Over the last decade, sustainable fashion advocates have brought issues like textile waste, carbon emissions, and supply chain opacity to the attention of state and federal lawmakers. Slowly, that attention is turning into legislation that’s beginning to take effect across the United States.
In many cases, the aim of these new policies is to put the responsibility on fashion brands to invest in initiatives like circularity and climate disclosures, rather than placing the burden on customers alone. But with so many new regulations, it can be difficult for both retailers and shoppers to keep track of what’s already required, what’s been proposed, and what it all means for the future of fashion.
Here are the latest fashion policies in the United States, and the ways in which investing in a resale program may help your brand comply with new requirements.
Extended producer responsibility (EPR) is an environmental policy that requires companies to manage what happens to their products after they enter waste streams. In many states, EPR programs have been in place for products like mattresses, paint, and batteries for a number of years. Now, textiles are being added to the conversation, primarily because textile waste has increased by an estimated 80% over the last 20 years.
For textile and fashion companies, EPR policies make brands responsible for collecting, repairing, and recycling clothes rather than allowing them to accumulate in landfills.
California’s Responsible Textile Recovery Act, also known as SB 707, was signed into law by Governor Gavin Newsom on September 28. The act will require producers of apparel with more than $1 million in annual sales to join a producer responsibility organization (PRO), which will help brands manage the collection, transportation, repair, sorting, and recycling of apparel and textile articles in the state. Companies that do not abide by the requirements will be subject to civil penalties of up to $50,000 per day of violation.
California’s Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery will have until March 2026 to create the PRO, which will establish more concrete systems around textile circularity and sorting. Even though the details are still being sorted out, resale will play a crucial role in the final PRO, because the law specifically states that “authorized collectors and authorized sorters may divert reusable covered products for sale in secondhand markets.”
In New York, Senate Bill S6654, which is still being negotiated in the state’s Environmental Conservation Committee, follows a similar structure to California’s textile EPR program. If passed, the bill would require makers of apparel or textiles, either individually or cooperatively with other companies, to submit a collection plan for any apparel or textile that is unsuitable for reuse by a consumer in its current condition. Those collection plans would need to include a description of the “methods to be used to reuse or recycle discarded covered products to ensure that the components are transformed or remanufactured into finished products.” Recommerce technology providers, including Archive, already help brands with this kind of remanufacturing and reuse work, and will play a key role in helping companies abide by New York’s law, should it pass in the next legislative session.
Massachusetts in 2022 banned textiles from traditional disposal and now requires consumers to deposit used bedding, clothing, curtains, fabric, footwear, towels, and similar items in specified bins. Those textiles are then donated to organizations in the state that resell, reuse, or recycle them. Nearly half of the items collected in Massachusetts are usable clothes that are resold, while the rest are either turned into wiping cloths or downcycled into fiber pulp.
As an increasing number of states work to prevent clothing from entering landfills, resale will play a larger role in making sure good condition clothing finds a new home where it can be worn for longer.
The production process involved in making new clothes—including harvesting raw materials like cotton, processing and dyeing fabrics, and sewing the garments—is resource-intensive and responsible for an estimated 4% of total global carbon emissions. As a result, a handful of states have brought forward legislation that will require large companies, including fashion brands, to disclose information about their carbon emissions and the climate risks associated with their business.
The New York Fashion Act (S4746A), which is still being negotiated in the state’s Consumer Protection Committee, would require fashion companies with $100 million or more in annual revenue to set and achieve science based targets in order to sell to the New York market. Science based targets require that the pace of carbon emissions reductions are in line with the scale required to keep global warming below 2 degrees Celsius from pre-industrial levels, as set out in the Paris Agreement.
In California, the Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act (SB 253) and the Climate-Related Financial Risk Act (SB 261), both of which passed in 2023, mandate climate-related disclosures. SB 253 requires companies doing business in California with revenues greater than $1 billion to report their emissions comprehensively beginning in 2026. SB 261, meanwhile, requires businesses with annual revenues over $500 million operating in California to disclose climate-related financial risks and mitigation strategies to the public on a regular basis.
The federal government also has new climate transparency regulations that impact most US industries, including fashion. In March, the Securities and Exchange Commission adopted final rules that require US companies registered with the SEC to report their scope 1 and scope 2 emissions annually.
Separately, Congressman Sean Casten and Congresswoman María Elvira Salazar introduced the bipartisan Voluntary Sustainable Apparel Labeling Act in July, which, if passed, would develop a label to place on clothing products that will contain Environmental Protection Agency-verified information relating to the carbon footprint of that item.
With more attention and transparency around carbon emissions and climate risks, apparel and footwear companies will be pressured to find ways to mitigate their impact on the environment. That’s where resale comes in: it allows existing brands to minimize the carbon emissions associated with new clothing production while still increasing revenue.
Ultra-fashion brands are taking advantage of global trade loopholes to save money on tariffs and other costs. That’s allowed ultra-fast fashion brands, particularly those based overseas, to keep their prices low while domestic brands struggle to compete. Regulators in the US are now cracking down on this practice to level the playing field.
Federally, there are multiple active bills, as well as a presidential executive order, that seek to do away with de minimis, a trade loophole that allows foreign companies to ship individual packages worth $800 or less to the US tariff free. One such bill, The Americas Act, would allocate $14 billion to loans and grants for businesses involved in reuse, recycling, repair, rental, and reverse logistics, as well as establish a $100 million public education program for textile reuse and recycling.
Resale remains one of the simplest ways for brands to both shrink their carbon footprints and comply with emerging rules around textile reuse and recycling. But executing a seamless and scalable recommerce model is often difficult for retailers to execute on their own.
Looking for direction on how your brand should approach resale, or wondering how to get started? Reach out to our team at info@archiveresale.com
.png)
.png)
