Is it Allowed? Companies Face New Challenges with an Ever-Evolving List of “Off Limits” Ingredients in Cosmetic Products
Client Alert | 2 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.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 5 min read | 08.21.26
FTC Proposes Enforcement Policy Statement on Personalized Pricing: What Businesses Need to Know
On August 19, 2026, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced a proposed Enforcement Policy Statement on personalized pricing — the practice of companies using consumers’ personal data to set individualized prices, discounts, coupons, or other incentives. The proposed statement, which is open for public comment for 30 days following publication in the Federal Register, marks a major step up in the FTC’s focus on data-driven pricing strategies and puts businesses across industries on notice that undisclosed or inadequately disclosed personalized pricing will not be tolerated. Importantly, while the proposed statement is not a binding legal requirement and does not create new legal obligations, it serves as an enforcement warning that the FTC is prepared to use its existing enforcement authority under Section 5 of the FTC Act (Section 5) and is also a potential harbinger of rulemaking. Businesses that engage in — or are considering — personalized pricing should carefully assess their disclosure practices and data collection procedures against the standards articulated in this statement.
Client Alert | 7 min read | 08.19.26
CMS’s Final Rule Bans Federal Medicaid Funding for Youth Gender-Affirming Care
Client Alert | 2 min read | 08.19.26
