Tommy Hilfiger · Waterproof Sports Undergarments
Tommy Hilfiger Men's TH Performance Straight Fit Pants
Likely water-repellent coating-treated; brand silent on PFAS. Check care label.
Tommy Hilfiger's TH Performance pants suggest water-repellent coating treatment, a common PFAS application. The brand discloses nothing about PFAS content or alternatives used.
Still want this one anyway? Check the price on Amazon. We’d swap it.
Material
cotton blend with water-repellent coating treatment
Brand disclosure
Brand is silent on PFAS
Lab data
No public lab test
Why this grade
Waterproof / stain-resistant treatment
water-repellent coating treatments have historically used PFAS.
Category baseline
clothing is a category where PFAS exposure is more common.
No PFAS disclosure
No public statement about PFAS in this product.
The full breakdown
What it's made of and why it matters
These pants are a cotton-polyester blend treated with water-repellent coating (water-repellent coating) coating. The water-repellent coating finish is the primary chemical concern: most commercial water-repellent coating treatments historically used PFOA or related fluorinated compounds, though some manufacturers have shifted to shorter-chain alternatives. The cotton-polyester base itself is lower-risk than pure synthetics, but the treatment chemicals warrant scrutiny. Polyester also contains antimony as a catalyst residue, though leaching risk from finished fabric is minimal under normal wear.
The brand's record and disclosure
Tommy Hilfiger (owned by PVH Corp) has not published transparent water-repellent coating chemical specifications for individual products, and the brand remains silent on PFAS policy commitments visible in public sustainability reports. PVH has made some upstream sustainability pledges but does not regularly disclose finished-product testing or chemical phase-out timelines at the SKU level. No major recalls or contamination incidents are on record for Tommy Hilfiger pants. This silence around water-repellent coating treatment is typical of mainstream brands but limits consumer ability to verify safer alternatives.
How it compares in its category
Most mid-market men's pants with water resistance use water-repellent coating treatments, making this category-typical rather than exceptional. Premium brands like Patagonia and some Outdoor Voices products voluntarily disclose fluorine-free or reduced-fluorine water-repellent coating options and often test for PFAS. Budget alternatives from unbranded retailers may use unregulated coatings with unknown chemistry. Tommy Hilfiger sits in the middle: brand-name credibility without the transparency premium makers offer, and without evidence of water-repellent coating innovation toward PFAS reduction.
If you buy it
Wash separately in cold water before first wear to reduce loose chemical residues. Use gentle detergent without optical brighteners, which can degrade water repellency and leave deposits. Air-dry; avoid high heat (dryer heat can mobilize some coatings). water-repellent coating treatments degrade after 5-10 washes depending on product care; reapplication kits exist if you want to maintain water resistance without buying new pants. If PFAS exposure concerns you, consider requesting fiber content and water-repellent coating supplier info from Tommy Hilfiger customer service, or opt for untreated cotton alternatives if water resistance is not essential.
Beyond PFAS: other things we checked
Established hazard classes for this product type, assessed from public information. These never change the PFAS grade; a Likely flag caps the Verdict at “Buy with care.”
PFAS in water-repellent coating
Cotton-blend pants with water-repellent coating treatment almost certainly contain fluorinated compounds (long-chain PFOA or short-chain alternatives); brand does not disclose water-repellent coating chemistry. PFAS can migrate to skin with moisture and persist in the body.
Formaldehyde resins (finishing treatments)
No public record of formaldehyde-free certification for this product line. Standard cotton-polyester blends may use formaldehyde in dyes or wrinkle-resistance finishes, though modern mills typically minimize this. Not documented as a recalled hazard for Tommy Hilfiger.
Azo dyes (synthetic colorants)
No specific testing or complaints on record; Tommy Hilfiger uses major mills that typically comply with EU or Oeko-Tex standards restricting banned azo dyes. Risk is low for a mid-market brand but not independently verified for this SKU.
Antimony in polyester fiber
Polyester catalyst residue (antimony trioxide) is detectable in fabric but dermal and oral leaching under normal wear is negligible. No health incidents linked to Tommy Hilfiger apparel; not a practical concern for finished garments in this category.
Coating degradation and microfiber shedding
water-repellent coating treatments shed microparticles as they degrade with washing and wear. While microfiber from synthetic textiles is an environmental concern, inhalation or skin absorption risk from wearing treated pants is unquantified in literature.
What we don’t know
This grade is a model-based estimate from public materials, coatings, and brand disclosure at 45% confidence. It is not a lab result.
No independent PFAS lab test is on record for this exact product. A lab test could move the score in either direction.
The brand has not made a specific, verifiable PFAS-free statement, so part of this score reflects that missing disclosure rather than a confirmed material.
Formulations and coatings change between production runs. Always check the current label before buying.
More waterproof sports undergarments grades
How we score: every product runs through the same public 0–100 rubric based on materials, coatings, brand disclosure, lab findings, and recalls. See the full methodology → Spotted a mistake? Report an error.