PFAS Banned in Cosmetics: State Laws, MoCRA and K-Beauty Formulas

PFAS is the shorthand for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, the "forever chemicals" family behind nonstick pans and stain-proof fabric. In cosmetics they do quieter jobs. They add slip to a powder, shine to a gloss, and staying power to a waterproof mascara.

The rules around them changed fast. In 2025 and 2026, seven US states turned these chemicals from an ingredient question into a sales ban. Korea is where many indie brands make their products. There, using PFAS in cosmetics was not itself a legal violation when civic groups tested local products in 2021 (Kyunghyang Shinmun). So the PFAS-free requirement for a US launch has to come from you, in writing.

This is an industry shift, not a footnote. Below: what changed, where they hide in a typical K-beauty formula, who carries the legal risk, and the questions to send your factory before the next PO.

Which States Ban PFAS in Cosmetics Right Now?

Seven states enforce a ban today. California, Colorado, Maryland, Minnesota and Washington started on January 1, 2025. Maine and Vermont followed on January 1, 2026. Each one bars selling cosmetics that contain intentionally added PFAS in the state (Compliance & Risks).

Seven more states have enacted laws with later start dates, for fourteen in total as of March 2026. New York and Massachusetts have bills pending. Connecticut sits in between. Since July 1, 2026, a PFAS cosmetic can only be sold there with prior written notice to the state and a compliant label, and a full ban follows in 2028.

Sources: Compliance & Risks state tracker, March 2026; Minnesota Statutes 116.943. Check the statute text before relying on any single date.

For a brand that sells nationally online, the practical reading is simple. The strictest state sets your spec. One compliant formula is far simpler than two versions and a shipping map for each.

Federal Law Still Has No PFAS Ban, Only a Report

No federal regulation specifically prohibits intentionally added PFAS in cosmetics. FDA said so itself when it released its MoCRA-mandated report on December 29, 2025 (FDA).

The report drew on the product listings that MoCRA made mandatory. It found 51 PFAS in 1,744 cosmetic formulations. FDA reviewed the 25 most used, which cover about 96 percent of intentional use in those listings (FDA). Five looked low concern under intended use. One showed a potential safety concern. For most of the rest, the toxicology data was incomplete or unavailable.

Read that as a gap, not a green light. A federal "not enough data" finding leaves every state ban in force. Lawyers also expect state attorneys general and private plaintiffs to pursue these chemicals in consumer products, including through class actions (Holland & Knight). The MoCRA overview for indie K-beauty founders covers the rest of the federal duties.

Where Do PFAS Hide in a K-Beauty Formula?

PFAS sit in the ingredients that make a product glide, shine or resist water. FDA's listing data names the common ones: PTFE, perfluorononyl dimethicone, perfluorohexylethyl triethoxysilane, methyl perfluorobutyl ether, methyl perfluoroisobutyl ether, trifluoroacetyl tripeptide-2, and tetradecyl aminobutyroylvalylaminobutyric urea trifluoroacetate (FDA PFAS page).

The last two surprise people. They are skincare actives, not makeup polymers. They count because state law uses a chemistry test. In Minnesota's statute, PFAS is defined as a class of fluorinated organic chemicals containing at least one fully fluorinated carbon atom (Minn. Stat. 116.943). One trifluoro group meets that test.

Product type matters too. Researchers who screened 231 cosmetics bought in the US and Canada found high fluorine most often in foundations, waterproof mascaras and liquid lipsticks. Products sold on long wear or water resistance tracked with high readings (Whitehead et al., 2021).

Korean shelves show the same pattern. In 2021, Korean civic groups tested 20 cosmetics sold in Korea and found PFAS in 10 of them. All three lip products and four of the five sunscreens tested positive (Kyunghyang Shinmun).

The Brand Owner Carries the Risk, Not the Korean Lab

Under Minnesota's law, the manufacturer includes the person whose brand name is affixed to the product. For imports, it also includes the importer or first domestic distributor when the maker has no US presence (Minn. Stat. 116.943). For most indie K-beauty brands, that points at the US brand owner.

