ARTICLE
10 June 2026

Pennsylvania Bill To Ban PFAS In Consumer Products Advances In Committee

SH
Shook, Hardy & Bacon

Contributor

Shook, Hardy & Bacon has long been recognized as one of the premier litigation firms in the country. For more than a century, the firm has defended companies in their most substantial national and international products liability, mass tort and complex litigation matters.

The firm has leveraged its complex product liability litigation expertise to expand into several other practice areas and advance its mission of “being the best in the world at providing creative and practical solutions at unsurpassed value.” As a result, the firm has built nationally recognized practices in areas such as intellectual property, environmental and toxic tort, employment litigation, commercial litigation, government enforcement and compliance, and public policy.

Pennsylvania lawmakers have advanced proposed legislation—HB 2145—that would target the use of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in common consumer products.
United States Pennsylvania Consumer Protection
Shook, Hardy & Bacon are most popular:
  • within Corporate/Commercial Law, Criminal Law and Privacy topic(s)
  • with Inhouse Counsel
  • with readers working within the Basic Industries, Environment & Waste Management and Technology industries

Pennsylvania lawmakers have advanced proposed legislation—HB 2145—that would target the use of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in common consumer products. The bill received a unanimous committee vote in late April, reflecting an ongoing trend among states to move toward regulating PFAS at the product level in the absence of comprehensive federal standards.

Introduced on January 15, 2026, HB 2145 would amend Title 12 (Commerce and Trade) to establish new consumer protection provisions prohibiting the intentional use of PFAS in specified product categories. If enacted, the legislation would apply to "covered products," including cosmetics, dental floss, menstrual products and juvenile products, and would authorize enforcement by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection.

Although the bill has not yet been enacted, its advancement highlights the growing momentum of state-level PFAS regulation, particularly where federal action remains limited or evolving. Pennsylvania's proposed legislation mirrors similar laws enacted or proposed in California, Vermont and other states where PFAS regulation has expanded from environmental contamination into consumer product restrictions.

Committee proceedings indicate broad bipartisan support for the proposed Pennsylvania measure. During the hearing, members characterized PFAS as persistent chemicals associated with a range of adverse health outcomes, and the bill was presented as a targeted measure focusing on high-contact products. The measure advanced through the committee proceedings without recorded opposition, including via voice vote in committee discussion.

Despite unanimous committee approval for the proposed Pennsylvania legislation, stakeholder feedback reflects familiar fault lines in PFAS regulation debates. A memorandum submitted by the Pennsylvania Chamber of Business & Industry urged lawmakers to oppose the bill, citing concerns about:

  • Broad statutory definitions that could capture unintended products
  • Compliance burdens across complex supply chains
  • Expansion of liability exposure under consumer protection law
  • Divergence from federal and multi-state regulatory frameworks

These issues echo arguments raised in other jurisdictions, particularly with respect to how states define "intentionally added PFAS" and the evidentiary burden placed on manufacturers.

Following committee approval, HB 2145 received first consideration in the Pennsylvania House. Although subsequently tabled on April 28, 2026, the bill remains eligible for further action during the session.

Key next steps include:

  • Potential removal from the table and scheduling for House floor debate
  • Possible amendments addressing definitional scope or compliance mechanisms
  • Continued stakeholder engagement, particularly from industry groups and environmental organizations

For regulated entities and litigants, the Pennsylvania bill underscores several trends:

  • Expansion of potential PFAS liability beyond contamination into product composition
  • Increasing reliance on consumer protection statutes for enforcement
  • Growing divergence among state regulatory regimes

As Pennsylvania joins a growing list of states considering similar legislation, stakeholders should anticipate continued activity in both legislative and litigation arenas.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

[View Source]

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More