions can apply to PFAS but, at present, there are no specific permit conditions that target PFAS. 

Drinking water quality standards

The Water Supply (Water Quality) Regulations 2016 (the Water Quality Regulations) require that, to be considered 'wholesome', drinking water must not contain any substance at a level that would constitute a potential danger to human health.  Breaches of the Water Quality Regulations can result in the DWI requiring the relevant water company to put in place a legally binding programme of work to raise the quality of the water to the required standard.  In the most serious cases, the DWI can issue an enforcement order. 

There is no specific standard listed in the Water Quality Regulations for PFAS, nor are there statutory standards for PFAS in drinking water in England and Wales.  However, recent and updated guidance from the Drinking Water Inspectorate (DWI) – which took effect in January 2025 and which applies to England and Wales – requires water companies to enforce a cumulative limit of 100 nanograms per litre (ng/l) for 48 PFAS (47 substances initially listed for monitoring and 6:2 FTAB) to ensure that water is sufficiently 'wholesome'.  This goes beyond the position in Scotland where the 100 ng/l limit applies to a smaller group of PFAS.

Water companies are also required to sample the drinking water supply for any element, organism or substance that they believe may cause the supply not to be wholesome. This includes the detection of PFAS. They are required to notify the DWI of any event which has or might affect the quality of the water supplied.  This could include an incident arising from PFAS contamination.

The DWI's guidance states that it expects water companies to adopt a tiered approach to risk assessment, monitoring and management of PFAS concentrations in drinking water supplies (with the tiers and actions required at each level being set out in Table 1 of the guidance).  For example, where sites fall into tier 3 (greater than 100 ng/l), the DWI expects companies to put in place emergency contingency measures to reduce concentrations to below the 100 ng/l in water supplied to consumers.  This could include the provision of alternative water supplies.

Although unlikely to become law, on 5 November 2024 a UK Member of Parliament, the Liberal Democrat Munira Wilson, introduced draft legislation (a 'bill') into the UK parliamentary process to require the DWI to issue guidance to water companies in relation to PFAS.  The Poly and Perfluorinated Alkyl Substances (Guidance) Bill would, if it were to become law, introduce statutory limits on PFAS in drinking water. 

The bill was scheduled to move to the next stage of the parliamentary process – its second reading – in late April 2025.  Its progress appears, however, to have stalled.  This is unsurprising: only a small percentage of members' bills introduced without later obtaining Government support ultimately become law.  This is especially true for so-called 'Ten Minute Rule Bills' (the type of bill introduced in this case).

While the above focused on drinking water, there are also standards for PFOS in surface waters under Directive 2008/105/EC which remains in effect in the UK as assimilated EU law. 

General water standards

The UK has Environmental Quality Standards (EQS) for PFOS in inland surface waters.  The annual average EQS is 0.00065 micrograms per litre.  In addition, a maximum allowable concentration (MAC-EQS) of 36 micrograms per litre applies to short-term peaks. 

These limits are part of the UK’s implementation of the Water Framework Directive (which in England has been done through The Water Environment (Water Framework Directive) (England and Wales) Regulations 2017) under which PFOS is classified as a Priority Hazardous Substance, requiring progressive reduction and eventual elimination of emissions, discharges, and losses to water bodies.

Planning, contaminated land and environmental insurance

Where PFAS contamination is identified, it may become subject to the planning or contaminated land regimes.  This could arise where a site with a history of industrial use involving PFAS is to be used for residential purposes and requires remediation to bring it to a suitably safe standard.

At present, limited recognised standards are available for assessing the risk of PFAS present in soils.  There are interim generic screening levels for four PFAS - PFOA, PFOS, PFHxS and PFNA – but these do not represent hard limits, rather they can be used as a basis to judge whether further investigation may be warranted given the relevant land use. 

In England, there is a statutory contaminated land regime established under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 for the remediation of contaminated land which causes an unacceptable level of risk. Under this regime (which is, in practice, rarely used), local authorities must identify contaminated land. The relevant enforcing authority – which can include the Environment Agency in addition to local authorities – is then required to ensure that those who are responsible for the contamination remediate it so that the land is suitable for use.  Exceeding the screening levels mentioned above would not, in itself, lead to land being officially designated as 'contaminated' under the Part 2A regime. 

