Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a large class of synthetic chemicals widely used to provide water, grease and stain resistance in consumer and industrial products. Their persistence in the environment and potential for long-term accumulation has driven a significant tightening of regulation in Australia and globally. Australia’s regulatory approach is now entering a more mature phase, with binding national controls under the Industrial Chemicals Environmental Management Standard (IChEMS) and increasing state-level enforcement, particularly from 2025 onward.

Australia regulates PFAS primarily through the Industrial Chemicals Environmental Management Standards (IChEMS) and the IChEMS Register.

For chemicals listed in Schedule 7, the legal position is clear - they cannot be imported, manufactured, exported or used. This prohibition applies not only to chemicals in isolation, but also where they are present in mixtures (products) or articles (finished goods). Only very limited exceptions apply, such as research use or where the substance is present as an unintentional trace contaminant. From 1 July 2025, this framework captures key PFAS substances including PFOS, PFOA and PFHxS, along with certain related substances. In practical terms, these controls extend beyond chemical manufacturers to retailers, importers and distributors who deal in finished goods containing these substances.

IChEMS applies only to industrial uses of chemicals. It does not apply to agricultural chemicals, veterinary chemicals, therapeutic goods or food, except where there is an industrial use component. However, this distinction does not remove risk for retailers. Many consumer goods (such as textiles, packaging, coatings and treated materials) fall within the scope of industrial chemical regulation where PFAS are used as performance additives or surface treatments.

The IChEMS Register itself does not directly create offences. Instead, it establishes nationally consistent standards that are implemented and enforced through Commonwealth, state and territory environmental laws. This means that:

In practice, regulators expect businesses to understand their chemical risks and demonstrate that they have taken reasonable steps to manage them. There is no general product pre-approval system; compliance is assessed through audits, investigations and environmental duty obligations.

The introduction of Schedule 7 PFAS controls significantly changes the compliance landscape for retailers and importers.

1. Responsibility extends across the supply chain. Businesses importing or supplying finished goods may be exposed to compliance risk if those goods contain restricted PFAS, even where the chemicals were introduced, applied or treated offshore. Under the IChEMS framework, obligations are not limited to the original manufacturer. Importers, distributors and retailers can all be captured where they ‘introduce’, supply or continue to deal with non-compliant goods. This means reliance on supplier assurances alone is not sufficient - businesses are expected to take reasonable steps to understand the chemical composition of the products they place on the Australian market and to manage associated risks.

2. The rules apply equally to chemicals in articles. A product does not need to be a bulk chemical or liquid formulation to trigger obligations. PFAS present in articles (such as treated textiles, apparel, footwear, furniture, food-contact packaging, coatings, and surface-treated materials) can fall within scope. This is particularly relevant for retail, where PFAS are often used for performance characteristics such as water resistance, stain resistance or grease-proofing. Regulatory controls can therefore attach to everyday consumer goods, even where PFAS are present only as part of a coating, laminate or treatment layer.

3. There is no general ‘sell-through’ allowance for existing stock. The fact that inventory was purchased before 1 July 2025 or before a supplier reformulated does not, by itself, permit continued sale. If a product contains a Schedule 7 PFAS above any applicable threshold (including where no exemption applies), ongoing import or supply may be non-compliant. This creates a practical risk for legacy stock, slow-moving inventory and returned goods. Businesses should avoid assuming they can clear existing stock and instead assess whether continued supply is lawful, or whether stock needs to be quarantined, tested, withdrawn or managed as waste.

4. Compliance depends heavily on evidence and defensible due diligence. Businesses are expected to be able to demonstrate, on request, what chemicals are present (or absent) in their products. This typically requires a combination of supplier declarations, contractual warranties, SDS and technical data sheet review, product specifications, and—where risk remains—targeted laboratory testing. Generic statements such as ‘PFAS-free’ or ‘to the best of our knowledge’ are unlikely to be sufficient on their own. The practical compliance standard is whether the business has implemented a reasonable, documented and risk-based assurance process that can withstand regulatory scrutiny.

PFAS regulation in Australia is not limited to product supply. Waste handling, storage and disposal are a central and often higher-risk part of the compliance framework. PFAS are highly persistent chemicals that resist degradation and can migrate through soil, groundwater and surface water. This mobility creates a long-term contamination risk, particularly where materials are disposed of, stockpiled or processed through waste systems. From a regulatory perspective, this shifts PFAS from a product compliance issue to an environmental liability issue.

Key implications include controlled handling and disposal requirements and PFAS-containing waste may need to be classified and managed as a controlled or hazardous waste stream, depending on jurisdiction and concentration. This can trigger requirements for:

In many cases, standard commercial waste disposal routes are not appropriate.

Accumulation of PFAS-containing materials - whether unsold inventory, returns, recalled goods or manufacturing waste - can constitute a ‘stockpile’ under environmental frameworks. Poorly managed stockpiles create risks of leaching, runoff and environmental release, particularly where exposed to weather or stored on unsealed surfaces. Regulators expect storage to be designed to prevent release, including containment, segregation and appropriate site controls.

Landfills, wastewater treatment systems and recycling processes can act as secondary sources of PFAS contamination. PFAS can leach from disposed products into landfill leachate, pass through wastewater treatment systems, or be redistributed through recycled materials. This means that disposal does not eliminate risk - it can transfer it into other parts of the environment, which regulators are increasingly scrutinising.

Businesses may retain responsibility for PFAS-containing materials even after they leave their direct control. If waste is misclassified, improperly transported or disposed of at an unsuitable facility, liability can flow back to the original holder or generator. This creates a need for due diligence not just at the point of disposal, but across the entire waste chain, including contractor selection and verification of disposal outcomes.

In most jurisdictions, environmental legislation imposes a general duty to prevent environmental harm. Failure to properly manage PFAS-containing waste—particularly where contamination occurs—may breach this duty, even in the absence of a specific PFAS offence. The PFAS National Environmental Management Plan (NEMP) provides nationally agreed guidance on managing PFAS contamination, including stockpiling, transport, reuse and disposal. However, it is not directly binding law. Implementation and enforcement are driven by state and territory regulators, and requirements can vary depending on local legislation, licensing frameworks and regulator expectations.

The regulatory landscape is continuing to evolve rapidly. According to recent Q1 2026 regulatory updates, Australia is actively considering expanding Schedule 7 restrictions to additional PFAS, including PFHpS, PFNS and PFDS and their related substances. This reflects a broader global trend toward regulating PFAS as a class rather than addressing individual substances in isolation. Other key trends include:

While many of these developments are still at the proposal stage, they indicate a clear direction of travel toward broader and more stringent controls.

For most businesses, compliance with PFAS regulation is less about absolute certainty and more about demonstrating a reasonable, risk-based approach. At a minimum, this typically involves:

The IChEMS Minimum Standards reinforce this approach by requiring businesses to identify risks, implement control measures, and manage chemicals and waste in an environmentally responsible way.

PFAS regulation in Australia has moved from a largely guidance-based framework to a system with enforceable restrictions, particularly for high-risk substances such as PFOS, PFOA and PFHxS. For retailers and importers, the key risk is no longer theoretical. The focus is now on whether a business can demonstrate that it understands its products, its supply chain and its chemical risks—and has taken reasonable steps to manage them.