Minnesota can also ask for proof. If the state believes a product contains intentionally added PFAS, it can direct the manufacturer to deliver test results within 30 days. If testing shows none were added, the manufacturer files a certificate with those results (Minn. Stat. 116.943).

Intentionally added PFAS refers to chemicals deliberately added during manufacture where their continued presence is desired in the final product to perform a specific function (Minn. Stat. 116.943). A fluorinated silicone chosen for wear time fits that test exactly.

Your Korean factory formulates to Korean rules and to your brief. If the brief says nothing about PFAS, a coated pigment or a fluorinated slip agent stays in because it performs. The guide to Korean cosmetic ingredient restrictions for US founders shows how the two rulebooks split in general. Fluorinated ingredients are the clearest current example.

What Should You Ask Your Korean Factory Before the Next PO?

Ask for five things in writing before you approve a formula or pay a deposit. Each one closes a gap that a finished-product label cannot show.

1. Full INCI list with CAS numbers. Cover every raw material, including blends, peptide complexes and coated pigments, down to the sub-ingredients.
2. A fluorine screen of that list. Flag any name with fluoro, perfluoro, trifluoro or PTFE, plus any fluorinated surface treatment on a pigment.
3. Supplier PFAS declarations. Get one signed statement per raw material that no PFAS, as state law defines them, were intentionally added.
4. Replacements for every flag. Ask the lab for non-fluorinated options and for stability data on each swap before you lock the formula.
5. A test plan you can show a regulator. Decide between total fluorine screening and targeted PFAS analysis, and keep the results with your safety file.

One more check sits outside the formula: claims. A "PFAS-free" badge is a marketing claim, so keep the declarations and test results that back it. For the federal side of the same file, the guide to FDA requirements for Korean skincare lists what MoCRA, labeling and import rules already expect.

PFAS-Free Is Turning Into a Sourcing Advantage

Europe is pushing the same supply chain your factory buys from. France has banned the manufacture, import and sale of cosmetics containing PFAS since January 1, 2026 (Premium Beauty News). As of October 10, 2026, cosmetics newly placed on the EU market must keep PFHxA and its salts below 25 ppb. PFHxA-related substances must stay below 1,000 ppb (SGS on Regulation (EU) 2024/2462).

Large brands moved early. The OECD has counted 36 PFAS used in beauty products, and Cosmetics Europe committed to replacing them by 2026 (Premium Beauty News). Any Korean supplier that ships cosmetics to France has needed PFAS-free versions since January.

That is good news for an indie brand. The alternatives exist, and asking for them at the brief stage costs you a conversation, not a relaunch. Color is where you will feel it most, because long-wear and waterproof claims lean hardest on fluorinated ingredients. If a color line is on your roadmap, the guide to Korean color cosmetics for the US covers the rest of the sourcing picture.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is PTFE banned in cosmetics in the US?
Not at the federal level. PTFE is on FDA's list of common PFAS ingredients in cosmetics (FDA), so every state ban on intentionally added PFAS covers it. A cosmetic with added PTFE cannot be sold in California, Minnesota, Washington or the other states with bans in force.

Do state PFAS bans cover trace contamination?
Most target intentionally added PFAS, meaning PFAS added on purpose to do a job in the product (Minn. Stat. 116.943). Vermont spells out an exemption for technically unavoidable traces from impurities, processing, storage or packaging migration (Compliance & Risks). Keep raw material declarations anyway, because they are your evidence of intent.

Does a state ban apply if I sell online from another state?
The statutes are written around selling, offering or distributing for sale in the state, so orders shipped to customers there are exposed (Minn. Stat. 116.943). Treat the strictest state as your national spec, and confirm your channel plan with counsel.

Do the new EU PFHxA limits apply to products already on shelves?
No. Cosmetics placed on the EU market before October 10, 2026 are exempt. Products placed on the market after that date must meet the limits (SGS).

By Liz Song, K-beauty sourcing consultant.