While liability under the Part 2A regime is, in the first instance, imposed on those persons who caused or knowingly permitted the contaminating substances to be present in, on or under the land, if no such person can be found, liability can pass to the current owner or occupier of the site (regardless of whether they were aware of the contamination). 

In practical terms, the remediation of PFAS-contaminated sites can be challenging: PFAS do not decompose in the environment and there is, as yet, limited authoritative guidance as to what standards should be applied when attempting clean-up.  In addition, while PFAS are increasingly being discussed in the context of real estate and corporate transactions, there can be information gaps in affected sites' historical records given the relative lack of attention given to PFAS until recently.  Up-to-date environmental assessments which specifically encompass PFAS are therefore increasingly being sought as part of due-diligence exercises. 

PFAS coverage is also increasingly being sought under environmental insurance policies.  While PFAS are not yet subject to blanket coverage exclusions – although such exclusions are becoming increasingly common – insurers will naturally be wary of insuring against PFAS risks at sites where PFAS-related activities are known, or are likely, to have been undertaken.  Obtaining the assistance of an experienced environmental insurance broker, in addition to being aware of how PFAS may give rise to liabilities in the future, can be helpful in such situations.

For existing insurance policies, the policy wording should be assessed on a case-by-case basis to determine whether PFAS are covered.  For example, while a policy could contain a 'pollution' exclusion, these may not always apply to PFAS or the particular way in which PFAS may be giving rise to liability.    

Civil liability

PFAS can also potentially give rise to civil liability, for example via claims for nuisance and negligence, both of which can apply in the context of soil and groundwater contamination. 

However, successfully bringing – as opposed to merely 'investigating' – a civil claim for environmental contamination can be difficult.  There are often complex evidential and causation issues involved, and these are likely to be exacerbated in relation to PFAS where knowledge about contamination pathways and the substances' harmful impacts is still being developed. 

In addition, given the widespread use of PFAS (both historic and current), it may be difficult to establish the requisite degree of linkage – or 'causation' to use the correct legal term – between the presence of PFAS and the activities of a particular company.  Claims in relation to historic activities also run the risk of finding that the potentially relevant company no longer exists (although there may be legal successor entities against which a claim could be brought). 

While there are relaxed causation tests under English law for asbestos – to which PFAS are sometimes compared – the normal rules of causation would apply to personal injury claims linked to PFAS.  Some commentators have raised the possibility of the law being changed to make it easier to bring claims linked to PFAS exposure.  This, to the extent it will ever happen at all, seems quite some way off.  PFAS and asbestos are also not strictly analogous: while the sources of potential exposure to asbestos may be limited (such as to one or more former employers), the ubiquity of PFAS means that even a very significant relaxation of causation rules may not be enough for some future claimants. 

Generally applicable regimes

Finally, the production and use of PFAS may also be regulated, albeit indirectly, under other generally applicable legal regimes such as those relating to:

• green claims and consumer law (for example, where a failure to provide information on PFAS is found to be a misleading omission or an express statement that a product is non-toxic is found to be misleading);
• fluorinated gases;
• plant protection products;
• biocides;
• veterinary medicines;
• human pharmaceuticals;
• waste;
• health and safety (for example, under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 and the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH) regime); and
• food contact materials, although there are currently no specific restrictions on PFAS in food or food contact materials in the UK (unlike the EU). 

How are PFAS currently regulated in the EU?

In addition to the UK, attention also needs to be given to the regulatory position in the EU given both the EU's position as a leader in European environmental regulation and a place where many UK and international companies operate.  In addition, relevant aspects of EU law also apply, by virtue of the Northern Ireland Protocol, to Northern Ireland. 

Below, we have set out an overview of several of the key regulatory regimes in the EU.  As in the UK, other generally applicable regimes will also encompass PFAS.  An obvious example is the EU's General Product Safety Regulation in relation to product safety matters. 

