State PFAS laws are here.Minnesota’s deadline is first: September 15.
PFAS Matrix is the compliance platform for consumer brands. One supplier dataset, every state, starting with the report Minnesota wants by September 15.
of suppliers reply, even after months of chasing. Getting that data out of them is what we do.
sourcehow far the EPA underestimated the cost of getting PFAS data from suppliers. The part we handle for you.
sourcenow regulate PFAS in your products. We track all 52 rules for you, with citations.
see all →The form takes an afternoon.
The supplier chase takes months.
States made filing cheap on purpose. Minnesota charges a flat $800 and publishes a free template. What nobody solved is upstream: suppliers who don’t answer, answer late, or refuse chemical names as confidential. Well resourced industry groups report response rates under 40% after months of trying.
And “we don’t use PFAS” isn’t an exit. Minnesota expects you to keep asking until information is known, and to keep records proving you did. When a retailer, regulator, or plaintiff asks, the paper trail is the product.
Check
Map every SKU against 16 states' bans, labels, and filing duties, with citations.
Chase
Send supplier attestation requests that don't get ignored, with automatic reminders and a one-click reply link, no supplier account needed.
Prove
Every ask, answer, and escalation lands in an evidence log, one click from a due diligence report.
File
Turn collected answers into a Minnesota upload ready for PRISM, with Washington's format next.
The state’s portal wasn’t built for small brands. Your on-ramp to it can be.
We prepare your data to drop into Minnesota’s PRISM system: correct product grouping, the exact concentration ranges from Minn. R. 7026.0030, chemical names matched to the state’s list, and unknowns handled the way the rule allows. You (or we, as your authorized consultant) hit submit.
“The product was nearly impossible to use, plagued with IT and substantive errors…”
Sixteen states. Four kinds of obligation.
Minnesota PFAS Report
We do the part that takes work: chasing your suppliers, building the evidence record, and handing you a report ready to file, with extension help if you need it.
Request a call →The platform
One dataset that checks your obligations, chases your suppliers, keeps the proof, and files in every state.
Full pricing →FAQ
Who counts as a “manufacturer” under Minnesota's law?+
More companies than you'd think: the producer, but also the brand owner whose name is on the product, and, when neither has a US presence, the importer or first domestic distributor. Selling into Minnesota through e-commerce counts as selling in Minnesota.
My products are marketed PFAS free. Am I done?+
Not automatically. A PFAS free claim still needs supplier verification behind it. Minnesota's standard requires you to keep asking suppliers until information is known, and Prop 65 plaintiffs test 'PFAS free' claims with lab panels. If your supply chain answers confirm no intentionally added PFAS, you may have nothing to report, but you want the paper trail proving it.
What does the Minnesota report actually require?+
For each product (grouping of similar products is allowed): a description with a product code (UPC, HTS, or SKU), each intentionally added PFAS by name or CAS number, its function, and its amount in state defined concentration ranges, plus an $800 one time fee per manufacturer. Unknowns are permitted if you document your efforts to find out.
What happens if I just… don't file?+
Minnesota has stated a cooperative first cycle posture toward companies that file best available information and document their efforts. But the statute lets MPCA direct retailers to stop selling a noncompliant manufacturer's products. For a consumer brand, delisting is the real risk, not just fines.
Is this legal advice?+
No. PFAS Matrix is compliance software and information. Every rule we show carries its citation, source link, and the date we last verified it, and flags where rules are contested. For judgment calls, bring your counsel. We make the factual groundwork fast and defensible.
Which states actually require filings, versus bans or labels?+
Today: Minnesota (reports due Sept 15, 2026), Washington (reports due Jan 31, 2027), and New Mexico (labeling and reporting from Jan 1, 2027, currently under legal challenge). Connecticut requires labeling plus notification since July 1, 2026. Twelve more states have category bans, where you mostly need to know what you can sell and prove what's in your products.