SUMMARY:

• On 2 July, the European Commission and the JRC presented to the European Parliament’s ENVI Committee the work undertaken so far on the ESPR Delegated Act for Textiles. Members can find a recording of the hearing at this link.
• The exchange was primarily political, as the European Parliament does not formally shape the Commission’s preparatory work at this stage. However, it provided useful indications on the expected timeline, the current direction of the JRC preparatory study, and the initial reactions of MEPs.

MORE INFORMATION

Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea, speaking for the Commission, indicated that the call for evidence and public consultation on the impact assessment are expected in Q3 2026. The next Ecodesign Forum meeting should take place after this step, while the impact assessment is expected to be finalised in Q1 2027. The WTO notification and Have Your Say consultation on the final draft are currently expected around mid-2027.

Speaking for the JRC, Caroline Lambert indicated that the preparatory study for the DA is now expected to be finalised in September 2026 and will remain a central element of the impact assessment. DG ENV also mentioned that the revision of the Textile Labelling Regulation is still being discussed by the Commission.

A few points were particularly relevant for FESI:

• on robustness, the JRC confirmed that it is approaching durability through robustness, while acknowledging the difficulty of measuring absolute product lifetime. This is broadly in line with FESI’s position that robustness can be a pragmatic starting point, provided the methodology is refined;
• on repairability, the JRC referred to information requirements on the availability of repair services, and potentially on component characteristics and repair instructions, with some elements appearing to remain optional or only required where available;
• on environmental footprint, the JRC referred to impacts from raw materials through to the point of purchase. This partly reflects a point FESI has been strongly advocating for, namely the need to account properly for raw materials. However, the JRC also continued to defend the possible use of performance classes, which FESI remains opposed to;
• on recyclability, the JRC maintained its proposal for a recyclability score based on how product design enables recyclability;
• on recycled and organic content, the JRC referred to performance requirements based on the percentage of material used;
• on subtances of concern, the JRC referred to disclosure and traceability, while also acknowledging that ESPR may not be the most appropriate tool to address chemical risk management.

MEPs broadly supported the objective of improving textile sustainability, but differed on the appropriate level of ambition and regulatory approach. Some MEPs, particularly from the EPP, warned against excessive labelling, regulatory burden and the risk of confusing consumers, calling for a careful and evidence-based approach. Others, including S&D, Renew, Greens/EFA and The Left speakers, called for stronger binding requirements, faster implementation, closer links with EPR fee modulation, and tougher action on harmful substances, textile waste and fast fashion.