EU Regulatory Simplification: What It Means for the Future of Cosmetic Compliance
In July 2025, the European Commission unveiled a draft regulation amending both the Cosmetics Regulation (1223/2009) and the CLP Regulation (1272/2008). Presented as an administrative simplification initiative, this proposal is part of a broader strategy to boost EU competitiveness and modernize the chemical and cosmetics sectors.
While the changes promise faster processes and reduced bureaucracy for manufacturers and importers, they also mark a significant policy shift: a gradual move away from the EU’s ambitious environmental and health protection agenda toward lighter regulatory frameworks aimed at stimulating industrial growth. This evolution has sparked a heated debate among stakeholders and raises important questions about the future of cosmetic safety and sustainability in Europe.
A New Administrative Approach to Cosmetic Regulations
The Commission’s proposal introduces targeted updates to the Cosmetic Regulation, directly affecting how new ingredients and complex substances are managed:
- Nanomaterial Notification: The current six-month pre-notification system would be removed. Instead, companies would demonstrate nanomaterial safety through their Cosmetic Product Safety Reports, eliminating duplicate submissions and accelerating time-to-market.
- Ingredient List Updates: The process for adding new UV filters, preservatives, and colorants to positive lists (Annexes IV–VI) would be streamlined, reducing the delays currently faced by manufacturers seeking to innovate with new, safe ingredients.
- CMR Substance Derogations: The rules for authorizing the use of certain carcinogenic, mutagenic, or toxic to reproduction substances would be clarified, with fixed timelines and simplified criteria for transitional authorizations.
These changes aim to give companies faster and more predictable access to ingredient approvals, removing bureaucratic hurdles while reinforcing the authority of safety assessments by the Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS).
CLP Regulation: More Flexible Labelling
In parallel, the proposal amends the CLP Regulation, which governs classification and labelling of chemicals used throughout the cosmetics supply chain.
Key adjustments include:
- Allowing supplier contact information to be provided digitally instead of physically on labels.
- Simplified labelling requirements for very small packaging where space is limited.
- Extended deadlines for relabeling substances and mixtures, offering businesses more time to adapt to classification updates.
These changes are expected to lower compliance costs for ingredient suppliers and downstream cosmetic manufacturers, making EU products more competitive globally.
Beyond Cosmetics: A Broader Trend Toward Deregulation
The simplification proposal is not an isolated action but part of a wider regulatory shift within the EU:
- REACH Revision: Ambitious plans to expand substance restrictions and introduce stricter environmental criteria under REACH have been postponed or softened. Updates announced in the EU’s Legislative Train of June 2025 highlight a pivot toward administrative simplification and SME-friendly rules, as part of the 2024-2029 guideline of the European Commission.
- Green Claims Directive Paused for Review: The Green Claims Directive has not been withdrawn but is currently paused while the Commission reviews its impact on SMEs and micro-enterprises. The directive’s goal of tackling greenwashing remains, but adjustments are being considered to ease administrative burdens. This pause reflects a broader EU trend of reassessing regulatory initiatives to support competitiveness, even if it slows environmental policy rollouts.
- Chemicals Industry Action Plan (July 2025): The Commission presented a comprehensive plan to strengthen the competitiveness and modernization of the EU chemical sector. It sets out measures to answer four key areas: maintain EU production, secure and support environmental safety (mainly through circular economy and decarbonization), promote innovation, and simplify the regulatory framework.
Together, these developments indicate a broader strategic rebalancing of EU policy—less emphasis on the precautionary principle and sustainability-driven legislation, and more focus on making European industries nimble and globally competitive.
Diverging Stakeholder Views: Industry vs Consumer Advocates
These regulatory changes have sparked mixed reactions within the cosmetics ecosystem:
- Cosmetics Europe, the leading industry association, welcomed the simplification measures, calling them a “balanced and pragmatic approach” that supports innovation without compromising consumer safety. They argue that reducing administrative delays in ingredient approval is essential for European brands to stay competitive in a fast-paced, global market.
