.jpg)
© SERHII stock.adobe.com (AI generated)
Taiwan's Ministry of Environment (MOENV) has proposed significant revisions to its draft measure listing PFAS as chemical substances of concern, following industry feedback that prompted a one-year delay in the regulation's implementation.
The ministry's Chemicals Administration (CHA) presented the revised draft of the 'Listing of PFAS and their operational management' at an online consultation meeting on 24 June, attended by government agencies, industry associations, companies and other stakeholders, including universities and an NGO.
Under the revised proposal, the number of listed substances would fall from 269 to 182, divided into two annexes:
- annex 1, covering 112 non-polymer substances, including perfluoroalkyl acids (PFAAs), their precursors and other per- and polyfluoroalkyl compounds; and
- annex 2, covering 70 PFAS polymers.
The original annex 3, which covered 30 PFAS gases, including fluorinated gases (F-gases) and hydrofluoroolefins (HFOs), has been removed. The CHA said these substances overlap with greenhouse gas (GHG) controls under the Climate Change Response Act and that regulating them under both regimes could affect the transition away from high global warming potential (GWP) refrigerants. The agency said it will continue discussions with the ministry's Climate Change Administration (CCA) and Department of Atmospheric Environment on a consistent management approach.
Despite the narrower scope, the changes do not represent a wholesale relaxation of PFAS controls. Of the 87 substances removed from the draft, 14 long-chain perfluorocarboxylic acids (LC-PFCAs), their salts and related compounds included on the indicative list adopted at the 21st meeting of the Stockholm Convention's Persistent Organic Pollutants Review Committee (POPRC-21) would instead be designated as toxic chemical substances through a separate amendment to the toxic chemicals listing.
A further 14 substances whose status under the OECD's PFAS definition remains disputed, together with 34 fluoropolymers identified in the OECD's 2025 fluoropolymer report, will remain under evaluation alongside the 32 removed gases, with seven substances overlapping between categories. One substance, hexafluoropropylene trimer, has also been reclassified from annex 1 to annex 2.
Threshold raised tenfold
The draft would raise the control concentration for all listed substances from 0.1% to 1% by weight. The CHA said the carcinogenic, mutagenic or reprotoxic (CMR) status of the 269 PFAS originally proposed for listing remains disputed and that chemical information disclosure standards should align with those applied by the Ministry of Labor (MOL) under the UN Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS).
The agency added that it will continue to collect scientific evidence on PFAS CMR properties and may revise the threshold again in the future.
Labelling
Labelling requirements have also been streamlined. The original draft required polymers and gases at concentrations between the threshold and 30% to be labelled with one of four category-specific terms – fluoropolymer, perfluoropolyether, fluorinated gas or hydrofluoroolefin. The revised draft replaces these with a single supplementary label, "per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances", for all annex 1 and annex 2 substances at or above the control concentration.
According to the CHA, the change will simplify compliance and improve the transfer of hazard information through supply chains.
The broader obligation structure remains largely unchanged. Manufacturing, importing, selling, using or storing annex 1 substances at concentrations of 1% or above would trigger approval, monthly recordkeeping, quarterly reporting, labelling and safety data sheet (SDS) requirements.
For annex 2 polymers, only manufacture and import would be regulated. At concentrations of 30% or above, full Toxic and Concerned Chemical Substances Control Act (TCCSCA) obligations would apply, while products containing between 1% and 30% would only require the supplementary PFAS label. Sale, use, storage, export, transport and disposal of annex 2 substances would remain outside the scope of the measure. Testing, research, educational and analytical uses would be exempt for both annexes.
The draft also expands exemptions for substances and articles regulated under other laws. The Fire Services Act, covering fire safety equipment, would be added to the list, bringing the total number of exempting laws to 21. The CHA said it will also accommodate a request from the Ministry of National Defense (MND) to exempt military uses by military agencies.
Timelines
The measure, issued under the TCCSCA, would now take effect on 1 January 2027, one year later than originally planned. The CHA said it expects to formally publish the final version no earlier than the end of this year and cautioned that all compliance deadlines will be adjusted to reflect the actual publication date, meaning the dates outlined below could be pushed back further if publication is delayed.
Existing operators would be required to begin keeping monthly operational records from the effective date, with quarterly reports due on 10 April, 10 July, 10 October and 10 January each year. The first reporting deadline would therefore fall on 10 April 2027.
Reflecting industry requests for a longer transition period, operators would then have two years – until 1 January 2029 – to complete container, packaging and site labelling, prepare SDSs and obtain approval documents. As a result, companies would be required to record and report PFAS activities for two years before the deadline for holding an approval document takes effect.
Penalties
The CHA highlighted existing TCCSCA penalties for recordkeeping and reporting violations, including fines ranging from NT$30,000 to NT$300,000 (approximately $927 to $9,273) and orders to rectify non-compliance. Repeated or serious violations can result in suspension of operations, business closures, or revocation of registrations and permits.
Consultation feedback
Stakeholders had until 30 June to submit written comments on the revised proposal. The CHA also invited companies to suggest common abbreviations or short names for listed substances for possible inclusion in the final announcement, after industry representatives argued that the published Chinese and English chemical names are impractical for labelling purposes.
More than 40 companies and industry associations submitted comments and questions during the consultation, including DuPont, Solvay, Daikin, AGC, Chemours, Honeywell, BASF, Dow, W L Gore, the American Chemistry Council (ACC), Japan's fluorochemical and fluorocarbon industry associations, and semiconductor groups SEMI and the Taiwan Semiconductor Industry Association (TSIA).
The WTO notification of the measure also drew three comments, all from Japanese companies or industry associations, in addition to more than 40 domestic submissions.
Pressure for stricter controls
Not all stakeholder pressure has favoured a softer approach. Taiwan's legislature froze NT$5m (approximately US$154,559) of the CHA's 2026 administrative budget pending a report on strengthening controls for unlisted PFAS, while the Control Yuan opened an investigation into the agency's PFAS regulatory implementation in February 2025.
At the consultation meeting, a civil society organisation criticised the extended implementation schedule – under which some obligations would not fully take effect until 2029 – and urged the ministry to abandon its positive-list approach in favour of regulating PFAS as a chemical family, similar to proposals under development in the EU.
Outlook
The CHA stressed that the draft remains under review. It said the measure is intended to establish source management and hazard information disclosure requirements rather than use restrictions, and noted that it is separately evaluating more than 300 additional PFAS for possible designation as toxic or concerned chemical substances.
That work would come on top of the 508 PFAS already listed as toxic chemical substances under Taiwan's implementation of the Stockholm Convention.