The selection of the first Producer Responsibility Organization (PRO) for textiles in California marks a turning point for the U.S. textile recovery industry. But the designation itself is only the beginning. The more difficult work now begins: designing a system capable of managing millions of tons of clothing while balancing reuse markets, domestic recycling, and emerging circular supply chains.
For decades, the textile recovery system has relied on a relatively simple model. Clothing is collected, sorted, and the highest-value items are resold domestically or exported to global secondhand markets. These reuse markets have played an essential role in keeping millions of tons of clothing in circulation while supporting collectors, charities, thrift stores and sorters across the United States.
But the system is under increasing strain.
Fast fashion has dramatically increased the volume of clothing entering the market while simultaneously lowering garment durability and resale value. Many importing countries that once absorbed large volumes of secondhand clothing are becoming more selective about the quality they accept. At the same time, investors and innovators are racing to build new textile recycling technologies that can process the materials reuse markets cannot absorb.
Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) for textiles is intended to help solve this growing imbalance. By requiring producers to finance collection, sorting, and processing infrastructure, policymakers hope to create a more stable system capable of handling the full spectrum of textile waste.
However, the implementation of EPR raises a central question that the industry must now confront: how can the United States expand domestic reuse and recycling capacity without destabilizing the global reuse markets that still provide the highest value outcome for the highest volume of clothing?
A functioning textile circularity system will likely require three complementary pathways.
First, reuse and export markets must continue to play a leading role. These markets keep wearable clothing in circulation and support established collection and sorting networks. When garments are still functional, reuse remains the most efficient and sustainable outcome.
Second, domestic reuse, repair and recycling must grow significantly. Textile to textile recycling in the U.S. can handle lower-value materials that cannot be resold. Emerging pre-processing, sorting and fiber-to-fiber recycling technologies offer promise, but these systems are still scaling. Reliable feedstock, stable demand and financing, and supportive policy frameworks will be critical for these technologies to mature.
For recyclers, this moment represents both opportunity and uncertainty. Textile EPR has the potential to unlock long-needed investment in domestic processing capacity, but the success of that investment will depend on how feedstock flows are structured. Recyclers will be watching closely to see whether the emerging system allows independent processors to access material streams or concentrates those flows within a limited set of contracted operators.
Finally, waste management will remain part of the system for textiles that are contaminated or too degraded for reuse or recycling. Even the most advanced circular systems must account for materials that cannot be recovered.
The challenge for regulators and industry leaders is to design an EPR system that strengthens all recovery pathways rather than unintentionally undermining one in favor of another, which would destabilize the whole system.
Collectors and charitable organizations are concerned about maintaining access to materials they have managed for decades. Private sorters and recycling companies are working to secure the supply streams necessary to justify major investments in new processing capacity. Brands are watching closely to ensure that compliance costs remain predictable and that the system supports meaningful circular outcomes rather than simply shifting costs.
In other words, textile EPR is not just a compliance framework. It is the creation of an entirely new material market.
The decisions made during the early years of California’s EPR implementation will determine who manages the flow of materials not just regionally but potentially nationally, how value is distributed across the recovery chain, and whether the United States can successfully build domestic recycling capacity without destabilizing the global reuse markets that continue to play an essential role in the sector.
For recyclers, collectors, brands, and policymakers alike, the task ahead is not simply to build infrastructure. It is to build a balanced system capable of handling a rapidly changing textile stream while preserving the economic pathways that already keep millions of garments in circulation.
American Circular Textiles (AMCIRC) provides an independent platform for cross-sector discussions around textile EPR implementation, bringing together brands, collectors, sorters, charities, recyclers, and policymakers to examine how reuse, recycling, and global markets can evolve together as the system develops.