Regulatory actions and policy initiatives have been adopted in many countries to reduce the prevalence of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and the harm they cause to health and the environment. This article lists such actions by jurisdiction. PFAS have also been the subject of multiple lawsuits worldwide. In the United States, settlements stemming from PFAS pollution claims have reached $18 billion by 2024. In 2023, Sweden's Supreme Court set a legal precedent by awarding damages to citizens who were supplied PFAS contaminated drinking water.
Australia In 2017, the ABC's current affairs program Four Corners reported that the storage and use of firefighting foams containing perfluorinated surfactants at Australian Defence Force facilities around Australia had contaminated nearby water resources. In 2019, remediation efforts at RAAF Base Tindal and the adjacent town of Katherine were ongoing. In the 2022 Australian federal budget $428million was allocated for works at HMAS Albatross, RAAF Base Amberley, RAAF Base Pearce and RAAF Base Richmond including funding to remediate PFAS contamination. As of 2026, "Australia [... is suing] 3M for $2bn over 'forever chemicals' in firefighting foam", according to a media outlet.Lam, L., Australia sues US giant 3M over 'forever chemicals' in firefighting foam, BBC News, accessed on 17 September 2026
Canada Although PFAS are not manufactured in Canada, they may be present in imported goods and products. In 2008, products containing PFOS as well as PFOA were banned in Canada, with exceptions for products used in firefighting, the military, and some forms of ink and photo media.
Health Canada has published drinking water guidelines for maximum concentrations of PFOS and PFOA to protect the health of Canadians, including children, over a lifetime's exposure to these substances. The maximum allowable concentration for PFOS under the guidelines is 0.0002 milligrams per liter. The maximum allowable concentration for PFOA is 0.0006 milligrams per liter. In August 2024, Health Canada established an objective of 30 ng/L for the sum of the concentration of 25 PFASPFCAs: C4–C12; PFSAs: C4–C8; PFECAs: PFMOPrA, PFMOBA, 3,6-OPFHpA, HFPO-DA, DONA; PFESAs: 6:2 Cl-PFESA, 8:2 Cl-PFESA, PFEESA; FTSs: 4:2 FTS, 6:2 FTS, 8:2 FTS detected in drinking water.
European Union Many PFAS are either not covered by European legislation or are excluded from registration obligations under the EU Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) chemical regulation. Several PFAS have been detected in drinking water, municipal wastewater, and landfill leachates worldwide.
In 2019, the European Council requested the European Commission to develop an action plan to eliminate all non-essential uses of PFAS due to the growing evidence of adverse effects caused by exposure to these substances; the evidence for the widespread occurrence of PFAS in water, soil, articles, and waste; and the threat it can pose to drinking water. Germany, the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, and Sweden submitted a restriction proposal based on the REACH regulation to achieve a European ban on the production, use, sale and import of PFAS. The proposal states that a ban is necessary for all use of PFAS, with different periods for different applications when the ban takes effect (immediately after the restriction comes into force, five years afterward, or 12 years afterward), depending on the function and the availability of alternatives. The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) described it as "the most extensive [chemical restriction] in the history of the EU".ECHA, REACH restriction proposal on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substance (PFAS) – questions and answers, published on 26 March 2026, accessed on 18 September 2026 The proposal has not assessed the use of PFAS in medicines, plant protection products, and biocides because specific regulations apply to those substances (Biocidal Products Regulation, Plant Protection Products Regulation, Medicinal Products Regulation) that have an explicit authorization procedure that focuses on risk for health and the environment. The proposal was submitted on 13 January 2023 and published by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) on 7 February. From 22 March to 21 September, citizens, companies, and other organizations commented on the proposal during a public consultation. Based on the information in the restriction proposal and the consultation, two committees from ECHA formulate an opinion on the risk and socio-economic aspects of the proposed restriction. Within a year of publication, the opinions are sent to the European Commission, which makes a final proposal that is submitted to the EU Member States for discussion and decision. Eighteen months after the publication of the restriction decision (which may differ from the original proposal), it will enter into force. In 2025, the "background document" for the proposed restriction, incorporating comments from thousands of stakeholders, was published.
The REACH Committee for Socio-Economic Analysis (SEAC) is expected to adopt its final opinion on the proposal and submit it to the European Commission by the end of 2026. This step "will conclude ECHA's scientific evaluation of the proposed restriction" (see REACH authorisation procedure).
