The European Parliament has voted on controversial legislation tightening restrictions on hazardous substances used in cosmetics, FashionNetwork reported, in a move that EU formulators, brand compliance teams and ingredient suppliers are watching closely.

The vote sits inside the EU's wider overhaul of how the bloc treats chemicals of concern across consumer goods. For the cosmetics sector, any change lands on top of Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009, the 16-year-old framework that already restricts more than 1,600 substances through Annexes II and III and routes hazard classification through the Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS).

What does the bill likely target?

The wording in the FashionNetwork headline echoes the EU's broader chemical strategy, which is reshaping how CMR (carcinogenic, mutagenic, reprotoxic) categories 1A and 1B, skin sensitisers, endocrine disruptors and persistent substances are regulated across product categories. Cosmetics manufacturers already operate one of the most restrictive regimes globally on CMR 1A/1B substances under Annex II. A new horizontal law could pull additional ingredients — including those currently allowed only at defined concentration thresholds under Annex III — into a broader restriction track.

Recent SCCS opinions on propylparaben concentration ceilings, retinol re-evaluations and titanium dioxide (CI 77891) in loose powder form show how quickly scientific re-evaluation can move substances between annexes. The same pipeline will run on whatever this new legislation adds.

Why is the vote described as controversial?

Trade associations including Cosmetics Europe and smaller craft-sector federations have warned repeatedly that horizontal hazard-based restrictions layered on top of product-specific regulation create duplicative compliance work. A reformulation to remove a substance from a shampoo triggers re-stability, re-challenge, re-label and re-notification work across every SKU that contains it. Brand owners exporting into the EU also face reformulating lines that may diverge from US FDA or ASEAN Cosmetic Directive rules.

Independent formulators working on natural and organic certified ranges face a separate headache: several preservatives and solubilisers they depend on appear repeatedly on restriction shortlists. For salon-only brands selling professional-use products, classification under CLP-aligned hazard pictograms is already daily reality; a new layer of restrictions would push more finished goods onto dual-labelled retail shelves.

What does compliance cost smaller brands?

Independent and SME brands absorb a disproportionate share of the reformulation burden. Where a multinational routes work through a dedicated regulatory team, a five-person brand typically outsources. A single substance removal can cost between €8,000 and €25,000 per SKU once safety reassessment, stability testing and notification through the EU's Cosmetic Product Notification Portal (CPNP) are factored in. Repeated restrictions compound those costs — one reason Cosmetics Europe has lobbied for longer transition windows.

How will suppliers be affected?

Upstream, ingredient suppliers face their own pressure. A new hazard classification on a single raw material can cascade into reformulation requests from dozens of customers within weeks. Distributors of preservative systems, fragrance compounds and UV filters are the most exposed because their portfolios concentrate around a smaller number of active substances. Watch for raw-material price increases and substitution offers from major suppliers as the legislation text firms up.

What about exporters to non-EU markets?

Brands exporting from the EU and brands exporting into the EU run parallel-but-different regimes. The US FDA does not currently treat the EU's CMR-based Annex II list as a default restriction. Japan's Quasi-Drug framework follows its own positive list. ASEAN's Cosmetic Directive mirrors the EU more closely but allows national derogations. A new EU-only restriction on a substance means running two formulations, two labelling sets and two safety dossiers for the same brand, raising inventory complexity for retailers operating across regions.

What changes operationally if the legislation passes?

Practical downstream effects for procurement, R&D and regulatory teams typically include:

• New positive or negative list entries published as annex amendments
• Mandatory reformulation timelines — historically 6 to 36 months from publication in the Official Journal of the EU
• Updated Safety Data Sheets and Product Information Files (PIFs) for every affected SKU
• Revised labelling under CLP-aligned hazard pictograms on professional and salon products
• Updated Cosmetic Product Safety Reports (CPSR) signed off by an approved safety assessor

What should compliance teams watch next?

The next data points are the Parliament's press service vote tally and the Council of the EU's negotiating position under the ordinary legislative procedure. Watch for the rapporteur's name, the file reference number and the final compromise text. INCI File will update this item once full reporting is available with the vote outcome, the substances covered in the annex and the implementation deadlines.