Regulatory Background: The Lead Interim Policy:

Washington’s Toxic-Free Cosmetics Act (TFCA) establishes a stringent statutory restriction prohibiting cosmetic products containing lead impurities in excess of 1 part per million (ppm), which took effect on January 1, 2025. Recognizing that naturally occurring trace lead in raw materials, particularly mineral pigments and natural clays, presents severe technical hurdles to consistently meeting 1 ppm, Ecology implemented an interim enforcement discretion policy in late 2024.

This interim policy established safe harbor pathways for companies actively working to lower lead levels:

Option 1: Covers general cosmetics with total lead concentrations at or below 2 ppm, as well as color cosmetics and clay-based masks at or below 5 ppm.

Option 2: Accommodates color cosmetics and clay masks with total lead levels between 5 ppm and 10 ppm, provided manufacturers notify the agency, monitor lead across product batches via third-party laboratory testing or raw material verification, and retain testing data for state review.

Key Updates to the Interim Policy:

Ecology’s recent revision modifies the enforcement timeline and establishes direct data auditing:

• The interim safe harbor was originally slated to expire on December 31, 2026. Ecology has lifted this calendar cutoff, allowing the policy to stay active until a permanent administrative rule is adopted or the agency formally rescinds the interim measures.
• Ecology will randomly audit 10 companies registered under Option 2, requiring them to submit their batch-level lead monitoring and testing documentation for state evaluation.

Industry Status and Immediate Action Items:

During a September 3 briefing, Ecology confirmed that notification notices have already been dispatched to the 10 selected companies.

• If your company utilizes Option 2 and has not received a formal call-in directive, you were either not part of the initial random selection or Ecology lacks current contact records.
• Brand owners and manufacturers operating under the interim safe harbor should review their submission records immediately to ensure all primary contact details filed with Ecology are completely up to date. 

If you need any further information regarding this update, contact us today.

The post Washington State Department of Ecology Updates Interim Policy on Lead in Cosmetics appeared first on Focal Point.

Judicial Ruling and Constitutional Grounding:

The court’s decision turns squarely on First Amendment commercial speech protections:

• The court ruled that based on the current state of scientific evidence, compelling brands to place cancer warnings for DEA cannot be constitutionally enforced. 
• Because the premise that DEA poses a carcinogenic risk to humans is contested rather than purely factual and uncontroversial, mandatory warning statements amount to unconstitutionally compelled commercial speech.
• PCPC filed the initial legal challenge in March 2024, maintaining that requiring warning statements claiming DEA is “known to the State of California to cause cancer” infringes upon commercial First Amendment rights

Industry Context: A Growing Pattern of First Amendment Victories:

This injunction marks a major milestone in a continuous series of successful First Amendment challenges brought by industry against Proposition 65 warning requirements where the underlying toxicology remains debated: 

• The DEA ruling follows successful federal court challenges restricting mandatory cancer warnings for glyphosate, acrylamide, and titanium dioxide (in cosmetic formulations). 
• Courts continue to reject compelled health warnings where authoritative scientific reviews fail to demonstrate a clear, uncontroverted link between consumer exposure and human carcinogenicity.
• While the permanent injunction blocks current enforcement, the state Attorney General retains the statutory ability to petition the court to dissolve the injunction should new scientific evidence establish consensus or if governing legal standards shift.

Strategic Implications and Action Items for Personal Care Brands:

While the ruling provides immediate regulatory relief, legal and regulatory specialists urge companies to approach their compliance strategies with measured caution:

• Audit existing product formulations containing DEA, identify any pending 60-day notices of violation, and evaluate ongoing enforcement threats involving the ingredient. 
• Review master product labels and supply chain compliance documentation concerning DEA to determine whether warning removals or revisions are commercially warranted.

If you need assistance with formulation or label reviews, contact us. 

The post First Amendment Milestone: Federal Court Bars California Prop 65 Cancer Warnings for Diethanolamine (DEA) appeared first on Focal Point.

Passed in May 2023, this legislation mandates that businesses must report intentionally added per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in products sold within Minnesota and pay an associated fee.

​Products manufactured prior to July 1, 2023, are strictly excluded from these reporting requirements.

Companies should be aware that after a formal review period, all submitted data will become publicly accessible, with the exception of verified trade secrets.

​Critical 2026 Reporting Deadlines:

​Because the initial reporting deadline is approaching rapidly, manufacturers are highly encouraged to begin their data entry and submit any necessary technical support requests immediately. Please ensure your compliance teams track the following key dates:

• ​September 15, 2026: Initial PFAS reports are officially due.
• ​November 14, 2026: For manufacturers who previously secured a due date extension, requests for waivers must be postmarked or mailed by this date.
• ​December 14, 2026: Initial reports are due for manufacturers operating under an approved extension.
• ​February 1 (Annually): Moving forward, subsequent annual updates will be required each year on this date.

​

If you have any questions regarding how this update may affect your business, do reach out to us today.

The post Upcoming Deadlines for Minnesota’s PFAS Reporting appeared first on Focal Point.

​Key Provisions of Virginia HB 122:

• ​The law strictly prohibits the use of certain intentionally used ingredients.
• ​The bill has successfully passed and its status is officially updated to enacted.

