Is it Allowed? Companies Face New Challenges with an Ever-Evolving List of “Off Limits” Ingredients in Cosmetic Products
Client Alert | 14 min read | 05.07.24
As we have previously discussed, in recent years, consumers have increasingly demanded “cleaner” beauty products and more transparency in product labeling. In addition to the FDA’s increased authority to regulate cosmetics under MoCRA, a number of states have now taken steps to regulate ingredients in cosmetics by limiting, and in some instances even banning, the use of certain ingredients that may be potentially harmful or toxic.
This web of complex and evolving regulations can be challenging for companies that manufacture and sell cosmetic products to track and follow to ensure compliance, especially when their products may be sold nationwide. Below is a May 2024 survey that may be helpful to companies in the process of untangling the current regulatory framework.
By way of background, the vast majority of states (39 of 50) have passed legislation that broadly prohibits (1) manufacturing and selling cosmetics that contain ingredients that allegedly can cause injuries and (2) providing false or misleading information on product labeling or packaging.[1]
Recent state legislation, however, goes one step beyond these regulations. As of May 1, 2024, the following states have enacted or proposed legislation limiting the manufacture, sale, and distribution of cosmetic products containing certain ingredients, including, but not limited to, chemicals like per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS):
This recent legislation breaks down as follows:
ENACTED legislation banning or limiting use of PFAS in cosmetics |
PROPOSED legislation banning or limiting use of PFAS in cosmetics |
ENACTED legislation banning or limiting use of certain ingredients other than PFAS in cosmetics |
PROPOSED legislation banning or limiting use of certain ingredients other than PFAS in cosmetics |
|
|
|
|
Still unclear as to what is in and what is out? Our team has prepared a List of Banned Ingredients by State—a summary of the ingredients banned or restricted in each state, which we will monitor and update on a routine basis.
[1] States that have such legislation on the books include: Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, and Wyoming.
Insights
Client Alert | 2 min read | 07.01.25
DoD Establishes New DOGE Approval Process for ITC&MS and A&AS Contracts
On June 23, 2025, the DoD issued a memorandum, “Implementation of Department of Government Efficiency Cost Efficiency Initiative,” to establish a new DOGE approval process for unclassified IT consulting and management services (ITC&MS) contracts or task orders (TOs), and advisory and assistance services (A&AS) contracts or TOs. The memorandum establishes a formal approval process, which directs DOGE to review and provide input for certain contract requirement packages included in Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s May 27, 2025 directive, “Implementation of Executive Order 14222 – Department of Government Efficiency Cost Efficiency Initiative” (“Contract Guidance”).
Client Alert | 10 min read | 07.01.25
Ninth Circuit Decision Underscores Increasing False Claims Act Risks to U.S. Importers
Client Alert | 8 min read | 06.30.25
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.30.25