While this article focuses on the measures at the EU level, domestic EU Member State laws – which can contain national restrictions on PFAS – may also need to be considered, particularly in relation to matters which are not harmonised at the EU level or which EU law allows national action (such as under Article 129 of EU REACH).  France, for example, recently passed a law (Law No. 2025-188 of 27 February 2025) under which the manufacture, import and sale of products containing PFAS above a residual value (which is still to be set) will be prohibited for cosmetics, consumer clothing and ski waxes. By 2030, the ban will extend to all textiles, other than those necessary for essential uses, etc.. 

Existing EU REACH restrictions

A number of PFAS are already restricted on a pan-European basis under EU REACH:

• perfluorocarboxylic acids (C9-14 PFCAs), their salts and related substances have been restricted in the EU and the European Economic Area (EEA), where EU REACH also applies, since February 2023 under EU REACH (entry number 68 of the EU Reach Restriction list); and
• undecafluorohexanoic acid (PFHxA), its salts and related substances, will face restrictions in the EU/EEA starting in April 2026 and with further elements taking effect later on 10 October 2026 (entry number 79 on the EU REACH Restriction List).

In addition, following work by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), on 2 October 2025 the EU adopted an EU REACH restriction on PFAS in firefighting foams.  From 23 October 2030, PFAS in firefighting foams at concentrations ≥ 1 mg/L (sum of all PFAS) will not be able to be placed on the market or used, except for specific derogations.

The proposed 'universal' EU REACH restriction

The EU is also considering a proposed so-called 'universal' PFAS restriction spanning a wide range (i.e. thousands) of PFAS.  Put forward by Germany, Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden, this would apply to PFAS as a class as opposed to individual substances (specifically, it would apply to "any substance that contains at least one fully fluorinated methyl (CF3-) or methylene (-CF2-) carbon atom (without any H/Cl/Br/I attached to it)".  The rationale for the universal proposal is both that there are very many PFAS (so targeting them individually is impractical/ineffective), but also because if certain PFAS are banned or restricted, other very similar PFAS would just be used instead. 

The original proposal was updated in August 2025 to include assessments for PFAS across eight sectors/applications that were not previously expressly referred to: printing, sealing, machinery, other medical applications (such as immediate packaging and excipients for pharmaceuticals); military, explosives, technical textiles and broader industrial, such as solvents and catalysts. 

On 14 October 2025, the five national authorities published a summary of their updated universal restriction proposal.  This document, in the authorities' words "describes the environmental and human health risks associated with the use of PFASs and assesses the appropriateness (proportionality) of different restriction options to address them".  It contains many interesting sections, one being Annex 2 which provides an overview of potential derogations from the restriction, including transition timings. 

The proposal is moving through ECHA's Committees for Risk Assessment (RAC) and Socio-Economic Analysis (SEAC) stages.  On 24 September 2025, ECHA published an update (not all of which relates to PFAS) on that evaluation process and what industrial sectors attention would turn to in future committee meetings. 

In its previous August 2025 update, ECHA stated that, due to the amount of work involved, its committees' assessments would not be extended to encompass the eight new sectors in the August 2025 proposal update.  Instead, ECHA expressed its commitment to conclude their discussions on the 14 sectors covered by the original restriction proposal, plus PFAS manufacturing and horizontal issues, by the end of 2025.  This will allow ECHA to finalise the RAC opinion and the SEAC draft opinion, and to carry out the consultation on the SEAC draft opinion, in the first half of 2026 (with this timing being confirmed again in ECHA's 24 September 2025 update).  ECHA's view is that this approach will ensure that more than 90% of PFAS emissions and volumes are considered.

Any eventual restrictions – which will ultimately be decided upon by the European Commission in consultation with the EU Member States – arising out of the updated universal proposal could range from outright bans to bans subject to time-limited derogations or other, more targeted, restrictions.  These would require the formal amendment of the EU REACH Regulation.  There would, however, need to be a public consultation in advance. 

Strenuous lobbying efforts are underway to weaken this 'universal' restriction proposal.  Further, as colleagues in Fieldfisher's Brussels office have recently noted in an insightful article, the proposal's very wide scope could ultimately render it legally unsound and open to challenge even it does become law in its present form.  This is because ECHA's approach presumes uniform hazards and risks across thousands of chemically diverse PFAS substances.  This, in turn, raises fundamental issues of enforceability, proportionality and legal certainty. 

