The revision of the European Union’s Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive (UWWTD) presents significant legal and regulatory challenges for the cosmetics sector. A legal challenge is currently underway pointing to a discrepancy in the Directive’s impact assessment which targets only the cosmetics and pharmaceutical sectors as responsible for the cleanup and associated costs, estimated in billions of Euros. During this session, we will review the regulatory and legal advocacy paths to find a more equitable allocation of financial responsibilities among all sectors contributing to pollution.

States such as California continue to fill the gap left by Congress in promoting recyclable packaging standards by implementing mechanisms such as Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) and Post-Consumer Recycled Content standards. This session reviews those state-level rules, identifies the important inconsistencies amongst the states on EPR, and discusses the personal care industry’s challenges around recyclability. We will also cover, the related topic of state-level greenwashing laws, such as California’s Truth in Recycling Act, which will prohibit the chasing arrows symbol and other implications of recyclability except on packaging that regulators determine to be recyclable.

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), known as “forever chemicals,” have been used in personal care products for long-lasting, waterproof formulations, to condition hair and skin, and to improve product texture, among others. In recent years, PFAS have come under intense regulatory and consumer scrutiny due to their environmental persistence and potential health risks, leading to a surge in class actions involving PFAS in consumer products over alleged violations of state consumer protection laws.

In this interactive session, speakers will lead attendees through a mini table-top exercise to address key challenges personal care companies face today:

• What regulations and new state laws governing PFAS should I be aware of?
• Should I test my product for PFAS? Should I engage a consulting expert?
• If my product contains PFAS, how can I reduce litigation risk?
• Is insurance an option?
• How do I get supply chain attestations from reluctant suppliers?
• What should I tell stakeholders if an environmental group finds PFAS in my product?

Attendees will gain insights into the evolving regulatory landscape, legal risks, and strategies for public relations and crisis communications, handling consumer inquiries, and communications with retailers.

Innovation drives the beauty industry, from cutting-edge formulations and proprietary ingredients to advanced skincare technologies. However, safeguarding these innovations through patents and trade secrets is becoming increasingly complex as competition intensifies and regulatory landscapes evolve. This session will cover recent IP disputes, best practices for navigating patent applications, and how to enforce trade secret protections in a digital and globalized market.

As consumers have become increasingly focused on supposedly “toxic” ingredients and contaminants, and with the escalating spread of misinformation, enterprising plaintiffs’ lawyers have seized the opportunity to pursue lawsuits purporting to expose the “hidden dangers” of common personal care products. These lawsuits take many forms—ranging from products liability to consumer fraud, depending on the alleged injury—but all follow a similar pattern: a plausible risk, bolstered by junk or dubious science, fueled by internet advertising, becomes a massive litigation risk for a company, or even an entire product category. During this session, panelists will discuss emerging trends in this type of “hidden danger” litigation and propose strategies for anticipating and defending against such claims.