BPA is banned or restricted in over a dozen countries, with the scope ranging from narrow prohibitions on baby bottles to sweeping bans covering all food packaging. The European Union enacted the most comprehensive restriction to date, banning BPA from virtually all food contact materials starting in 2025. France, Canada, China, and several U.S. states have had their own bans in place for years, though they vary widely in what they cover.
The European Union’s 2024 Ban
The EU now has the world’s broadest BPA restriction. On December 31, 2024, the European Commission published Regulation 2024/3190, which prohibits BPA and its salts in the manufacture of food-contact plastics, varnishes, coatings, printing inks, adhesives, rubber, and silicones. The regulation entered into force on January 20, 2025.
This decision followed a reassessment by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), which in 2023 lowered its safe exposure threshold for BPA to a level 20,000 times stricter than the previous one, citing concerns about harmful effects on the immune system. The new tolerable daily intake is just 0.2 nanograms per kilogram of body weight, a tiny fraction of what most people are actually exposed to through food packaging.
The ban includes phase-in periods for industry. Single-use food contact items already manufactured with BPA can still be sold until July 2026. Canned fruits, vegetables, and fishery products get a longer runway, with BPA-lined packaging allowed on shelves until July 2028. The regulation also extends beyond BPA itself. Bisphenol S (BPS) and bisphenol AF (BPAF), two common BPA substitutes that have raised their own health concerns, are included in the ban. Switzerland enacted a similar measure in 2025 covering hazardous bisphenols and their derivatives.
France Led the Way in Europe
France was the first country in the world to suspend BPA in all food packaging. President Francois Hollande signed the law in December 2012. It took effect in two phases: food containers for children under three were covered starting January 1, 2013, and all remaining food packaging followed on January 1, 2015. The law banned the production, import, export, and marketing of any food packaging where BPA could come in direct contact with food. At the time, the European Commission considered challenging the law as a potential breach of single-market rules, but no formal action was taken before the EU moved toward its own broader ban.
Canada and China
Canada was one of the earliest countries to act on BPA. It banned the manufacture, importation, sale, and advertising of polycarbonate baby bottles containing BPA, making it a pioneer in treating BPA as a consumer safety issue for infants. The restriction was narrowly focused on baby bottles rather than food packaging more broadly.
China followed a similar path. In 2011, the Chinese government banned the manufacture of infant milk bottles made from polycarbonate and other materials containing BPA. Manufacturing of these products was prohibited starting June 1, 2011, and import and sale were banned as of September 1, 2011. For all other food packaging, China required compliance with existing national food safety standards but did not impose an outright ban.
The United States: A Patchwork Approach
The U.S. has no federal ban on BPA in food packaging for adults. What it does have are two narrow FDA rule changes and a handful of state-level laws.
In 2012, the FDA amended its regulations to remove the authorization for BPA-based polycarbonate resins in baby bottles and sippy cups. In 2013, it did the same for BPA-based epoxy resins in infant formula packaging. These changes sound significant, but the FDA was explicit that they were not safety decisions. Manufacturers had already stopped using BPA in those products voluntarily, so the agency simply updated the rules to reflect that the use had been “permanently and completely abandoned.” The FDA’s position, stated on its own website, is that “the safety of a food additive is not relevant to FDA’s determination regarding whether a certain use of that food additive has been abandoned.”
State legislatures have gone further. Connecticut banned BPA in receipt paper (thermal paper) in 2011, making it the first U.S. state to do so. Illinois followed with a similar ban in 2019. California lists BPA as a reproductive toxicant under Proposition 65, which requires businesses to warn consumers about significant exposures. California has set a maximum allowable dose level of 3 micrograms per day for dermal exposure from solid materials, meaning products exceeding that threshold need a warning label.
What About BPA-Free Alternatives?
When manufacturers removed BPA from products, many switched to structurally similar chemicals like bisphenol S (BPS) and bisphenol F (BPF). These substitutes are now under growing scrutiny. The EU has classified BPS as a human reproductive toxicant, and it’s included in the 2024 EU food contact materials ban alongside BPA. France’s national health agency identified bisphenol B as an endocrine disruptor, and Swedish researchers reached similar conclusions about bisphenol AF.
This is why the EU and Swiss bans were written to cover multiple bisphenols rather than just BPA alone. A product labeled “BPA-free” may still contain related compounds that carry similar risks. If you’re trying to reduce your exposure, glass, stainless steel, and unlined containers avoid the issue entirely rather than relying on a label that only addresses one chemical in a family of structurally similar ones.
Where Things Stand Globally
The global picture breaks down roughly into three tiers. At the top, the EU and Switzerland now restrict BPA and several related bisphenols across nearly all food contact materials. In the middle, France (since 2015) had already banned BPA from all food packaging, a position now superseded by the broader EU rule. Countries like Canada and China occupy a narrower band, restricting BPA only in infant feeding products. The United States sits in the most fragmented position, with no comprehensive federal ban, FDA actions based on industry abandonment rather than safety findings, and a small number of state laws targeting specific products like thermal receipt paper.
The trajectory, though, is clearly toward tighter restrictions. EFSA’s 2023 risk reassessment, which slashed the safe daily intake by a factor of 20,000, reflects a scientific consensus that has shifted substantially since the early debates over BPA in baby bottles. Regulatory action has followed that shift, albeit at very different speeds depending on where you live.