Substances of Very High Concern under EU REACH

A number of PFAS are already on the EU REACH Candidate List of substances of very high concern (SVHC), for example PFOA, perfluorinated carboxylic acids (C9-14 PFCAs) and PFHxS.  As noted above in relation to UK REACH, inclusion on the EU REACH Candidate List triggers certain notification and communication requirements. 

Classification, Labelling and Packaging

As outlined above in relation to the UK, a number of PFAS are subject to harmonised classification and labelling under EU CLP.

Hazardous substances and mixtures placed on the EU market must be classified in accordance with CLP and the labelling and packaging rules of CLP must be followed. 

Proposed PFAS ban in consumer products

A member of the European Commission, EU Environment Commissioner Jessika Roswall, has raised the prospect of a ban on PFAS in consumer products, including cosmetics and non-stick cookware, subject to exemptions for 'essential' uses.  Such uses could include asthma inhalers and semiconductors for electric vehicles, although any exemptions are likely to be limited in scope (as they are under the POPs regime). 

This ban has not yet been formally proposed and this is not expected to occur before 2026 (with the ban itself taking effect at a later date). 

PFAS in food contact materials under the Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation

The EU's new Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (Regulation 2025/40, the PPWR), which entered into force on 11 February 2025 after a protracted legislative process, introduces strict requirements on PFAS in food packaging. Non-statutory guidance from the European Commission on the PPWR is anticipated which will assist businesses with their compliance efforts. 

From 12 August 2026, the PPWR will prohibit food packaging from being placed on the EU market if it contains PFAS (as defined in the PPWR) in concentrations at or above the following thresholds:

• 25 parts per billion (ppb) for any single PFAS as measured with targeted PFAS analysis (polymeric PFAS excluded from quantification);
• 250 ppb for the sum of PFAS measured as the sum of targeted PFAS analysis, where applicable with prior degradation of precursors (polymeric PFAS excluded from quantification); and
• 50 ppm for PFAS (including polymeric PFAS).

The European Commission will assess the need to amend or repeal the PFAS restriction under the PPWR by 12 August 2030, including as a result of any developments under REACH and corresponding potentially overlapping restrictions. 

It is, however, important not to lose sight of the fact that certain PFAS in food contact materials are already regulated under the Food Contact Materials Regulation (Regulation 10/2011). 

PFAS in food

A number of PFAS are subject to maximum levels (in μg/kg) in food under Annex I of the Food Contaminants Regulation (Regulation 2023/915): PFOS, PFOA, PFNA and PFHxS.

Drinking water

The recast Drinking Water Directive (Directive 2020/2184) includes a limit of 0.5 µg/l for all PFAS and a limit of 0.1 µg/l for the sum of 20 specific PFAS (namely, those listed in point 3 of Part B of Annex III of the Directive) in drinking water.  EU Member States are required to take measures to ensure that drinking water meets these limits by 12 January 2026.     

A number of EU Member States – including Denmark, Sweden and Germany – have already enacted stricter measures. 

Persistent Organic Pollutants

As outlined above in relation to the UK, certain PFAS are restricted under the international Stockholm Convention.  This is implemented in the EU through the Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) Regulation (Regulation 2019/1021).  The relevant PFAS are PFOS, PFOA and PFHxS. 

The relevant PFAS are PFOS, PFOA and PFHxS.  Taking PFOA as an example, there is an exemption, subject to conditions, permitting the use of PFOA in fire-fighting foam for liquid fuel vapour suppression and liquid fuel fire (Class B fires) already installed in systems until 3 December 2025 (extended from 4 July 2025). 

Soil monitoring

The EU, on 23 October 2025, formally adopted a new Soil Monitoring Directive (SMD).  Once it becomes law, which will happen 20 days after its publication in the EU's Official Journal, Member States will have three years to comply with the SMD's requirements through domestic implementing measures. 

These requirements will include an obligation for Member States to monitor and assess soil health using a common EU-wide methodology.  The law will also require Member States to draw up a public list of potentially contaminated sites (which will include sites impacted by PFAS) within 10 years and address any unacceptable risks to human health and the environment.  Finally, the SMD will require the EU Commission to draw up a 'watch list' of emerging contaminants which could pose a significant risk to soil health, human health or the environment.  This list is to include relevant PFAS. 

