Cruelty Free Cosmetics, Vegan and Ethical: What a Cosmetic Product Safety Report Can and Cannot Confirm

Cruelty free sits oddly in UK and EU cosmetics, because the thing it promises is already the law. Article 18 of Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009, retained in UK law and enforced through the Cosmetic Products Enforcement Regulations 2013, prohibits animal testing of finished cosmetic products and of ingredients for cosmetic purposes, and prohibits marketing products or ingredients that have been so tested. A brand selling lawfully here is therefore already not selling animal tested cosmetics. That does not make the claim meaningless, because schemes go further than the law and consumers value the assurance, but it does mean the claim needs handling carefully under Regulation (EU) No 655/2013 and its fairness criterion.

This article separates four things that get tangled: what the law requires, what the Cosmetic Product Safety Report and Product Information File actually confirm, what cruelty free adds and how to evidence it, and what vegan means and why it fails most often. It covers the animal testing statement and who signs it, the certification schemes with registers, the ingredients that break a vegan claim, the China question that used to complicate everything, the fairness problem with cruelty free marketing, a worked example of a range whose claims were sorted in a morning, and how to write all of these so they survive an assessment and a complaint

What does the law already require?

Two prohibitions that are easy to confuse. The testing ban prohibits carrying out animal testing on finished cosmetic products and on cosmetic ingredients for the purposes of the Cosmetics Regulation. The marketing ban prohibits placing on the market cosmetic products where the finished product or its ingredients have been the subject of animal testing for cosmetic purposes. Together they mean that a lawfully marketed cosmetic in the UK or EU has not been animal tested for cosmetic purposes, whatever the pack says. The complications sit at the edges: some ingredients are tested on animals under other regimes such as chemicals legislation for worker or environmental safety, and some markets outside the UK and EU have historically required animal testing for certain imported products. These are the areas where certification schemes make demands that go beyond the law.

What does the CPSR and the Product Information File confirm?

The Product Information File must contain data on any animal testing performed by the manufacturer, its agents or suppliers, relating to the development or safety evaluation of the product or its ingredients, including any testing carried out to meet the requirements of third countries. That is a specific legal requirement and it is usually met by an animal testing statement signed by the Responsible Person, supported by declarations from ingredient suppliers. The Cosmetic Product Safety Report supports it by assessing the product without relying on prohibited animal data, using published literature, read across, in vitro data and validated alternative methods, which is how modern toxicological profiles are built in any case. What neither document does is certify a cruelty free claim, because that claim belongs to schemes with their own criteria. Our article on how a CPSR exposes greenwashing explains where voluntary claims sit in the file.

How are these claims ranked by evidence?

Which certifications can be verified?

Leaping Bunny, operated by Cruelty Free International, is the best known cruelty free scheme and publishes its approved brands, requiring a fixed cut off date for animal testing, supplier monitoring and independent audit. The Vegan Society's trademark and similar vegan schemes publish registers of certified products. PETA operates its own listings. For a safety assessor and for a retailer, the test is the same as for any certification: does the brand or product appear on the scheme's public register? A logo that a brand has designed itself, or the phrase certified cruelty free with no scheme named, is a claim with no evidence, and it is one of the easier claims for a competitor or a journalist to check. Certification is not obligatory, and an uncertified brand with a written policy and supplier declarations can make a careful claim, but it should not use language that implies a certification it does not hold.

Why do vegan claims fail most often?

Because animal derived ingredients hide in ordinary formulations. Beeswax and honey in balms, lanolin in barrier creams, carmine in colour cosmetics, silk amino acids in hair care, shellac in nail products, collagen and keratin from animal sources, some glycerin and stearic acid derived from tallow rather than plants, and occasionally the processing aids used upstream of an ingredient. The claim therefore depends on supplier declarations for every ingredient, including confirmation of the source of materials such as glycerin that can be either. It is also a claim about origin only: a vegan product may still have been tested on animals historically, and a cruelty free product may contain beeswax. The assessor checks the ingredient list against the claim first, because a vegan product listing Cera Alba or Carmine is a contradiction visible on its own pack, and that is the version of this failure we see most.

