Understanding the UK's Retained Cosmetics Regulation After Brexit

Spectra Cosmetic Compliance

This is our hub for the UK regime; it connects to detailed guides including UK vs EU differences. Here we set out the framework.

UK Cosmetics Regulation: Born From the EU, Now Diverging

The UK's cosmetics rules originate in Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009, the EU Cosmetics Regulation that governed the UK before Brexit. When the UK left the EU, that regulation was retained in UK law as the UK Cosmetics Regulation, becoming the basis of the domestic regime for Great Britain, with amendments to make it work as a standalone UK system. So the UK regime began as a close copy of the EU one.

This shared origin is why the two systems remain fundamentally similar in structure and substance. The core concepts the CPSR, the Responsible Person, the PIF, notification, labelling, the ingredient annexes exist in both. But since Brexit, the UK regime has been able to diverge, and increasingly does, which is where the two systems part company.

Great Britain and Northern Ireland

An important nuance is that the UK regime applies to Great Britain England, Scotland and Wales. Northern Ireland, under the Windsor Framework arrangements, continues to follow the EU cosmetics rules. So 'the UK' is not a single cosmetics market: Great Britain runs the retained regime, while Northern Ireland aligns with the EU.

For brands, this means Northern Ireland is, for cosmetics purposes, effectively part of the EU regulatory sphere. A brand selling across the whole UK needs to account for both the GB regime and the EU rules that apply in Northern Ireland. This is one of the more intricate consequences of the post-Brexit settlement.

The core obligations are familiar

Under the GB regime, the core obligations mirror those brands know from the EU system. Every cosmetic needs a CPSR, held within a Product Information File. Each product must have a Responsible Person now specifically a UK-established Responsible Person for the GB market. Products must be notified, and labelling must meet the mandatory requirements.

Because these obligations are so similar to the EU's, a brand familiar with EU compliance will recognise the GB requirements. The key differences lie in the details the Responsible Person must be UK-established, notification is via the UK's own portal, and the ingredient rules can differ rather than in the overall shape of the system.

Notification: the SCPN

For the GB market, notification is made through the SCPN Submit Cosmetic Product Notification the portal operated by the Office for Product Safety and Standards. This is the UK's equivalent of the EU's CPNP, and products placed on the Great Britain market must be notified here before sale, separately from any EU notification.

This separation is a defining feature of the post-Brexit landscape: a brand selling in both GB and the EU must notify in both systems, with no mutual recognition. Our guide to SCPN vs CPNP explains the two portals and their differences in detail.

The UK Responsible Person

For products on the GB market, the Responsible Person must be established in the UK. Before Brexit, an EU-based Responsible Person could cover the UK; now, GB requires its own UK-established RP. This was a significant change for brands whose Responsible Person had been in the EU, who needed to appoint a UK RP to keep selling in Great Britain.

The UK Responsible Person carries the same kinds of duties as under the EU system ensuring the CPSR and PIF exist and are current, notification is done, labelling is compliant, and cooperating with authorities. Our Responsible Person guide covers the role in full. The key point is that GB needs a UK-established one.

Who enforces the UK regime

The GB cosmetics regime is enforced by the Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS) and local Trading Standards services, carrying out market surveillance under the relevant enforcement regulations. They have powers to check products, request Product Information Files, sample and test products, and take action from corrective measures to withdrawal, recall and penalties against non-compliant products.

This enforcement structure means the GB regime has real teeth. Brands selling in Great Britain should expect that their compliance can be checked, and be ready to produce complete documentation on request. Our guide to compliance inspections explains what that involves in practice.

How the UK regime is diverging

The most dynamic aspect of the UK regime is divergence. Because Great Britain now controls its own rules, it can make its own decisions about ingredient restrictions, bans and requirements and it increasingly does, through its own amendments to the retained regulation. These may follow, differ from, or run ahead of equivalent EU changes.

This growing divergence is why brands can no longer assume that complying with the EU rules automatically means complying in Great Britain, or vice versa. Ingredient restrictions, in particular, can differ between the two markets, and keeping track of both is now part of compliance for dual-market brands. Our UK vs EU guide explores the differences.

What this means for brands

For a brand, the practical upshot is that Great Britain is a distinct market requiring its own compliance attention: a UK-established Responsible Person, SCPN notification, and adherence to the GB ingredient rules, which may differ from the EU's. A brand selling into both the UK and EU effectively manages two related but separate compliance streams.

The good news is that the shared foundations make this manageable the underlying safety science and much of the framework are common. The discipline lies in respecting the differences: the separate notification, the market-specific Responsible Person, and the potentially diverging ingredient rules. Understanding the UK regime as its own system is the starting point.

The practical impact of divergence

For dual-market brands, the growing divergence between the GB and EU regimes has a concrete, day to day impact. The clearest example is ingredient restrictions: a substance may be banned or restricted in one market before, or differently from, the other. A product that is compliant in the EU might contain an ingredient that Great Britain has restricted, or vice versa, meaning the same formulation is not necessarily saleable in both markets without adjustment.

This means a brand can no longer maintain a single view of compliance and assume it covers both markets. Each regulatory change has to be assessed against both the GB and EU positions, and products checked against each. In some cases it may lead to market-specific formulations or labelling, adding complexity that simply did not exist when the UK was in the EU.

The practical response is to track both regulatory regimes actively and to treat GB and EU compliance as related but separate. For many brands this is where a compliance partner earns its keep monitoring both sets of rules, flagging divergences that affect the portfolio, and keeping products compliant in each market as the two systems continue to drift apart.

Keeping up with UK regulatory change

Because Great Britain now sets its own rules, it issues its own amendments to the retained regulation adding ingredient restrictions, bans and other requirements over time. Keeping up with these changes is an ongoing obligation, not a one off exercise at launch. A product compliant when it launched can become non compliant when a GB amendment restricts one of its ingredients, requiring reassessment and sometimes reformulation.

This is why monitoring the UK regulatory horizon matters. Brands need a way to learn about relevant GB changes, understand which of their products are affected, and act within any transitional deadlines. The same applies to EU changes for products sold there or in Northern Ireland. Staying current is a continuous compliance activity that protects a brand from unknowingly drifting out of compliance as the rules evolve.

Frequently asked questions

References: Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 as retained (legislation.gov.uk); Product Safety and Metrology etc. (Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019; Cosmetic Products Enforcement Regulations 2013; Windsor Framework; OPSS guidance. General information only, not legal advice.