HBW Insight is part of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC’s registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use. For high-quality copies or electronic reprints for distribution to colleagues or customers, please call +44 (0) 20 3377 3183

Printed By

UsernamePublicRestriction
UsernamePublicRestriction

California Passes Cruelty-Free Cosmetics Act: Now Friendlier To Industry, Still A Legal Minefield

This article was originally published in The Rose Sheet

Executive Summary

Late-stage, industry-driven amendments to SB 1249 eliminated terms that could have made companies liable for animal testing entirely outside their control. The bill that passed Aug. 31 is still rife with legal risks for companies that claim exemptions, according to Sacramento-area attorney Angela Diesch.

You may also be interested in...



Cosmetics Sector Needs Positive, Not Punitive, 21st Century Regulation – IBA

Independent Beauty Association president Ken Marenus discusses the trade group’s vision for modern, proportionate cosmetics regulation and forces at work that could undermine progress and endanger small businesses.

ECHA's ‘Devastating Blow’ To Animal Testing Ban Slammed By Cosmetic Industry, Stakeholders

In an open letter to the European Commission, Parliament and Council presidents, more than 400 cosmetics companies and animal-rights groups accuse the European Chemicals Agency of effectively “shredding” the animal testing ban on cosmetics by requiring testing for certain chemicals under REACH.

US Humane Cosmetics Act Backed By Industry And NGOs Alike; Here’s Why

The proposed bill in the US Senate could be seen as slightly friendlier to the cosmetics industry when it comes to continued use of animal testing data in limited, exempted contexts, compared with similar state laws enacted of late. But the federal bill includes stiffer penalties, addresses “cruelty free” labeling, and seeks to spur FDA acceptance of alternative test methods, a key objective for stakeholders overall.

Related Content

Topics

UsernamePublicRestriction

Register

LL1135490

Ask The Analyst

Ask the Analyst is free for subscribers.  Submit your question and one of our analysts will be in touch.

Your question has been successfully sent to the email address below and we will get back as soon as possible. my@email.address.

All fields are required.

Please make sure all fields are completed.

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please enter a valid e-mail address

Please enter a valid Phone Number

Ask your question to our analysts

Cancel