Toys

A new Toy Safety Regulation (TSR) to replace the Toy Safety Directive (Directive 2009/48/EC) will ban, amongst other things, the intentional use of PFAS in toys.  The TSR, which was approved by the European Council in October 2025, is expected to become law imminently, but it will be subject to an implementation period of several years before its requirements take effect. 

Priority substances in surface and ground waters

On 23 September, the Council and the Parliament reached a provisional agreement on a proposed new law to review and update the lists of pollutants affecting surface waters and groundwater and corresponding regulatory standards.  The proposed directive will amend the Water Framework Directive, the Groundwater Directive and the Directive on Environmental Quality Standards

In relation to PFAS, the agreement lists subsets of the substances as a 'priority substances' for both surface (in Annex 2) and groundwaters (in Annex 5). Trifluoroacetic acid (TFA), a breakdown product of certain PFAS, will be added as a substance to monitor for surface water. 

The draft law notes that "[in groundwater, a particular problem has been identified through voluntary monitoring for [PFAS] and pharmaceuticals. PFAS have been detected at more than 70% of the groundwater measuring points in the [EU] and existing national thresholds are clearly exceeded at a considerable number of locations". 

The provisional agreement still needs to be formally endorsed by the Council and the Parliament before being formally adopted and entering into force.  Following that, EU Member states will have to transpose the new directive into national law by 21 December 2027.

Wastewater Treatment Directive

The revised Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive (Directive (EU) 2024/3019), which became law in January 2025, introduced a range of measures to address the presence of pollutants, including PFAS, in wastewater systems.

The Directive requires the systematic monitoring of PFAS and for wastewater treatment plants across the EU to track PFAS levels at various stages of the treatment process. 

The Directive also applies the 'polluter pays principle': it requires industries which contribute significantly to pollutant levels, such as the pharmaceutical and cosmetics sectors, to finance at least 80% of the costs associated with new treatment requirements.

EU Member States have until 31 July 2027 to transpose the Directive into their national laws and the cost-recovery mechanisms under the polluter pays principle are required to be operational by 31 December 2028.

European Chemicals Industry Action Plan

An European Chemicals Industry Action Plan, published in July 2025 by the European Commission, sets out a framework to address the risks associated with PFAS.  Amongst other things, it calls for a comprehensive EU-wide PFAS monitoring system to centralise data, track pollution hotspots and promote safer substitutes through innovation and targeted R&D support.

The Action Plan also, in order to tackle legacy PFAS pollution, contemplates the establishment of a public-private initiative to identify feasible and affordable methods for the detection and remediation of PFAS.

Conclusion and recommendations

The UK and EU regulatory landscapes for PFAS are both fragmented and changing.  While this can make it difficult for businesses to know what steps to take in relation to PFAS, the trend is clearly towards increased and targeted regulation – if not outright bans in some cases – on PFAS specifically. 

Horizon scanning and engaging, where possible, in consultations and otherwise on an informal basis with relevant authorities is therefore essential.  More practically, businesses should start to assess where they or their suppliers use PFAS in their operations.  Businesses should also consider whether alternative substances can be used.  While switching away from PFAS may be costly, given the authorities' focus on PFAS, the costs – including those associated with reputational impacts – of continuing to use PFAS could be much greater.   

We recommend engaging in a PFAS screening process:

1. reviewing existing and historic operations to assess whether, and if so, how PFAS are/were utilised;
2. reviewing product composition, including through upstream supply chain engagement; and
3. creating a regulatory map of both relevant existing laws and potential new laws which could impact products and operations in future. 

If you require assistance

If you have any questions about PFAS, please contact Aonghus Heatley. Aonghus is a senior UK and EU-qualified environmental and products lawyer in Fieldfisher's London office.  Along with Fieldfisher colleagues across the firm's offices, he is currently advising clients in relation to issues associated with PFAS including in respect of high-profile alleged soil and groundwater contamination, regulatory enforcement action, civil claims, product safety and product/packaging composition requirements. 

The contents of this article do not constitute legal advice and are provided for general information purposes only.