Will there ever be a revision of the EU Cosmetics Regulation?

A potential review of the CPR was announced in 2020 as part of the EU Sustainable Chemicals Strategy, which aims to remove potentially harmful chemicals from consumer products.

The amendment to the CPR would enable the European Commission to ban the use of persistent and bioaccumulative chemicals or ingredients that affect the reproductive or hormonal system in cosmetics.

The revision of the REACH Regulation, which applies in parallel to the CPR and also affects the cosmetics sector, was also due to be reviewed but was put on hold in February 2024.

CPR revision: “no consensus in the Commission”

At the annual Cosmetics Europe (CEAC) conference on 19^tIn June in Brussels, Hans Ingels, head of unit at DG GROW in the European Commission, said that political discussions were ongoing on how best to revise the CPR.

He explained that an impact assessment had been carried out which showed that some of the options would be costly for the industry and that there is currently “no consensus in the Commission”.

Cosmetics Europe CEO John Chave compared the revised proposal to the Loch Ness Monster, stating: “Some claim to have seen it, but its existence has never been proven.”

“It’s interesting that we had an hour-and-a-half session on a regulation that hasn’t actually been published yet,” Chave told CosmeticsDesign-Europe after the panel discussion.

He pointed out that Ingels had said he had never seen so many people happy with regulations that had not yet been published.

“I think this points to issues that could potentially come up in future changes and how our industry really needs to think about what we need and what we want,” Chave continued.

Many in the cosmetics industry have raised concerns about the potential impact of the CPR revision, arguing that it could negatively impact the competitiveness of the sector.

“In our opinion, CPR has stood the test of time – it’s the gold standard worldwide – but that doesn’t mean some things can’t be improved.”

“We will have to see what happens in the future. It is important for the industry that we do not have a revision that will make our lives more difficult,” he said.

“We do not believe that we need a full revision of the CPR. We believe that some of the concerns expressed can be addressed, but without a revision of the CPR.”

The concept of “essential uses” is another key element of the Commission’s chemicals strategy for sustainable development. It sets out situations in which harmful substances can be allowed if their use is considered necessary for health or safety reasons, if there are no acceptable alternatives.

In April 2024, the EC adopted criteria and guiding principles to determine how the concept of “essential uses” will be applied. In its current form, it is not set in stone and will only have legal effect if it is introduced in specific legislation. There are currently many uncertainties and questions about its application.

The implementation of the Chemicals Strategy is to be discussed on 14 October 2024.

Cosmetics labeling: problematic

At the CEAC conference, Chave told CosmeticsDesign-Europe that the industry faces many challenges with labeling. “Labeling in our industry is particularly problematic, for example because of the different packaging sizes, and at the same time, for good environmental reasons, we are being asked to reduce packaging, so it’s a bit of a dilemma,” he said.

“We believe the solution is to move to a digital labelling system that will be more environmentally friendly and will allow us to provide information to consumers in a more accessible way, but as the discussions have shown, there are still challenges and much more to be done,” he continued.

“We believe this is the best option, but we do not dismiss the concerns. The challenge for our industry is to work with all stakeholders to find a solution that improves the information environment.”

CPR revision: “no consensus in the Commission”​

CPR revision: “no consensus in the Commission”