HR-4435-119
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Sponsored by Janice Schakowsky (D-IL)
What it does
This bill would require cosmetic product labels and packaging to list all ingredients, including specific fragrance and flavor ingredients that are currently allowed to be listed simply as "fragrance" or "flavor." Within two years of enactment, products that do not meet these labeling requirements could not be sold. If a cosmetic contains any ingredient identified on specified lists of harmful or potentially harmful chemicals — such as those the EPA has identified as carcinogenic — the label must direct consumers to the brand owner's website for health impact information. Within one year of enactment, brand owners would also be required to publish a dedicated webpage for each product listing all ingredients, the functional purpose of each fragrance or flavor ingredient, and links to relevant hazard lists for any flagged chemicals.
Who benefits
Consumers who want to know what chemicals are in the cosmetics they use, particularly those with allergies, chemical sensitivities, or health concerns. People with fragrance allergies — estimated at 1–4% of the population — who currently cannot identify specific allergens hidden under the "fragrance" label. Parents purchasing products for children. Consumers with certain medical conditions who need to avoid specific chemical exposures. Smaller cosmetic brands that already disclose full ingredient lists, who would gain a more level competitive playing field. Public health researchers who would gain access to more complete product composition data.
Who is hurt
Cosmetic manufacturers and brand owners who would face compliance costs to reformulate labels, update packaging, and build or maintain ingredient disclosure websites. Companies that rely on fragrance formulas as proprietary trade secrets, as full disclosure could expose those formulations to competitors. Smaller or independent cosmetic brands with fewer resources to absorb compliance costs. Retailers who may need to pull non-compliant products from shelves. Fragrance ingredient suppliers whose specific chemical compositions would become publicly visible.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that the cosmetics industry has long exploited the "fragrance" loophole to conceal hundreds of individual chemicals — including known allergens and endocrine disruptors — behind a single word on a label, leaving consumers unable to make informed choices. They contend that the European Union already requires more comprehensive fragrance ingredient disclosure under its Cosmetics Regulation, demonstrating that full transparency is operationally feasible for global manufacturers. They further argue that linking products containing EPA-identified carcinogens to health information directly addresses a gap in consumer protection without banning any ingredient outright.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that fragrance formulas represent legitimate trade secrets developed through years of costly research and development, and that forced disclosure would effectively destroy intellectual property protections and undermine innovation in the fragrance industry. They contend that the bill's reliance on multiple external chemical hazard lists — which vary in methodology and scientific consensus — could generate consumer alarm about ingredients present at trace levels that pose no demonstrated risk at typical cosmetic exposure levels. They further argue that small and independent cosmetic brands would bear disproportionate compliance costs for website infrastructure and label redesigns, potentially driving them out of the market.
Constitutional context
Congress has broad authority to regulate cosmetics sold in interstate commerce under the Commerce Clause (Art. I, §8, cl. 3), and the FDA's authority over cosmetic labeling is well established under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Post-Loper Bright (2024), any FDA rulemaking to implement the bill's disclosure requirements — particularly the maintenance of the public hazard ingredient list — would face independent judicial review rather than automatic deference, meaning courts would assess whether the statutory language clearly authorizes each regulatory step.
Checks and balances
Congress expands FDA's regulatory authority by mandating new labeling and disclosure rules; the FDA gains enforcement power over non-compliant products, checked by judicial review of any implementing regulations under the post-Loper Bright independent judgment standard.
Historical precedent
The Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act of 2022 (MoCRA) expanded FDA oversight of cosmetics, including new safety reporting and facility registration requirements, representing the most recent federal expansion of cosmetic regulation prior to this bill.