​To review your product formulations and ensure continuous compliance with emerging state-level legislation, please contact us.

The post Virginia Enacts Ingredient Restrictions (HB 122) appeared first on Focal Point.

​Key Provisions of RI HB 7734:

• The law strictly prohibits the sale of covered products (including cosmetics) that contain intentionally added PFAS.
• ​This prohibition will officially take effect beginning January 1, 2027.

​Considering the upcoming deadline, contact us today to review your product formulations to ensure full compliance before enforcement begins.

The post Rhode Island Enacts PFAS Ban on Covered Products appeared first on Focal Point.

​Key Provisions of the Enacted Bills:

​This legislation introduces strict regulatory requirements and robust enforcement mechanisms for the personal care industry:

• ​The enacted bills prohibit the manufacture, sale, or distribution of cosmetic and hair care products in Maryland that intentionally contain lead and certain other harmful chemicals.

• ​The Maryland Department of Health is now authorized to actively investigate complaints and enforce compliance with the new restrictions.

• ​Violations of the law are considered unfair trade practices. Businesses found in violation may face significant civil damages, which can include treble and punitive damages in cases of willful non-compliance.

​These new laws underscore the growing trend of state-level scrutiny regarding cosmetic ingredients, emphasizing the immediate need for rigorous formula and supply chain reviews to ensure compliance in the Maryland market.

​To get your formulas reviewed and to ensure compliance, contact us today.

The post Maryland Enacts Ingredient Restrictions for Cosmetics and Hair Care appeared first on Focal Point.

DTSC’s decision is driven by environmental and health safety evaluations regarding this class of chemicals. The department has determined that PPD derivatives are expected to exhibit specific hazard traits, primarily dermatotoxicity and wildlife survival impairment.

​Regulators are concerned that these derivatives may cause or contribute to adverse dermatological impacts (such as skin sensitization) as well as severe adverse aquatic impacts (such as death).

​What This Means for Your Business:

​It is important for manufacturers and formulators to understand the immediate impact of this update. Adding a chemical to the Candidate Chemicals List does not create any new regulatory obligations. However, this listing serves as a strong indicator that PPD derivatives are under scrutiny and may be targeted for future evaluation or product prioritization by the DTSC.

​If you have any questions regarding this update or would like to get your formulas reviewed, our team is here to help. Contact us today.

The post California DTSC Updates Candidate Chemicals List to Include PPD Derivatives appeared first on Focal Point.

​While the published dates are not legally binding, and cosmetics rulemaking has historically experienced further delays following the publication of these target dates, the agenda outlines the latest thinking from the HHS and FDA regarding their regulatory timelines.

​Key Updates to Proposed Target Dates:

​The agenda highlights new proposed dates for several critical regulatory actions:

• ​Disclosure of Fragrance Allergens: The new proposed date for the disclosure of fragrance allergens in cosmetic labeling is November 2026.

• ​Formaldehyde in Hair Products: The new proposed date for rules addressing the use of formaldehyde and formaldehyde-releasing chemicals as an ingredient in hair smoothing products or hair straightening products is November 2026.

• ​Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP): The new proposed date for Good Manufacturing Practice for cosmetic product facilities is November 2027.

• ​Asbestos Testing in Talc: The new proposed date for testing methods for detecting and identifying asbestos in talc-containing cosmetic products is November 2027.

​What This Means for the Industry:

​These revised target dates indicate continued delays in the finalization of key MoCRA provisions. However, this extension provides manufacturers, brand owners, and regulatory teams with additional time to prepare. Companies should use this window to proactively review their formulations, audit their manufacturing processes, and establish the necessary supply chain transparency to ensure full readiness once the FDA finalizes and enforces these mandates.

​If you have any questions or need assistance with MoCRA listings, label or formulation reviews, reach out today.

The post FDA Update: Revised Timelines for MoCRA Implementation and Cosmetic Regulations appeared first on Focal Point.

The proposal would also clarify that cosmetics sold directly to consumers are not subject to Louisiana’s facility permitting and inspection requirements. Businesses would still need to comply with applicable federal requirements under the FD&C Act and MoCRA, as well as state and local tax requirements.

If enacted, the changes could reduce regulatory and administrative requirements for small, home-based cosmetic businesses in Louisiana, while maintaining federal compliance obligations. Companies should monitor the legislation, particularly the $100,000 sakes threshold and product exclusions, when assessing eligibility for the proposed exemption.

For more such updates, contact us.

The post Louisiana moves to ease cosmetic requirements for cottage businesses appeared first on Focal Point.

Medical devices are subject to exemptions where PFAS are essential to the device and their use do not pose serious harm to users. Manufacturers should assess whether their products meet the applicable exemption criteria.

A new PFAS labeling requirement will also take effect January 1, 2027. Products containing intentionally added PFAS sold or distributed in New Mexico will be required to display a standardized PFAS symbol. The Environmental Improvement Board finalized the implementing rules in March 2026, with the Final Rule published in the New Mexico Register on May 5, 2026.

To ensure your compliance with this new requirement, please contact us.

The post New Mexico PFAS Protection Act: Cosmetics Restrictions Begin in 2028 appeared first on Focal Point.