US states push against toxic cosmetic chemicals as federal laws fall short

Individual states, advocacy groups, and civil society organizations are taking the lead in removing toxic cosmetic ingredients from the US market, as federal ingredient bans and enforcement are said to be limited. 

The national hands-on movement is exemplified in a new lawsuit filed by the Mercury Policy Project in California, US, against eBay. The case alleges the e-commerce giant failed to warn consumers about mercury-containing skin-lightening products that were repeatedly flagged as illegal and dangerous.

The lawsuit argues that eBay knowingly allowed consumers to be exposed to mercury without the clear warnings required by law. 

“Testing by the Mercury Policy Project and the Zero Mercury Working Group (ZMWG) found that eBay and other platforms continued to host mercury-containing skin-bleaching products even after repeated warnings and removals over several years,” Michael Bender, international co-coordinator at the ZMWG, tells Personal Care Insights.

The case exposes a broader responsibility gap in US cosmetics oversight. Online platforms play a central role in the distribution of cosmetics, but can often avoid accountability under federal law, Bender says.

“Violations of health and safety laws facilitated by e-commerce not only threaten public health but also create an uneven playing field, as brick-and-mortar retailers must comply with domestic laws that may be evaded online,” he adds.

At the state level, New Jersey lawmakers are also moving to close cosmetic safety gaps they say the law allows.

Governor Phil Murphy has signed legislation banning cosmetics that contain intentionally added per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). The ingredient group, hailed as “forever chemicals” for their environmental persistence, has been linked to cancer in humans as well as general ecological pollutants.

Moreover, Virginia is cracking down on toxic ingredients, such as formaldehyde and methylene glycol, in cosmetics. Legislators argue that consumers should not bear the burden of identifying harmful chemicals in products that remain largely unregulated at the federal level.

Mercury is a heavy metal linked to cancer, birth defects, and reproductive harm, even from secondary exposure.As e-commerce grows and the US beauty market expands, experts warn of the public health risks posed by weak enforcement of cosmetic ingredient standards. 

Targeting eBay

Like other online marketplaces, eBay has established policies to address prohibited and restricted items, product safety, and counterfeit goods.

“In 2024, eBay reportedly blocked 98.8% of prohibited-item violations, leading to the proactive removal of 5.9 million counterfeit and prohibited items. Notably, skin-bleaching products are not allowed on eBay,” Bender says.

However, in light of the new lawsuit, he adds that eBay and many other online platforms currently don’t appear to be “sufficiently motivated” to eliminate listings of toxic skin bleaching products.

The Mercury Policy Project, a project of the San Francisco Tides Center, partnered with the ZMWG and tested over 30 skin-lightening products purchased on eBay. The products were found to contain the heavy metal in levels exceeding the FDA’s legal limit by up to 31,000 times. The legal limit is 1 part per million.

The groups filed a lawsuit against eBay under California’s Proposition 65, which requires companies to warn consumers when they could be exposed to chemicals known to cause cancer, birth defects, or reproductive harm.

The lawsuit alleges that eBay did not provide the legally required warnings at the point of purchase. “This has been the case even after they were reminded on multiple occasions over several years,” Bender says.

The groups also claim to have formally notified eBay about several products in a letter sent in November 2018.

The lawsuit alleges eBay failed to warn consumers about mercury-containing skin-lightening products sold on its platform.“Consequently, policymakers and the courts are increasingly challenging the legal framework under which consumers are not well protected,” Bender explains.

Personal Care Insights has reached out to eBay regarding the lawsuit and is awaiting a response.

Closing legal gaps

Federal oversight of cosmetics in the US remains limited when it comes to ingredient safety. Historically, the US has focused more on product registration, labeling, and post-launch reporting systems rather than outright ingredient bans.

According to FDA regulatory data, approximately a dozen cosmetic chemicals are banned or restricted in the US. Meanwhile, the EU’s framework prohibits over 1,300.

Many industry-wide and individual-level actions have aimed to close this gap in cosmetic safety oversight, with companies voluntarily reformulating when new chemical safety data airs.

The Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act (MoCRA) was introduced in 2022 and requires cosmetic companies to disclose facility registration and adverse event reporting while granting recall authority. However, MoCRA did not introduce proactive ingredient safety bans.

As a result, many state-level actions have sought to take bans enact bans on their own. To name a few, Washington moved against the known carcinogen formaldehyde in hair and nail products, California against carcinogenic 1,4-dioxane in shampoo, and New York previously against mercury.

New Jersey and Virginia are now joining the list with their respective crackdowns against PFAS and other toxic cosmetic chemicals. New Jersey’s Bill S-1042 will ban the intentional addition of PFAS substances in cosmetics two years after the bill’s effective date.

“This is an essential piece of legislation that will save the lives of countless New Jersey residents. PFAS… have consistently been linked to serious health complications, ranging from cancer to developmental complications in our children,” says New Jersey Senator Linda Greenstein.

Advocacy groups say toxic skin-lightening products are widely marketed online and continue to circulate despite repeated warnings and removals.Virginia’s proposed House Bill 122 also seeks to ban toxic cosmetic chemicals, which, beyond PFAS, include formaldehyde and methylene glycol. According to lawmakers, the proposed bans aim to counter the gaps in safety protections that allow cosmetics to legally enter the market without prior FDA approval.

Escaping online liability 

The eBay lawsuit mirrors a similar case brought against Amazon in California, which, after a decade, was settled in January 2025. The case centered on the sale of mercury-containing skin-lightening products on Amazon’s e-commerce platform.

“Amazon’s primary defense was that health and safety compliance of products sold on its site should be handled by each of the individual entities from all over the world that use its online marketplace — no matter how small and no matter whether they are familiar with US laws,” Bender says.

Amazon argued that, as an online platform, it should not be held responsible for any consumer harm caused by the dangerously high levels of mercury in products sold on its virtual shelves. 

However, Bender says that “as the case wove its way through the courts, Amazon’s perspective gradually changed.”

As part of the settlement, Amazon agreed to block sales of skin-lightening creams containing mercury from its website and pay civil penalties and costs of nearly US$600,000, without admitting liability.

While online platforms use their own algorithms and keyword checks to control the products listed and determine whether a prohibited product is offered for sale, these controls can fall short of protecting consumers.

“Third-party sellers may try to counter this control by changing or deliberately misspelling the name of the product, adding letters to it, or omitting the name of the (prohibited) brand altogether, thereby creating the problem of repeat offenders,” says Bender.

He explains that many online platforms are not taking the enforcement steps necessary to keep highly toxic skin-bleaching products from being offered for sale, claiming an exemption from liability.

Rules that apply to domestic sellers and physical stores often do not apply to international online sellers due to the legacy of how the internet is, or is not, regulated.

Experts have crowned the lack of online enforcement of banned cosmetics a “global criminal enterprise” that requires multiple measures to dismantle. 

With the eBay lawsuit set to unfold in the year ahead, Bender hopes that California’s Proposition 65 may uniquely hold both the platform and third-party sellers liable.

“Strong enforcement, coupled with court decisions and settlements with strict penalties, could send a wake-up call that it’s time for platforms to effectively enforce their prohibited product policies of toxic skin-lightening products.”