More States Legislate to End Product Safety Testing on Animals

It has been recognized that the use of animals in safety testing for cosmetics does not necessarily create safer products. There are many safety tests that are scientifically superior and more reliable than those that use animals. Moreover, alternative tests have been in use by the cosmetics industry for more than a decade.

In 2002, California became the first state to prohibit testing cosmetics and personal care items on animals, when an alternative test is available. Since then, three other states (NJ, NY and VA) have also passed laws that ban testing cosmetics on animals. These state laws ban manufacturers and other testing facilities from using traditional animal testing methods when alternative testing methods have been approved by the Inter-Agency Coordinating Committee for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM).

In 2018, California became the first state to prohibit the sale of cosmetics tested on animals outside the state. In 2019, Illinois and Nevada passed similar laws to ban the sale of animal-tested cosmetics in their states.  

This year, many other states have introduced legislation to ban the sale and use of cosmetics using animals for safety testing, and three states with product testing bans in place are legislating to ban the sale of animal-tested cosmetics as well. If you live in a state that has legislation pending, please contact your legislator and encourage them to support this legislation.


Pending legislation


Hawaii, SB 2754 Would make it unlawful for a manufacturer to import for profit, sell, or offer for sale in this State, any cosmetic, for which an animal test was conducted or contracted by or on behalf of the manufacturer, or any supplier of the manufacturer.

1/27/20 Referred to Senate Committees on Commerce, Consumer Protection and Health and Public Safety Intergovernmental and Military Affairs

2/14/20 Died in committee without a hearing


Maryland, SB 729 Would ban the use of animals for testing cosmetics or household products if an alternative test method is available and would ban the sale animal-tested cosmetics in the state.

2/3/20 First Reading in Senate Finance Committee

3/12/20 Hearing in Senate Finance Committee 1:00 pm



Massachusetts, H 823/S 505 Would prohibit manufacturers and contract testing facilities in the state from using traditional animal test methods on any ingredient or product for which an appropriate alternative test method or strategy exists. This bill has carried over from last year.

1/22/19 Referred to respective committees on Environment, Natural Resources and Agriculture

8/28/19 Hearing held before joint committee.



New Jersey, A 795/S 1726, Would prohibit any person or manufacturer from selling or offering for sale in the state any cosmetic that was developed or manufactured using an animal test, if the test was conducted or contracted by the manufacturer or any supplier of the manufacturer on or after January 1, 2020; expands on existing ban on conducting safety testing on animals in the state.

1/14/20 Referred to Assembly Consumer Affairs Committee

2/13/20 Senate bill introduced, referred to Senate Commerce Committee



New York, A 496/S 4250 Would prohibit the manufacture or sale of cosmetics tested on animals; expands on existing ban on the use of animals for cosmetics safety testing. This bill is a carryover from last year.

1/9/19 A 496 Referred to Committee on Economic Development.

3/5/19 S 4250 Referred to Committee on Consumer Protection.

1/8/20 A 4496 Referred to Committee on Economic Development.

1/8/20 S 4250 Referred to Committee on Consumer Protection.



Vermont, S 16  Would prohibit the use of vertebrate animals in nonmedical research testing if there is an alternative test method available that does not use vertebrate animals and provides equivalent or better scientific information than the animal test it replaces.

1/16/19 Referred to Committee on Economic Development, Housing and General Affairs.



Virginia HB 1289 Would prohibit conducting or contracting with a third party to conduct animal testing for cosmetics safety in the state. It would also prohibit the sale of any animal-tested cosmetic and would impose civil penalties for violating this prohibition.

1/8/20 Referred to Committee on Labor and Commerce.

2/4/20 Defeated in Labor and Commerce


For more information on the adoption of humane cosmetics law worldwide, go to the NAVS website.

This entry was posted in News and tagged on February 5, 2020.
Comments are closed.