- BEUC (European Consumer Organization), however, has voiced strong concerns. They warn that easing derogations for hazardous substances, simplifying nanomaterial reporting, and delaying broader REACH reforms could prolong consumer exposure to harmful chemicals and slow progress toward safer, greener cosmetics. BEUC views these moves as a retreat from the EU’s long-standing precautionary principle, prioritizing industrial convenience over public health and environmental protection.
This divergence highlights a fundamental policy debate:
- Should EU regulation continue to evolve toward maximum safety and sustainability, even at the cost of slower innovation and higher compliance costs?
- Or should it shift toward administrative efficiency and competitiveness, accepting potentially slower progress on chemical safety reform?
What It Means for Cosmetic Companies
For the cosmetics sector, these reforms present both opportunities and risks:
Opportunities:
- Faster ingredient approvals will allow brands to introduce innovative formulations more rapidly.
- Reduced administrative burdens, particularly for nanomaterial notifications and labelling, will cut costs, free up regulatory resources and reduce the time-to-market.
- Greater alignment between CLP and CPR simplifies cross-regulation compliance.
Risks:
- A slower pace of environmental and chemical safety reform could undermine Europe’s position as a global leader in clean and safe beauty.
- Brands investing heavily in sustainability may face market confusion if regulatory signals weaken.
- Consumer trust could be challenged if NGOs successfully frame the reforms as weakening safety standards.
Preparing for a Shifting Regulatory Landscape
The European Commission’s draft regulation marks the start of a new era in EU chemical and cosmetic policy. While maintaining fundamental safety oversight, it prioritizes competitiveness, innovation, and regulatory efficiency over the more ambitious precautionary reforms envisioned in past strategies.
For cosmetic companies, this is a crucial moment to engage in public consultations, adapt internal compliance strategies, and ensure that safety, transparency, and sustainability commitments remain strong, even as regulatory pressures ease.
The coming years will determine whether Europe can successfully balance industrial competitiveness and consumer safety, or if this policy shift risks delaying the long-term transition toward safer, greener cosmetics.
Why EcoMundo ?
At Ecomundo, we guide you through your evolving regulatory obligations. With our innovative solutions and compliance expertise, we help you navigate regulatory changes while ensuring the safety and sustainability of your products. Contact us today to learn how we can simplify your compliance and enhance your competitiveness.
In July 2025, the European Commission unveiled a draft regulation amending both the Cosmetics Regulation (1223/2009) and the CLP Regulation (1272/2008). Presented as an administrative simplification initiative, this proposal is part of a broader strategy to boost EU competitiveness and modernize the chemical and cosmetics sectors.
While the changes promise faster processes and reduced bureaucracy for manufacturers and importers, they also mark a significant policy shift: a gradual move away from the EU’s ambitious environmental and health protection agenda toward lighter regulatory frameworks aimed at stimulating industrial growth. This evolution has sparked a heated debate among stakeholders and raises important questions about the future of cosmetic safety and sustainability in Europe.
A New Administrative Approach to Cosmetic Regulations
The Commission’s proposal introduces targeted updates to the Cosmetic Regulation, directly affecting how new ingredients and complex substances are managed:
- Nanomaterial Notification: The current six-month pre-notification system would be removed. Instead, companies would demonstrate nanomaterial safety through their Cosmetic Product Safety Reports, eliminating duplicate submissions and accelerating time-to-market.
- Ingredient List Updates: The process for adding new UV filters, preservatives, and colorants to positive lists (Annexes IV–VI) would be streamlined, reducing the delays currently faced by manufacturers seeking to innovate with new, safe ingredients.
- CMR Substance Derogations: The rules for authorizing the use of certain carcinogenic, mutagenic, or toxic to reproduction substances would be clarified, with fixed timelines and simplified criteria for transitional authorizations.
These changes aim to give companies faster and more predictable access to ingredient approvals, removing bureaucratic hurdles while reinforcing the authority of safety assessments by the Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS).
CLP Regulation: More Flexible Labelling
In parallel, the proposal amends the CLP Regulation, which governs classification and labelling of chemicals used throughout the cosmetics supply chain.
Key adjustments include:
- Allowing supplier contact information to be provided digitally instead of physically on labels.
- Simplified labelling requirements for very small packaging where space is limited.
- Extended deadlines for relabeling substances and mixtures, offering businesses more time to adapt to classification updates.
