US State PFAS Bans on Food Packaging: A 2026 Map for Buyers

Quick answer. By 2026 at least twelve US states restrict intentionally added PFAS in food packaging, and they do not use the same definition of compliance. California sets a total organic fluorine threshold of 100 ppm; most other states prohibit "intentionally added" PFAS without a numeric test. The federal floor moved in January 2025, when the FDA determined that 35 food contact notifications authorising PFAS grease-proofing were no longer effective. For a buyer, the practical requirement is the same in every state: a total organic fluorine test report and a signed declaration of compliance, per SKU — not per factory.

1. What actually changed, and when

PFAS entered paper food packaging for one reason: it made paper resist grease. A fluorochemical coating dropped the surface energy enough that oil would not wick through board, at an add-on of a fraction of a percent by weight.

The regulatory sequence since 2020 has been unusually fast for a chemicals file.

January 2025. The FDA determined that 35 food contact notifications authorising PFAS-based grease-proofing agents for paper and paperboard were no longer effective. Manufacturers had already stopped selling those substances for food-contact use in 2024; the compliance deadline for exhausting existing inventory was 30 June 2025.

2022 onwards, at state level. States moved ahead of the federal government, and they moved in different directions. That divergence, not the federal action, is what makes sourcing difficult today.

August 2026. The EU's Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation becomes fully applicable, with its own PFAS limits and its own documentation chain.

The net effect: the question is no longer "does my packaging contain PFAS" but "can I prove it, to whom, in what format, for which SKU". Those are different problems.

2. The two definitions that decide your test

Almost every compliance failure we see comes from confusing these two standards.

"Intentionally added." The law prohibits PFAS that were deliberately introduced into the product or its components. Trace contamination from recycled fibre, process water or equipment is not a violation. This is the standard used by most states, and it is proved by a supplier declaration plus a manufacturing statement — not necessarily by a lab test.

Total organic fluorine (TOF) threshold. A numeric ceiling on measured organic fluorine in the finished article. California's plant-fibre packaging rule uses 100 ppm. Some procurement teams now specify 50 ppm as an internal standard because it sits below every published threshold. This standard is proved only by a test — a declaration cannot satisfy it.

Why it matters commercially: a supplier who can sign a declaration but cannot produce a TOF report is compliant in most states and non-compliant in California. A supplier who has a TOF result below 50 ppm satisfies both. If you sell nationally, specify the stricter test once and stop managing a patchwork.

3. The 2026 state map

The table below compiles enacted restrictions on PFAS in food packaging. Treat it as a sourcing checklist, not legal advice: dates and thresholds are amended frequently, several states phase requirements in by product category, and two of the entries below are reported with conflicting effective dates across secondary sources.

Two entries deserve a note. Minnesota's Amara's Law phases additional product bans through 2032, so a packaging spec that clears today may not clear in three years. Maine's plant-fibre rule is the most recent to bite, and it lands squarely on molded-fibre and paper containers — the two product families most likely to have used a fluorochemical grease barrier.

4. What the EU does differently

Regulation (EU) 2025/40 applies from 12 August 2026 and replaces the 1994 packaging directive with a directly applicable regulation — no national transposition, no room for member-state variation.

For food-contact packaging it sets three PFAS limits: 25 ppb for any single PFAS, 250 ppb for the sum of targeted PFAS, and 50 ppm for total PFAS including polymers. Heavy metals are capped at 100 mg/kg in total. Where total fluorine exceeds 50 ppm, the manufacturer or importer must supply downstream buyers with fluorine content documentation.

One structural difference matters for specification: the EU limit applies to the whole packaging unit, not just the substrate. Inks, varnishes and adhesives are in scope. A compliant board with a non-compliant ink is a non-compliant cup. Most US state laws are written around the packaging material; the EU's scope is wider, and buyers who spec only the board get caught on the print.