The China question

For years a cruelty free claim was complicated by China, which required animal testing for many imported cosmetics, so brands selling there could not satisfy schemes such as Leaping Bunny. Chinese requirements have been reformed for several categories of general cosmetics, allowing some imported products to be filed without animal testing where the manufacturer holds appropriate certification and safety documentation, while special cosmetics and some other categories remain subject to stricter requirements. The position continues to evolve, so a brand claiming cruelty free while selling into China should confirm the current requirements for its specific product categories and hold documentation showing which route its products took. For a UK or EU brand not selling in China, none of this arises, and the claim rests on the domestic bans plus whatever scheme it has joined.

The fairness problem with cruelty free marketing

Because animal testing of cosmetics is banned in the UK and EU, a cruelty free claim presented as a point of difference can imply that competing lawful products are animal tested, which they are not. The fairness criterion in Regulation (EU) No 655/2013 prohibits claims that denigrate competitors or lawfully used ingredients, and the Advertising Standards Authority has ruled on comparative animal welfare claims. The safe formulation is a positive statement about what the brand does, such as certification to a named scheme with the cut off date, rather than a contrast with an unnamed industry. This is the single correction we make most often to cruelty free copy, and it costs a brand nothing, because the certification is the persuasive part anyway.

How to write these claims so they survive

•    Keep the animal testing statement current and in the Product Information File. With supplier declarations behind it.
•    Certify if the claim matters to your customers, and use the logo only while listed. 
•    State the scheme and, where relevant, the cut off date. 
•    Never contrast yourself with unnamed competitors on animal testing. 
•    Hold a supplier declaration for every ingredient before claiming vegan. Especially glycerin, stearic acid and any wax.
•    Check the ingredient list against the vegan claim before printing. 
•    Replace ethical with the specific things you actually do. 
•    Keep every certificate, declaration and policy in the claims table with review dates. 

Myths we hear

•    Cruelty free means the brand goes beyond the law. Only if it is certified to a scheme that requires more; otherwise it restates the legal position.
•    Vegan and cruelty free are the same claim. One is about ingredients, the other about testing, and a product can be either without the other.
•    A CPSR certifies cruelty free. It confirms the assessment did not rely on prohibited animal data; certification comes from schemes.
•    Beeswax is fine in a vegan product. It is an animal product and breaks the claim.
•    Ethical is a safe catch all. It is unspecific and will usually be refused; name what you actually do

What to do this week

•    Check your animal testing statement exists, is signed and is current. 
•    Verify any cruelty free or vegan logo on its scheme's register. 
•    Read every ingredient list against your vegan claims. 
•    Request source declarations for glycerin, stearic acid and any wax. 
•    Replace ethical with specific, evidenced statements. 
These claims are worth making when they are true and evidenced, and they are easy to get wrong in ways a customer can spot from the back of the pack. Sort the file first and the copy writes itself.

Related reading on the Spectra blog

•    How a Cosmetic Product Safety Report exposes greenwashing
•    Natural, organic and chemical free claims in a Cosmetic Product Safety Report
•    Clean beauty and the Cosmetic Product Safety Report
•    All Spectra articles

Spectra services mentioned in this article

•    The Complete Compliance Pack: CPSR, PIF, SDS and SCPN or CPNP (£295)
•    CPSR services by product type
•    PIF services
•    UK and EU Responsible Person
•    Contact Spectra

Official sources and legislation

•    Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 on cosmetic products, Article 18
•    Regulation (EU) No 655/2013 on cosmetic claims
•    Advertising Standards Authority
•    Cosmetic Products Enforcement Regulations 2013
•    OPSS guidance on cosmetic products regulations

Disclaimer: This article is general information, not legal advice. Regulations change and product decisions depend on your exact formulation, claims and market. Have your product assessed by a qualified professional before sale.