HB 1107
In CommitteeHouse
Fashion environmental impact
Concerning environmental impacts of fashion.
This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.
How does a bill become law?
- Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
- Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
- Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
- Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
- Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
- Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
AI Analysis
This bill requires fashion producers to disclose environmental and labor practices related to clothing and footwear sold in Washington, with larger companies providing more detailed information. It directs the Department of Ecology to study and recommend policies to reduce fashion’s environmental impact—including water use, pollution, and carbon emissions—and establishes a fund for environmental projects in vulnerable communities, financed by civil penalties for noncompliance.
- Requires fashion producers to annually disclose to the Department of Ecology: (1) products containing high- or priority chemicals, (2) how sustainability terms like 'green' or 'sustainable' are defined, (3) how unsold inventory is disposed of, and (4) current environmental initiatives.
- Requires large fashion producers (annual worldwide gross income over $100 million) to also disclose environmental due diligence policies, greenhouse gas emissions, recycled content, and working conditions of their operations and direct suppliers.
- Mandates the Department of Ecology to assess policy options (by October 15, 2026, and update by October 15, 2028) for reducing fashion’s environmental impact—including extended producer responsibility and labeling best practices—and submit recommendations to the legislature.
- Authorizes the Department of Ecology to adopt rules, including setting a de minimis size exemption for reporting, and imposes civil penalties of up to $5,000 for first offenses and $10,000 for repeat offenses for noncompliance.
- Creates the Community Environmental and Public Health Improvement Account, funded by civil penalties, to support environmental benefit projects in overburdened and vulnerable communities.
Who is affected
- Fashion producers and brand owners — Fashion producers and brand owners selling in Washington must disclose environmental and labor practices, and may face civil penalties for noncompliance.
- Washington consumers — Consumers may gain more transparent information about the environmental and social impacts of clothing and footwear they purchase.
- State agencies (especially Department of Ecology) — State agencies like the Department of Ecology will gain new authority to collect data, conduct assessments, and enforce disclosure requirements.
- Overburdened and vulnerable communities — Overburdened communities and vulnerable populations may benefit from environmental projects funded by civil penalties collected under the bill.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (5)
Civil penalties are directed into a dedicated fund for environmental benefit projects in overburdened and vulnerable communities, creating a direct, verifiable environmental and public health benefit for communities disproportionately affected by industrial pollution and waste.
EnvironmentPeopleRef: Sec. 6Mandatory disclosure of sustainability claims and environmental due diligence (e.g., recycled content, emissions, chemical use) empowers consumers to make informed purchasing decisions and reduces greenwashing, especially benefiting low-income and environmentally conscious shoppers who rely on transparency to avoid exploitative or hazardous products.
consumer protectionPeopleRef: Sec. 3(1)(b), Sec. 3(2)(a)(i)-(iv)The bill requires the Department of Ecology to assess and recommend policies—including extended producer responsibility and labeling best practices—by 2026 and 2028, with explicit consideration of public health benefits and economic impacts on vulnerable populations, laying groundwork for future regulations that could reduce systemic environmental harms.
EnvironmentPeopleRef: Sec. 4(1)-(2), Sec. 4(4)Requirement for large producers to disclose working conditions—including wage bands, benefit enrollment, and incident rates—enhances labor transparency and enables public oversight of labor practices in global supply chains, supporting worker safety and fair compensation, especially for garment workers in vulnerable countries.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 3(2)(b)Expanded reporting on high- and priority chemicals in apparel and footwear improves state tracking of hazardous substances, supporting early intervention and reducing exposure risks for consumers and workers—particularly children, who may be exposed through hand-me-downs or secondhand goods.
Public SafetyLean peopleRef: Sec. 3(1)(a), Sec. 9
Potential Concerns (3)
Large fashion producers (>$100M global income) must disclose greenhouse gas emissions and working conditions—including detailed wage band data and employee benefit enrollment—which increases compliance costs and administrative burden, potentially deterring market entry or encouraging offshoring of operations to avoid disclosure thresholds.
Business & EmploymentLean industryRef: Sec. 3(2)(a)(iv), Sec. 5(2)Civil penalties of up to $10,000 per repeat offense create financial risk for companies, especially those with thin margins or limited legal resources; while the penalty cap is modest, repeated violations (e.g., across multiple product lines or years) could accumulate to significant fines, disproportionately impacting mid-sized firms near the $100M threshold.
Business & EmploymentIndustryRef: Sec. 5(2)Mandatory disclosure of unsold inventory disposal methods may expose companies to reputational or competitive risk, particularly for fast-fashion retailers that rely on controlled disposal (e.g., landfilling or incineration) to prevent gray-market diversion or counterfeiting—this could lead to defensive business model changes that reduce consumer access to affordable goods.
Business & EmploymentLean industryRef: Sec. 3(1)(c)
Who Is Most Affected
Large fashion brands (>$100M income) face new disclosure and reporting obligations and potential civil penalties; while compliance costs are modest relative to revenue, the requirement to disclose working conditions and emissions may expose labor or environmental violations to public scrutiny, increasing reputational risk.
Consumers gain access to standardized sustainability and labor information, enabling more informed purchasing decisions; however, some may face higher prices if producers pass on compliance costs or shift sourcing to avoid disclosure thresholds.
The Department of Ecology gains new authority to collect data and recommend future regulations, increasing its role in environmental oversight; however, this also increases its regulatory workload and may require additional staffing or funding to implement effectively.
Overburdened and vulnerable communities are explicitly targeted for environmental benefit projects funded by penalties—this creates direct, measurable improvements in local air/water quality and remediation, especially in areas near landfills, ports, or industrial zones.
Small and mid-sized producers (under $100M) face lighter burden (only basic disclosures), but may still incur costs for data collection and reporting; those near the threshold may restructure to stay below it, potentially reducing competition or innovation in the local fashion sector.