The chemical industry organisation ChemSec has noted that PFAS are used extensively and called for transitional periods for the implementation of restrictions so that supply chains can adapt: "the transition period will be crucial ... even 12 years won't be long enough" in some cases.Jonatan Kleimark, in Holmes, T., "Nothing lasts forever, not even forever chemicals", Supply Management, April-June 2023, page 30
Italy An estimated 127,000 residents in the Veneto region have been exposed to contamination through tap water, in what is thought to be Europe's biggest PFAS-related environmental disaster. While Italy's National Health Institute (ISS, Istituto Superiore di Sanità) set the threshold limit of PFOA in the bloodstream at 8 nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL), some residents had reached 262 and some industrial employees reach 91,900 ng/mL. In 2021 some data was disclosed by Greenpeace and local citizens after a long legal battle against the Veneto Region and ISS, which for years has denied access to data, despite values known since or even before 2017. The Veneto region has not carried out further monitoring or taken resolutive actions to eliminate pollution and reduce, at least gradually, the contamination of non-potable water. Although in 2020 the European Food Safety Agency (EFSA) has reduced by more than four times the maximum tolerable limit of PFAS that can be taken through the diet, the region has not carried out new assessments or implemented concrete actions to protect the population and the agri-food and livestock sectors. Some limits were added to monitoring the geographical area, which does not include the orange zone and other areas affected by contamination, as well as the insufficiency of analysis on important productions widespread in the areas concerned: eggs (up to 37,100 ng/kg), fish (18,600 ng/kg) spinach and radicchio (only one sampling carried out), kiwis, melons, watermelons, cereals (only one sample was analyzed), soy, wines and apples.PFAS negli alimenti dell'area rossa del Veneto, Greenpeace.
Sweden Sweden has up to 90 thousand areas contaminated by PFAS, which is a serious environmental issue, according to Swedish Environmental Protection Agency.
Highly contaminated drinking water has been detected at several locations in Sweden. Such locations include Arvidsjaur, Lulnäset, Uppsala and Visby. In 2013, PFAS were detected at high concentrations in one of the two municipality drinking water treatment plants in the town of Ronneby, in southern Sweden. Concentrations of PFHxS and PFOS were found at 1700 ng/L and 8000 ng/L, respectively. The source of contamination was later found to be a military fire-fighting exercise site in which PFAS-containing fire-fighting foam had been used since the mid-1980s.
Additionally, low-level contaminated drinking water has also been shown to be a significant exposure source of PFOA, PFNA, PFHxS and PFOS for Swedish adolescents (ages 10–21). Even though the median concentrations in the municipality drinking water were below one ng/L for each individual PFAS, positive associations were found between adolescent serum PFAS concentrations and PFAS concentrations in drinking water.
Japan A study of public water bodies ending in March 2022 showed that the sum of PFOS and PFOA concentrations exceeded 50 ng/L in 81 out of 1,133 test sites and in some cases are present at elevated levels in blood. This has led to pressure to increase regulations.
New Zealand The Environmental Protection Authority (New Zealand) has banned the use of PFAS in cosmetic products starting from 31 December 2026. This will make the country one of the first in the world to take this step on PFAS to protect people and the environment.
United Kingdom The environmental consequences of PFAS, especially from firefighting activities, have been recognized since the mid-1990s and came to prominence after the Buncefield explosion on 11 December 2005. The Environment Agency has undertaken a series of projects to understand the scale and nature of PFAS in the environment. The Drinking Water Inspectorate requires water companies to report concentrations of 47 PFAS.
United States
An estimated 26,000 U.S. sites are contaminated with PFAS. More than 200 million Americans are estimated to live in places where the PFAS level in tap water, including PFOA and PFOS levels, exceeds the 1 ppt (part per trillion) limit set in 2022 by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Based on tap water studies from 716 locations from 2016 and 2021, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) found that the PFAS levels exceeded the EPA advisories in approximately 75% of the samples from urban areas and in approximately 25% of the rural area samples.
Certain PFAS are no longer manufactured in the United States as a result of phase-outs including the PFOA Stewardship Program (2010–2015), in which eight major chemical manufacturers agreed to eliminate the use of PFOA and PFOA-related chemicals in their products and emissions from their facilities. However, they are still produced internationally and are imported into the U.S. in consumer goods. Some types of PFAS are voluntarily not included in food packaging.
In 2021, Senators Susan Collins of Maine and Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut proposed the No PFAS in Cosmetics Act in the United States Senate. The bill was also introduced in the United States House of Representatives by Michigan Representative Debbie Dingell, but the Republican Party, supported by the U.S. chemical industry filibustered the bill.
In February 2025, Minnesota became the first state to ban the sale of cookware containing PFAS.
In 2026, Tyco Fire Products agreed to a $10 million settlement with Wisconsin to resolve the 2022 lawsuit regarding PFAS water contamination in the Marinette and Peshtigo areas. The deal required funding for environmental cleanup, continuous monitoring, and the provision of clean water to affected residents for 20 years.
Military bases The water in and around at least 126 U.S. military bases has been contaminated by high levels of PFAS because of their use of firefighting foams since the 1970s, according to a study by the U.S. Department of Defense. Of these, 90 bases reported PFAS contamination that had spread to drinking water or groundwater off the base.