Though the US and EU are separated by over 5,000 physical miles, their legal positions on green fashion are becoming more and more divergent, reported Just Style.
The European Parliament said this week that a number of greenwashing techniques, such as making general environmental claims and misrepresenting products as repairable when they aren't, will be prohibited by its new proposed rule.
This is in addition to the launch of its digital product passport and the EU Parliament's impending approval of laws meant to lessen the fashion industry's environmental impact.
It should be emphasized that the EU's proposed legislation is not flawless, and some trade associations have said that the EU Parliament missed important possibilities and lacked clarity in its negotiating mandate for the EU ecodesign framework for sustainable products.
Nonetheless, it is undeniably headed in the right path.
On the other hand, during a legislative hearing in July, the US removed US California SB707, also referred to as the Responsible Textile Recovery Act of 2023.
The proposed measure would impose the first-ever Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) program for textiles, apparel, and textile goods in the United States, making garment manufacturers accountable for the recycling and collecting of their products.
Earlier that month, the European Commission unveiled its proposed regulations for the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR). These regulations would hold fashion firms and retailers accountable for the whole lifecycle of textile products and mandate their financial support for the sustainable treatment of textile waste throughout the EU.
At the time, the American Apparel & Footwear Association (AAFA) contended that the delay would allow all parties involved to gain insight from the EU's ongoing Extended Producer Responsibility program as well as California's own pilot program, which was authorized last year for textiles.
When it comes to addressing forced labor in the fashion supply chain—more especially, in the Xinjiang region—the US has set the standard, and the EU has followed suit.
Thus, the fundamental query still stands: Why is the US taking so long to address the fashion industry's very significant and ever-growing environmental impact?