PFAS-related claims are increasingly caught between market demands, technical verifiability, and regulatory assessment. For manufacturers and retailers, it is therefore crucial not only whether a claim is technically accurate, but also how it is understood in the market.
Why claim strategy is more important today
PFAS-related claims are often not interpreted by customers and end consumers in a purely technical sense. Depending on how they are worded or visually presented, they may be understood as environmental or sustainability benefits. When interpreted in this way, they may conflict with the requirements of the Empowering Consumers Directive 2024/825. This increases the importance of a precise claims strategy - especially wherever products are marketed through consumer-facing channels
What EU directive 2024/825 changes
The Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition Directive imposes stricter limits on general environmental and sustainability claims; certain blanket statements will no longer be permitted in the future.
Particularly relevant in practice:
General environmental claims without clear specifications will no longer be permitted in this form
Sustainability labels must be transparent and verifiable
Claims about the entire product are particularly sensitive if they actually apply only to individual components
For communication related to PFAS, this means: The more general, catchier, and badge-like a claim is, the more carefully it must be reviewed and contextualized.
What is particularly sensitive when it comes to PFAS-related claims
Broad, absolute statements
Statements such as “PFAS-free” or “100% PFAS-free” seem unambiguous, but in practice they are often too sweeping.
Badge or label solutions
A graphically highlighted PFAS label can quickly come across in the market as a standalone environmental or trust seal.
Claims about the entire product
If a technical claim actually refers only to the coating but is interpreted in the market as a claim about the entire pan, baking dish, or appliance, this creates an additional risk.
Combinations with logos or product labels
If a PFAS-related claim is used in conjunction with an ILAG logo or ILAG label, it must be clear that the statement refers specifically to the coating in question. It should not be interpreted as a statement about the entire product or system without further evidence.
ILAG’s preferred communication approach
ILAG recommends technology-based, clearly defined communication.
Preferred:
The coating was developed without intentionally added PFAS.
Use with caution:
Made without PFAS.
Not actively recommended:
PFAS-free
100% PFAS-free
Standalone PFAS badges or PFAS logos
What ILAG specifically supports for customers
What remains with the customer
The final decision regarding claims, labels, and their specific use in the market rests with the respective manufacturer or retailer. Particularly in consumer-facing applications, it is also advisable to obtain a legal assessment of the specific communication medium.
Practical recommendations
Anyone who wishes to continue using PFAS-related statements should consider four key factors:
What exactly does the statement refer to?
How is it technically documented or analytically supported?
How is it likely to be understood by the market?
When used in conjunction with logos or labels, does the statement clearly refer to the specific coating in question