EU microplastics ban pushes beauty from ingredient swaps to manufacturing change

The European Union (EU) is cracking down on microplastics intentionally added to cosmetics due to their environmental persistence. Turning to bio-based formulations could help cosmetic manufacturers skirt upcoming bottlenecks, but at scale, these materials present formulation challenges. Experts suggest that it may be time for the beauty industry to update its manufacturing processes.

The 2027 EU Microplastics Ban began applying in phases in October 2023. It targets synthetic polymer microparticles (SPM), which are solid microplastic polymers smaller than 5mm.

The EU says the purpose of banning microplastics is to reduce environmental pollution and risk. The regulatory body maintains that SPMs can be replaced with environmentally-friendly alternatives that do not pollute oceans.

Beyond materials like synthetic scrub beads and glitter, the law covers any SPM intentionally added to give a cosmetic product a specific property, such as texture, color, or film-forming. Many common cosmetic ingredients are included in its scope, such as film-forming copolymers used in waterproof sunscreens and mascaras, nylons used for texture in pressed powders or foundations, and encapsulated fragrance microcapsules.

“The restriction targets synthetic polymers used for sensory texture, opacifying, and microencapsulation, requiring a pivot toward bio-based alternatives like cellulose, silicas, or natural lipid matrices,” Dave Palmer, technical manager at Micropore Technologies, tells Personal Care Insights.

“Formulators are being forced to rethink both product structure and active delivery.”EU restrictions are prompting cosmetic formulators to rethink synthetic polymers used for texture, film-forming, and encapsulation. 

Palmer explains that, for cosmetic manufacturers affected by the restrictions, the main priority is substituting impacted ingredients without compromising rheology, skin feel, shelf stability, or active ingredient performance.

Reformulation challenges

Palmer says that ahead of the upcoming bans, companies can replace SPMs with bio-based alternatives. However, these materials present formulation challenges that synthetic alternatives typically sidestep.

“Bio-based substitutes are physically less forgiving. They generally exhibit lower shear tolerance, altered interfacial tension, and different flow dynamics than synthetic polymers,” he says.

Traditionally, cosmetic emulsions are made using high-speed mixing equipment that tears ingredients apart with force. This works well for synthetic ingredients, which are tough and predictable, but when switching to more delicate bio-based alternatives, aggressive mixing creates challenges. The force causes uneven particle sizes and unpredictable release of active ingredients.

As formulators scale up from lab beakers to commercial-sized tanks, the mixing force changes, creating more intense shear stress and breaking fragile natural microcapsules. 

“Natural raw materials introduce inherent batch-to-batch variations due to agricultural growth factors. Under conventional high-shear mixing, these delicate materials easily break down and can be more likely to fail preservative testing,” explains Palmer.

Gentler mixing for stability 

To overcome these formulation challenges, Palmer points to process innovation and low-shear membrane emulsification as a solution.

Low-shear membrane emulsification is a gentle method to create creams and lotions by pushing oil through a fine membrane to create tiny, perfectly uniform droplets. The process protects sensitive ingredients from being damaged by harsh mixing.

“Low-shear techniques, like Advanced Crossflow membrane emulsification, form droplets drop-by-drop through uniform pores rather than tearing materials apart with violent mechanical force,” says Palmer.

He explains that this process avoids the heat generation and structural stress of homogenizers. It thereby keeps delicate bio-based carriers, sensitive natural fragrances, and active ingredients fully intact throughout processing.

According to Palmer, uniformity is fundamental to emulsion stability and performance. He tells us that, when particle sizes vary wildly, larger droplets merge over time, triggering creaming, sedimentation, or phase separation. Bio-based alternatives can be more sensitive to processing conditions than conventional synthetic cosmetic ingredients. 

“For encapsulated ingredients, uniform particle size ensures identical shell wall thickness and break strength, guaranteeing predictable active release or scent delivery upon application.”

Palmer says that, beyond gaining formulation stability, companies can benefit from switching to low-shear emulsification techniques on an operational level.

“Regulatory compliance is an opportunity to modernize processing. Shifting from traditional high-shear batch mixing to low-shear, continuous membrane emulsification does more than solve a formulation headache — it slashes energy usage, eliminates raw material waste from failed batches, and de-risks future regulatory shifts.”

Timely compliance

The 2027 EU Microplastics Ban was designed with different phased transitional periods to give companies time to adapt. The deadline for rinse-off products, such as face washes and shower gels, is October 2027.

Leave-on products, including those with fragrance capsules, have until October 2029. The longest transition is for make-up, lip, and nail products, which have until October 2035.

To ensure early compliance, Palmer advises manufacturers to evaluate their manufacturing processes alongside ingredient selection. 

“Because standard stability testing requires three months per iteration, losing time to failed high-shear batches severely threatens compliance timelines,” he says.

“Adopting scalable, low-shear processing during early R&D ensures that pilot-scale results translate directly to commercial lines without process redesign.”