Cosmetics Firms To Phase Out Cocamide DEA Under Prop 65 Settlements
This article was originally published in The Rose Sheet
At a time when California regulators are considering amendments to Proposition 65 to stem a rising tide of related lawsuits, 14 personal-care manufacturers and retailers have settled suits filed by the Center for Environmental Health for violating the regulation and failing to properly warn consumers about the use of cocamide DEA in products.
You may also be interested in...
Businesses must provide proper disclosures to online consumers who enroll in auto-renewal purchasing or subscription programs or risk facing litigation in California and other states, according to Tucker Ellis attorney Ronie Schmelz. Birchbox is among companies that have been targeted for alleged violations of California law designed to protect consumers from being charged for continuous product shipments or ongoing services without their express consent and ability to cancel easily.
Environmental nonprofit contends there is no safe exposure level for lead in a lawsuit challenging the Prop 65 safe harbor for the substance, which has enabled many cosmetics firms to forgo warning labeling in California to date. Attorneys and regulatory experts discuss the suit’s potential large-scale impact while identifying diethanolamine as potentially the cosmetics industry’s next major headache under Prop 65.
California proposes a website to provide consumers with information on products containing ingredients subject to Proposition 65 reporting. The proposal would require firms to provide, at the state’s request, data for the website regarding ingredient concentrations, exposure pathways and/or estimated exposure levels.