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
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 ↗The full breakdown
What it's made of and why it matters
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.
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 we don’t know
- 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.
Better-graded alternatives in Waterproof Sports Undergarments
Carhartt
Men's Force Relaxed Fit Short-Sleeve Pocket T-Shirt
100% cotton jersey knit, untreated
Azo dyes
Limited concern
Microfiber shedding
Limited concern
Basic cotton tee, lower PFAS concern with no waterproofing.
⚠Starting grade for this product type
Carhartt
Men's Relaxed Fit Midweight Short-Sleeve Pocket T-Shirt
100% cotton, no water-repellent finish
Heavy metals
Limited concern
BPA & bisphenols
Limited concern
Lower concern, plain cotton tee with no water-repellent coating treatment.
⚠Starting grade for this product type
Carhartt
Men's Force Color Enhanced Long Sleeve T-Shirt
100% cotton long-sleeve shirt
Azo dyes and dye residuals
Limited concern
Allergen dyes and color fastness
Limited concern
Lower concern, bare cotton apparel with no added treatments.
⚠Starting grade for this product type
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.