Cosmetic Safety for Communities of Color and Professional Salon Workers Act of 2025
- Sponsor
- Rep. Schakowsky, Janice D. [D-IL-9]
- Committees
- Education and Workforce Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jul 16, 2025
Bottom line
The bill aims to enhance cosmetic safety and address health inequities by funding targeted research, supporting safer product development, providing educational resources, and implementing new regulatory requirements for professional cosmetics and synthetic braids.
What it actually does
This bill establishes new research programs within the Public Health Service Act to investigate health disparities related to cosmetics in communities of color and occupational health concerns for professional salon workers. It also creates grant programs to support the development of safer cosmetic alternatives and establishes two national resource centers for beauty justice and salon worker health. Furthermore, the bill mandates the Department of Labor to issue a standard requiring multilingual safety data sheets for professional cosmetics and amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to include synthetic braids under FDA regulation, requiring safety standards and warning labels.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that this legislation is crucial for addressing long-standing health disparities and occupational hazards faced by communities of color and professional salon workers, who are often disproportionately exposed to harmful chemicals in cosmetic products. They contend that the bill's provisions for research, education, and regulatory oversight will lead to safer products, better-informed consumers, and improved worker protections, promoting health equity and transparency in the cosmetic industry.
Opponents contend
Critics, particularly from the cosmetic industry, may argue that the bill imposes significant new regulatory burdens and compliance costs on manufacturers, importers, and salon owners, especially concerning the multilingual safety data sheet requirements and the new FDA oversight for synthetic braids. They might contend that such mandates could stifle innovation, increase product costs, or create a complex regulatory patchwork if states are allowed to implement stricter standards, potentially impacting product availability.
The bill is relatively concise and clearly structured, making it accessible for an informed reader to understand its provisions and implications within a reasonable timeframe.
Sec. 3, Part P of title III of the Public Health Service Act
Research on Health Disparities Related to Cosmetics Impacting Communities of Color
This provision directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to conduct or award grants for research into chemicals linked to adverse health effects in cosmetics marketed to women and girls of color. The research will examine product use across lifespans, specific adverse health effects, and interventions to reduce exposure. A report on findings is required within five years, and $7.5 million is authorized for this purpose.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this research is crucial to address long-standing health inequities and protect vulnerable populations from harmful chemical exposures in products specifically marketed to them, filling a critical knowledge gap.
Critics contend
No specific opposition is typically raised against research into health disparities, though some might question the scope or cost if not directly tied to immediate regulatory action.
Tradeoffs
Balances the need for targeted research to address specific health disparities with broader cosmetic safety regulations, ensuring resources are directed where health impacts are most pronounced.
Sec. 4, Part P of title III of the Public Health Service Act
Research on Health Concerns Impacting Professional Nail, Hair, and Beauty Salon Workers
This provision directs the Secretary of HHS to conduct or award grants for research into chemicals found in cosmetics used by professional salon workers. The research will investigate adverse health effects from exposure, types of products containing such chemicals, and interventions to reduce harm. A report is required within five years, and $7.5 million is authorized for this purpose.
Sec. 5
Support for Creating Safer Cosmetic Alternatives
This provision authorizes the Secretary of HHS, through the FDA Commissioner, to award grants for research focused on designing cosmetic chemicals without inherent toxicity. Priority is given to projects replacing chemicals in professional cosmetic products, products marketed to women and girls of color, and assisting minority-owned cosmetic companies in creating safer formulations. $10 million is authorized for this initiative.
Sec. 6
National Resource Center on Beauty Justice
This provision directs HHS to award a grant to an eligible non-profit organization to establish a National Resource Center on Beauty Justice. The center will address unsafe cosmetic chemical exposures experienced by women/girls/men/boys of color, immigrant populations, language minorities, the LGBTQIA community, and other underserved populations through community outreach, education, and collaborative partnerships. $2 million is authorized annually for fiscal years 2026 through 2030.
Sec. 7, Amends Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970
Translation and Access to Safety Data Sheets for Professional Cosmetics
This provision mandates the Secretary of Labor to issue a new OSHA standard within 18 months. This standard will require manufacturers and importers of professional cosmetics containing hazardous chemicals to provide safety data sheets (SDS) online in English, Spanish, Vietnamese, Chinese, Korean, and other languages upon request. Distributors must provide these SDS, and employers (salon owners) must have them in the workplace and provide translations to employees upon request, ensuring greater transparency and worker safety.
Sec. 8
National Resource Center on Salon Worker Health and Safety
This provision directs HHS to award a grant to an eligible non-profit organization to establish a National Resource Center on Salon Worker Health and Safety. The center will address unsafe cosmetic chemical exposures for salon workers, particularly those from underserved populations, through information dissemination, training (including on safety data sheets), and collaborative partnerships. $2 million is authorized annually for fiscal years 2026 through 2030.
Sec. 9, Amends Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
FDA Regulation and Safety Standards for Synthetic Braids
This provision amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to explicitly include synthetic braids in the definition of 'cosmetic.' It declares synthetic braids misbranded if they do not meet FDA safety standards (to be established within one year) or lack a warning label indicating non-compliance. Crucially, it amends the preemption rules to allow states to implement stronger regulations for synthetic braids than federal requirements. The Secretary of HHS, through the FDA, is directed to issue regulations establishing these safety standards within one year.
Defines hazardous chemicals in professional cosmetics by reference to existing OSHA regulations (29 CFR 1910.1200(d)).
Sec. 7(a)(1)(A)(ii)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice to incorporate existing regulatory definitions by reference, avoiding redundancy and ensuring consistency with established frameworks like OSHA's Hazard Communication Standard.
Case for: Ensures that the new safety data sheet requirements align with established and understood definitions of chemical hazards under OSHA, leveraging existing regulatory infrastructure and expertise.
Case against: Requires external research for a full understanding of the scope of 'hazardous chemical,' potentially making the bill less self-contained and immediately understandable for a casual reader.
Estimated impact: Applies to all professional cosmetic products containing chemicals classified as health hazards under OSHA's Hazard Communication Standard, ensuring consistency in hazard identification.
Amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to explicitly state that nothing in the Act shall prevent states from implementing requirements for greater transparency, disclosure, or protection with respect to synthetic braids than federal requirements.
Sec. 9(c)
Why it matters:While technically an amendment, the non-preemption clause is a significant policy choice that grants states more power than typically allowed in federal cosmetic regulation, which could be overlooked if only focusing on the new FDA authority.
Case for: Proponents argue this preserves states' rights to enact stronger consumer protections for synthetic braids, allowing for tailored responses to local health concerns or faster action than federal processes, and fostering innovation in state-level regulation.
Case against: Opponents, particularly industry groups, might argue that a patchwork of state regulations could create undue burden and complexity for manufacturers operating nationally, hindering commerce, increasing compliance costs, and potentially confusing consumers with varied standards.
Estimated impact: Could lead to varied safety standards and labeling requirements for synthetic braids across different states, potentially increasing compliance costs for manufacturers but offering enhanced consumer protection in some jurisdictions.