These changes are expected to lower compliance costs for ingredient suppliers and downstream cosmetic manufacturers, making EU products more competitive globally.
Beyond Cosmetics: A Broader Trend Toward Deregulation
The simplification proposal is not an isolated action but part of a wider regulatory shift within the EU:
- REACH Revision: Ambitious plans to expand substance restrictions and introduce stricter environmental criteria under REACH have been postponed or softened. Updates announced in the EU’s Legislative Train of June 2025 highlight a pivot toward administrative simplification and SME-friendly rules, as part of the 2024-2029 guideline of the European Commission.
- Green Claims Directive Paused for Review: The Green Claims Directive has not been withdrawn but is currently paused while the Commission reviews its impact on SMEs and micro-enterprises. The directive’s goal of tackling greenwashing remains, but adjustments are being considered to ease administrative burdens. This pause reflects a broader EU trend of reassessing regulatory initiatives to support competitiveness, even if it slows environmental policy rollouts.
- Chemicals Industry Action Plan (July 2025): The Commission presented a comprehensive plan to strengthen the competitiveness and modernization of the EU chemical sector. It sets out measures to answer four key areas: maintain EU production, secure and support environmental safety (mainly through circular economy and decarbonization), promote innovation, and simplify the regulatory framework.
Together, these developments indicate a broader strategic rebalancing of EU policy—less emphasis on the precautionary principle and sustainability-driven legislation, and more focus on making European industries nimble and globally competitive.
Diverging Stakeholder Views: Industry vs Consumer Advocates
These regulatory changes have sparked mixed reactions within the cosmetics ecosystem:
- Cosmetics Europe, the leading industry association, welcomed the simplification measures, calling them a “balanced and pragmatic approach” that supports innovation without compromising consumer safety. They argue that reducing administrative delays in ingredient approval is essential for European brands to stay competitive in a fast-paced, global market.
- BEUC (European Consumer Organization), however, has voiced strong concerns. They warn that easing derogations for hazardous substances, simplifying nanomaterial reporting, and delaying broader REACH reforms could prolong consumer exposure to harmful chemicals and slow progress toward safer, greener cosmetics. BEUC views these moves as a retreat from the EU’s long-standing precautionary principle, prioritizing industrial convenience over public health and environmental protection.
This divergence highlights a fundamental policy debate:
- Should EU regulation continue to evolve toward maximum safety and sustainability, even at the cost of slower innovation and higher compliance costs?
- Or should it shift toward administrative efficiency and competitiveness, accepting potentially slower progress on chemical safety reform?
What It Means for Cosmetic Companies
For the cosmetics sector, these reforms present both opportunities and risks:
Opportunities:
- Faster ingredient approvals will allow brands to introduce innovative formulations more rapidly.
- Reduced administrative burdens, particularly for nanomaterial notifications and labelling, will cut costs, free up regulatory resources and reduce the time-to-market.
- Greater alignment between CLP and CPR simplifies cross-regulation compliance.
Risks:
- A slower pace of environmental and chemical safety reform could undermine Europe’s position as a global leader in clean and safe beauty.
- Brands investing heavily in sustainability may face market confusion if regulatory signals weaken.
- Consumer trust could be challenged if NGOs successfully frame the reforms as weakening safety standards.
Preparing for a Shifting Regulatory Landscape
The European Commission’s draft regulation marks the start of a new era in EU chemical and cosmetic policy. While maintaining fundamental safety oversight, it prioritizes competitiveness, innovation, and regulatory efficiency over the more ambitious precautionary reforms envisioned in past strategies.
For cosmetic companies, this is a crucial moment to engage in public consultations, adapt internal compliance strategies, and ensure that safety, transparency, and sustainability commitments remain strong, even as regulatory pressures ease.
The coming years will determine whether Europe can successfully balance industrial competitiveness and consumer safety, or if this policy shift risks delaying the long-term transition toward safer, greener cosmetics.
Why EcoMundo ?
At Ecomundo, we guide you through your evolving regulatory obligations. With our innovative solutions and compliance expertise, we help you navigate regulatory changes while ensuring the safety and sustainability of your products. Contact us today to learn how we can simplify your compliance and enhance your competitiveness.
