"must prioritise" ≠ "ban"

As usual with such regulation. It's better than nothing, but... well, it's early days, maybe they'll find stricter wording.

They will find a loophole, no doubt. Next thing you know some vague websites sells t-shirts for $20,000 and has their entire stock safely stored in a ditch somewhere.

It’ll work the same way as with books: we already have fixed book prices, and only damaged copies are allowed to be sold at a reduced price. So retailers stamp ‘damaged copy’ on the book – that counts as the damage – and suddenly these books are available more cheaply.

With clothes, they’ll just splash some paint 🫟 over them and then the damaged goods can be destroyed.

Pretty sure a lot of waste comes from returned clothes from online stores. Wonder if being opened and tried on will count as damaged enough to be discarded.

Companies may only destroy unsold clothes and shoes in limited cases, such as when items are unsafe or damaged, counterfeit or infringing intellectual property rights, or are rejected by charities or donation schemes.

To prevent misuse, businesses relying on these exemptions must provide proof (e.g. documents or test results) and publish annual reports on what they have discarded.

https://www.teenhearts.com/collections/offensive-rude-and-vulgar-t-shirts

A previously-little-noticed corner of European bureaucracy was about to become the new Florida police blotter from an entertainment standpoint.

arent they alr sell the unsold textile to eastern europe or poorest africa then be used as fuel?

not sure how this ban solve the problem

They'll just sell it to some off-shore third parties that would just destroy it for them.

Once again, the authorities are barking at the wrong tree.

Recycle all the polyester and ban it for clothing. Mandate natural fibers, like hemp!