Tommy Hilfiger · Waterproof Sports Undergarments
Tommy Hilfiger Men's Regular Fit Tommy Wicking Polo
Wicking treatment probably uses water-repellent coating, but risk remains unconfirmed without disclosure.
This cotton-blend polo has a moisture-wicking finish, but Tommy Hilfiger offers no information about PFAS in the treatment. Water-repellent finishes typically contain PFAS, though it's unconfirmed here.
Still want this one anyway? Check the price on Amazon. We’d swap it.
Material
cotton blend with moisture-wicking finish
Brand disclosure
Brand is silent on PFAS
Lab data
No public lab test
You may also be interested in
Top-graded picks in the categories readers replace first, every one scored on the same rubric.
- polypropylene filter housing, carbon/sediment cartridge
- We found no PFAS statement from the brand
- Bacterial growth in spent cartridges
3 hazards checked on this product, all on its full breakdown.
Aquasure
Premier Series 75 GPD Under Sink Reverse Osmosis Water Filtration System
- RO membrane, carbon filters, stainless steel housing
- We found no PFAS statement from the brand
- Bacterial and microbial growth in housing and filters
4 hazards checked on this product, all on its full breakdown.
Avocado
Vegan Mattress
- organic cotton, natural latex, coconut coir, recycled steel coils
- The brand calls it PFAS-free, which we have not verified
- Heavy metals
2 hazards checked on this product, all on its full breakdown.
What Tommy Hilfiger Men's Regular Wicking Polo is made of, ingredients and materials
This polo is a cotton blend (exact polyester percentage not specified in typical retail data) with an applied moisture-wicking finish. The finish is the key variable, most performance wicking treatments in this price tier use water-repellent coating (water-repellent coating) coatings that may contain PFAS compounds, though some manufacturers have begun switching to non-fluorinated alternatives. Cotton itself is not a material linked to PFAS; the risk resides entirely in the applied chemical finish and any dyes used.
What’s concerning
Category baseline
The starting point for this type of product, before anything specific to this product is counted.
No PFAS disclosure
No public statement from the brand about PFAS in this product.
Waterproof / stain-resistant treatment
Water-repellent coating treatments have historically used PFAS.
Azo dyes (synthetic color)
Tommy Hilfiger polos use synthetic dyes in a range of colors; while regulated azo dyes are not carcinogenic by design, poorly controlled batches can retain banned aromatic amines. No specific incidents on record for this brand, but pre-wash testing is prudent for dark colors.
Formaldehyde / VOCs
Moisture-wicking and wrinkle-resistance finishes sometimes use formaldehyde-releasing resins. Not a hazard for the finished fabric (residue is minimal), but sensitive individuals may react to off-gassing; pre-laundering mitigates exposure.
Source, ATSDR ↗Polyester fiber degradation and microfiber shedding
If this blend contains significant polyester (typical for wicking polos, often 30-50%), repeated washing and friction can shed microfibers into wastewater and soil. This is an environmental and indirect ingestion hazard, not acute toxicity.
What’s reassuring
Antimony catalyst residue in polyester
Antimony is used as a catalyst in polyester synthesis but is tightly bound in the polymer chain; it does not leach under normal wear or laundering. No evidence of antimony migration from apparel into skin.
Flame retardants
Polos are not subject to flammability standards and are not typically treated with flame retardants. No hazard expected from this product class.
Source, EPA ↗How is this PFAS grade calculated?
The brand's record and disclosure
Tommy Hilfiger has not publicly committed to PFAS-free manufacturing and does not disclose specific finish chemistry on product labels or sustainability pages. The brand is owned by PVH Corp, which has made some progress on chemical transparency for denim and sportswear but has not issued a blanket PFAS phase-out policy. No recalls or formal safety violations are on record for Tommy Hilfiger polos.
How it compares in its category
Most mid-market performance polos from established brands (Nike, Adidas, Ralph Lauren) do not disclose wicking-finish composition; this product is typical of the category in transparency, not exceptional. Premium heritage brands (Patagonia, Outdoor Voices) are more likely to guarantee PFAS-free finishes. Budget alternatives from less-established makers may use untested finishes with higher contamination risk.
If you buy it
Wash the polo in cold water before first wear to remove residual finishes and loose dyes. Machine wash warm in subsequent uses; hot water may compromise the wicking treatment. Dry on low heat or air-dry to preserve fabric integrity. Replace after 3-5 years or when elastic or stitching fails; the finish will gradually degrade with laundering. Do not dry clean unless labeled as lower concern; avoid fabric softeners, which can clog wicking properties.
What is not known about PFAS in this product?
- Basis
- Model estimate, 45% confidence, not a lab result
- Lab test
- None on record for this exact product
- Brand statement
- Tommy Hilfiger has made none
Formulations change between production runs, so check the current label. How we grade.
What are the PFAS-free alternatives to Tommy Hilfiger Men's Regular Fit Tommy Wicking Polo?
- Cotton-blend knit jersey, uncoated
- We found no PFAS statement from the brand
- Azo dyes and synthetic colorants
3 hazards checked on this product, all on its full breakdown.
Find an alternative on Amazon
- cotton jersey, no applied finish
- We found no PFAS statement from the brand
- Azo dyes and colorant residues
2 hazards checked on this product, all on its full breakdown.
Find an alternative on Amazon
- 100% cotton jersey knit, untreated
- We found no PFAS statement from the brand
- Azo dyes
2 hazards checked on this product, all on its full breakdown.
Find an alternative on AmazonMore 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.