The FDA published its first-ever assessment of the Use of PFAS in Cosmetic Products. The report’s headline isn't alarming, but the subtext is worth your attention.
On December 29, 2025, the FDA released its long-awaited Report on PFAS in Cosmetic Products. PFAS, the shorthand for per/polyfluoroalkyl substances, are a class of synthetic chemicals used across countless industries. In beauty, they go by names like PTFE, perfluorodecalin, and perfluorononyl dimethicone. You have almost certainly used a product that contains one.
The report was mandated by The Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act of 2022 (MoCRA), the biggest overhaul of federal cosmetics oversight since 1938. The FDA had a congressional deadline to assess the safety of PFAS and publish its findings.
What it found, essentially, is that it cannot tell you whether most of them are safe. Not because they are definitively dangerous, but because the data required to answer the question does not exist.
For 19 of the 25 most commonly used PFAS in cosmetics, the agency’s own language is “incomplete or unavailable” toxicological data. That is not what we expected - a shrug 🤷♂️ on government letterhead?
Why Are These Chemicals in Cosmetics at All?
Because they work. PFAS earn their place in a formula.
PTFE, which most people know as Teflon, is the most widely used PFAS in cosmetics. It shows up in eyeshadows, pressed powders, foundations, and long-wear formulations as a texture agent. It is what gives a pressed powder that smooth, almost frictionless feel on a brush. It helps waterproof mascaras resist humidity and long-wear products stay put. Other PFAS contribute to skin conditioning, water resistance, and consistency.
They are not accidental. A formulator puts them there because they deliver a sensory or performance result that has, until recently, been difficult to replicate with non-fluorinated alternatives.
What the Numbers Actually Say
Using new mandatory product listing data from MoCRA, the FDA identified 51 distinct PFAS intentionally added to 1,744 cosmetic formulations. That is roughly 0.41% of all registered products, so not the whole market. But the category concentration is what matters: eyeshadows, face powders, foundations, eyeliners, and leave-on face and neck products make up the majority of those formulations. Products applied close to the eye (a direct conduit to your bloodstream), worn for hours, and used daily.
PTFE alone appeared in approximately 490 products, making it the single most common PFAS ingredient in the category.
Of the 25 most frequently used PFAS reviewed, five were assessed as low safety concern under their intended use conditions. One was flagged as a potential safety concern, with significant uncertainty remaining. And 19 could not be assessed at all, because the toxicological data simply isn’t there.
One important scope note: the report covers only PFAS that are intentionally added as ingredients. It does not address PFAS that may be present as contaminants from raw materials, packaging, or ingredient breakdown. Separate research has found PFAS in products with no PFAS listed on the label, but that is a different, still-developing conversation.
States Didn’t Wait for the Federal Government
While the FDA was drafting its report, states were already acting. Eleven states have now enacted bans on intentionally added PFAS in cosmetics. California, Colorado, Maryland, Minnesota, and Washington went first, with bans taking effect on January 1, 2025. Connecticut, Maine, Vermont, and Illinois followed on January 1, 2026. Oregon, Rhode Island, and New Hampshire are on deck for 2027.
France has a phased ban in place. New Zealand is phasing out all intentionally added PFAS in cosmetics by 2027 to 2028. The EU is evaluating a broad restriction proposal that covers thousands of PFAS uses, including cosmetics.
The patchwork is messy, the state definitions vary, and compliance is genuinely complicated for brands selling nationally. But the direction we’re heading towards with PFAS is clear.
How to Read Your Labels Right Now
If you want to know whether a product you use contains PFAS, the INCI list is your answer. Look for:
PTFE (the most common one, appears as exactly that)
Anything beginning with “perfluoro” or “polyfluoro”
Perfluorodecalin, perfluorononyl dimethicone, perfluorohexane
Rinse-off products are lower concern simply because contact time is short. The category to pay attention to is leave-on products used close to the eye daily: pressed eyeshadows, long-wear liners, setting powders, and foundations. That is where the cumulative exposure question becomes meaningful.
#MyTwoCents
Nobody is telling you PFAS in cosmetics are definitely harming you. The FDA report does not say that. What it does say is that for the majority of PFAS used in cosmetics, the science to answer that question has not been done. That is a meaningful distinction worth noting and understanding.
The regulatory environment is tightening, both at the state level in the US and globally. Reformulation away from PFAS is already underway at brands paying attention. Non-fluorinated alternatives for most PFAS functions now exist commercially, even if the reformulation process is rarely a simple swap.
The conversation about forever chemicals in beauty is gathering steam. This report is the beginning of a data infrastructure that will produce more answers, not fewer questions. So, stay tuned.
Kevin James Bennett is a multiple Emmy Award-winning makeup artist, respected industry expert, cosmetic developer, and educator. He is the publisher of In My Kit®