There is also a grandfathering provision: packaging placed on the EU market before 12 August 2026 may remain on the market. That is a transition allowance, not a compliance route — it does not help anyone placing new orders after that date.

For the EU documentation chain, see EU PPWR compliance.

5. The three documents to collect

Every conversation with a supplier should end with these three, per SKU:

1. Total organic fluorine test report, from an accredited laboratory, dated within twelve months, naming the specific product — not the product family. A report for "paper bowls" that does not state capacity and board grade is not usable in an audit.

2. Declaration of compliance, signed, listing the regulation and the threshold it is being measured against. A generic "PFAS-free" letter is not a declaration; it does not say which standard was applied.

3. Barrier technology disclosure. What replaced the fluorochemical — a starch or clay barrier, an acrylic aqueous dispersion, a silicone, or a plastic film. This is not strictly required by law, but a supplier who will not tell you is a supplier who has not tested.

Ask for the same three on lids, sleeves and printed wraps. They are separate articles with separate chemistry, and they are where audits most often find the gap.

6. Where compliance usually fails

Four places, in descending order of frequency:

The lid. Cups get specified and tested; lids get assumed. A PE lid is fine; a lid with a grease-resistant liner may not be.

The ink and varnish. Especially on high-coverage print. Under the EU rule these are explicitly in scope.

The recycled content. Recycled fibre can carry trace PFAS from its feedstock. This does not breach an "intentionally added" standard, but it can breach a TOF threshold. If you specify 50 ppm, know what your recycled content is doing.

The second source. Buyers test the first factory and not the backup. A dual-sourced SKU is only compliant if both sources are.

7. What to put in your specification

A one-page clause that ends most of these conversations:

1. The applicable standard — name it, and state whether it is "intentionally added" or a TOF threshold in ppm

1. The jurisdiction list — which states, and whether EU is in scope for this SKU

1. The documents required, per SKU, with a renewal date

1. Scope: substrate, ink, varnish, adhesive, lid, sleeve — listed explicitly

1. The change-notification clause: any change to barrier chemistry or supplier requires re-testing before shipment

1. The remedy: what happens if a test comes back above threshold after delivery

Item 5 is the one buyers forget, and it is the one that prevents a compliant supply becoming non-compliant quietly.

Our PFAS-free range is specified on TOF results rather than declarations, across PE, PLA, aqueous and PP-lined constructions, and we supply the three documents with each order. If you need to check your current packaging before switching, send us a sample and we will tell you what we would test for.

8. FAQ

Is PFAS banned federally in the US? No. The FDA action removed authorisations for PFAS grease-proofing in paper and paperboard food packaging; it is not a general ban. State laws fill the gap, and they differ.

Does a "PFAS-free" declaration satisfy California? No. California's plant-fibre rule uses a 100 ppm total organic fluorine threshold, which requires a test. A declaration alone does not demonstrate it.

Can recycled paper packaging be non-compliant? Yes, on a TOF threshold, because recycled fibre can carry trace PFAS from its feedstock. It is generally not a breach of an "intentionally added" standard.

If my packaging was on the EU market before August 2026, am I fine? Existing stock may remain on the market. New orders placed after 12 August 2026 must comply.

Are lids and sleeves covered? Under the EU rule, the limit applies to the whole packaging unit, so yes. Under most state laws the written scope is the packaging material, but a buyer auditing you will ask about the lid anyway.

Sources

• US FDA, 35 food contact notifications for PFAS grease-proofing determined no longer effective, January 2025; inventory exhaustion deadline 30 June 2025.

• State statutes and secondary compliance trackers, compiled October 2026. Effective dates and thresholds are amended frequently; two entries above are reported with conflicting dates across sources. Verify with counsel before relying.

• Regulation (EU) 2025/40 (PPWR), applying from 12 August 2026; European Commission implementing guidance and FAQ, 30 March 2026.

• Scope of the EU limit covering inks, varnishes and adhesives: Commission guidance summary published by Taiwan's Bureau of Foreign Trade, 2026.