Is PFAS Hiding in Your Makeup Bag in 2026? What the New Wave of Beauty Lawsuits Means for You

A new client alert from the law firm Crowell & Moring is putting the beauty industry on notice, PFAS-related lawsuits and regulations are no longer a fringe issue for cosmetics and personal care brands. According to the firm, early class-action lawsuits over PFAS in cosmetics mostly failed because plaintiffs couldn't prove the chemicals were actually in the products they bought. That legal shield is weakening fast, and it has real implications for anyone who buys makeup, skincare, or hair products.

This isn't just a beauty-aisle problem. PFAS Authority's own scoring of 10,338 products across many consumer categories finds that 48% fail its PFAS and toxin screen , a reminder that "forever chemicals" show up far beyond nonstick pans and rain jackets, and that many brands still say nothing about whether their products contain them.

What Happened With PFAS Lawsuits Against Beauty Brands?

Per Crowell & Moring's summary, the first round of consumer class actions accusing cosmetics companies of hiding PFAS in their products largely fizzled out in court. The reason wasn't that the chemicals weren't present, it was that plaintiffs' lawyers struggled to produce solid testing evidence tying specific PFAS compounds to specific products on store shelves. Courts generally require more than a suspicion; they want lab data connecting the allegation to the actual item purchased.

That evidentiary gap is closing. Independent lab testing of cosmetics has become more accessible and more common, state regulators are tightening ingredient disclosure rules, and plaintiffs' firms are getting better at building the scientific record courts want to see. Crowell & Moring's alert frames this as a turning point, litigation risk for the beauty industry is "real and growing," not a passing headline.

Who Is Affected by This Shift?

The short answer, shoppers, brands, and retailers alike. Cosmetics categories most often flagged for PFAS include long-wear foundations, waterproof mascaras, and other "stay-put" formulas, where PFAS compounds have historically been used for their water- and oil-repelling properties. Brands facing more legal and regulatory scrutiny are those that market water-resistance, long-wear, or smudge-proof claims without disclosing exactly which ingredients deliver that performance.

PFAS Authority's brand-level screening has found several major companies, including the cosmetics brand MAC, along with Cuisinart, T-fal, Calphalon, The North Face, Nike, Columbia, and Samsung, disclose essentially nothing about whether PFAS are used in their products or manufacturing. That silence doesn't prove a product contains PFAS, but it does mean consumers currently have no easy way to check.

Why Does This Matter for You?

PFAS are a large family of synthetic chemicals that don't break down easily in the environment or the body, which is why they're nicknamed "forever chemicals." Federal health agencies, including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, have linked certain PFAS compounds to health concerns such as effects on the immune system, cholesterol changes, and increased risk of some cancers. These are associations identified in scientific studies, not proof that any single product or exposure causes a specific health outcome in any individual.

Cosmetics are a particular concern because many are applied directly to skin or near the mouth and eyes daily, over years or decades, and some ingredients can be absorbed through skin or inadvertently ingested. Beyond personal health questions, the growing litigation and regulatory pressure described by Crowell & Moring also matters for your wallet, companies facing lawsuits or new disclosure mandates may reformulate products, raise prices, or pull items from shelves, changes that can happen with little warning to consumers.

What Can You Do Right Now?

You don't have to wait for a lawsuit to resolve to make more informed choices today. A few practical steps.

• Check ingredient labels for PFAS red flags. Ingredients containing "fluoro" in the name (like polytetrafluoroethylene, perfluorooctanoic acid, or perfluorodecalin) are common markers of PFAS chemistry in cosmetics.
• Be cautious with "waterproof" and "long-wear" claims. These performance promises have historically relied on PFAS in some formulas, though not all brands use them the same way.
• Look up brands and products before buying. Tools like PFAS Authority's product finder let you search specific items to see how they score, based on publicly available ingredient lists, material data, and certifications.
• Understand how scoring works. PFAS Authority evaluates products using published ingredients, materials, and third-party certifications or disclosures, not independent laboratory testing of each item. You can read the full approach on the methodology page.
• Favor brands that disclose. Companies that publish clear ingredient and materials information make it easier for you to judge PFAS content; brands that stay silent leave you guessing.

Bottom Line

PFAS litigation against beauty brands is shifting from mostly unsuccessful to genuinely risky, according to Crowell & Moring, as better testing and tighter disclosure rules close the evidence gap that once protected companies. No product should be labeled flatly "safe" or "unsafe" based on this alone, but categories built around waterproof and long-wear claims deserve extra scrutiny. With PFAS Authority's own scoring showing that 48% of over 10,000 products screened fail its PFAS and toxin check, the smartest move is to check before you buy, not after.

FAQ

Does this mean my makeup definitely contains PFAS?

No. It means litigation and regulatory pressure are increasing because some products in the category have tested positive for PFAS compounds, per legal and scientific sources cited by Crowell & Moring. Whether any specific product you own contains PFAS depends on its formula and ingredient sourcing.

Are all "long-wear" or "waterproof" cosmetics a concern?

Not automatically. These claims have historically been associated with PFAS use in some formulations, but brands increasingly reformulate with alternatives. Checking ingredient lists or a product's disclosed materials, such as through PFAS Authority's finder tool, gives a clearer picture than the marketing claim alone.

What should I do if a brand discloses nothing about PFAS?

Treat the lack of disclosure as a gap in information, not proof of a problem. You can prioritize brands that publish ingredient transparency, look for third-party certifications, or use screening tools that compile available public data to flag products with lower or higher concern levels.