cosmetics sales; animal testing; prohibitions

Plain English Breakdown

The effective date of the law is December 31, 2026, which was not mentioned in the candidate explanation.

Arizona Law Banning Animal Testing for Cosmetics

SB1005 makes it illegal to sell cosmetics in Arizona that were tested on animals during development or manufacturing unless certain exceptions apply.

What This Bill Does

• Makes it against the law for companies to sell cosmetics in Arizona if these products were tested on animals during their creation or production.
• Imposes a fine of up to $1,000 for the first day and an additional $500 each day after that if a company breaks this rule.
• Prevents cities, towns, and other local areas within Arizona from making their own rules about selling cosmetics without animal testing.
• Allows exceptions for certain types of tests done outside the U.S. or required by federal laws.

Who It Names or Affects

• Cosmetic manufacturers and sellers in Arizona
• Local governments within Arizona

Terms To Know

Cosmetics

Products used to clean or beautify the body, like makeup or hair care products.

Animal testing

Tests done on animals to check if a product is safe for humans.

Limits and Unknowns

• The law does not specify how it will be enforced.
• It only applies to cosmetics sold in Arizona, not other states or countries.
• There are several exceptions that allow some animal testing under certain conditions.

Official Summary Text

SB1005 - 572R - Senate Fact Sheet

Assigned to
NR���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� FOR
COMMITTEE

ARIZONA STATE SENATE

Fifty-Seventh
Legislature, Second Regular Session

FACT SHEET FOR
S.B. 1005

cosmetics sales; animal
testing; prohibitions

Purpose

Deems it
unlawful for a manufacturer to knowingly sell or offer for sale, in Arizona, a
cosmetic that used cosmetic animal testing during the development or
manufacture of the cosmetic and subjects a manufacturer that violates the
prohibition on cosmetic animal testing to a civil penalty of up to $1,000 for
the first day of the violation and an additional civil penalty of $500 for each
day the violation continues.

Background

The Federal
Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act requires a responsible person for a cosmetic
product to ensure and maintain records supporting that there is adequate
substantiation of safety for cosmetic products and their ingredients. If a
cosmetic product and each of its ingredients do not have adequate
substantiation of safety, it must be deemed adulterated and the responsible
person must cease distribution and recall the cosmetic either voluntarily or by
order of the Secretary of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (21 U.S.C. ��
361

and
364g
).

The Federal
Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act prohibits any state or political subdivision of a
state from establishing or continuing in effect any law, regulation, order or
other requirement for cosmetics that is different from or in addition to, or
otherwise not identical with, any requirement within the Federal Food, Drug and
Cosmetic Act with respect to registration and product listing, good
manufacturing practice, records, recalls, adverse event reporting or safety
substantiation of cosmetic products and ingredients (
21
U.S.C. � 364j
).

There is no anticipated fiscal impact to the state
General Fund associated with this legislation.

Provisions

1.

Deems it unlawful for a manufacturer to knowingly sell or offer for sale
a cosmetic in Arizona that used cosmetic animal testing during the development
or manufacture of the cosmetic if the cosmetic animal testing was conducted by
the manufacturer, any supplier of the manufacturer or any person hired or
contracted by the manufacturer.

2.

Subjects a manufacturer that sells or offers for sale a cosmetic that
violates the prohibition on cosmetic animal testing to a civil penalty up to
$1,000 for the first day of the violation and an additional civil penalty of
$500 for each day that the violation continues.

3.

Preempts the regulation of the sale of cosmetics.

4.

Declares that the sale of cosmetics is not subject to further regulation
by a county, city, town, or other political subdivision of Arizona.

5.

Exempts
cosmetic animal testing from the outlined prohibition if the cosmetic animal
testing is:

a)

conducted
outside of the United States and is required by a foreign regulatory authority,
only if there is no evidence resulting from the testing that is relied on to
substantiate the safety of the cosmetic ingredient or cosmetic product being
sold by the manufacturer in Arizona;

b)

conducted
for a cosmetic or cosmetic ingredient subject to regulation under the Federal
Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act;

c)

conducted
for an ingredient intended to be used in a product that is not a cosmetic
product and that is conducted pursuant to a requirement of a federal, state or
foreign regulatory authority if:

i.

the animal testing does not result in evidence that is relied on to
substantiate the safety of a cosmetic sold in Arizona by a cosmetics
manufacturer; or

ii.

there
is documented evidence of the non-cosmetic intent of the animal testing, there
is a history of use of the ingredient outside of cosmetics for a period of at
least 12 months before reliance on the outlined evidence and the manufacturer
has determined the need to rely on data that is obtained from the testing
because there is not a nonanimal alternative method or strategy recognized by a
federal or state agency or the organization for economic co-operation and
development for the relevant safety endpoints for the cosmetic ingredient of
the non-cosmetic intent of the animal testing; or

d)

requested,
required or conducted by a federal or state regulatory authority if:

i.

there is not a nonanimal alternative method of strategy recognized by a
federal or state agency or the organization for economic co-operation and
development for the relevant safety endpoints for the cosmetic ingredient or
nonfunctional constituent;

ii.

there
is a reasonable probability that the cosmetic ingredient or nonfunctional
constituent poses a specific and serious adverse human health risk, and the
need to conduct cosmetic animal testing is justified and supported by a
detailed research protocol that is proposed as the basis for the evaluation of
the cosmetic ingredient or nonfunctional constituent; and

iii.

the
cosmetic ingredient or nonfunctional constituent is in wide use and, in the
case of a cosmetic ingredient, cannot be replaced by another cosmetic
ingredient capable of performing a similar function.

6.

Exempts
the following from the prohibition on cosmetic animal testing:

a)

a cosmetic in its final form that was tested on animals before January
1, 2027, if the manufacturer or a person on the manufacturer's behalf does not
conduct new cosmetic animal testing in violation of the prohibition on cosmetic
animal testing on or after January 1, 2027;

b)

an ingredient in a cosmetic that is tested on animal before January 1,
2027, if the manufacturer or a person on the manufacturer's behalf does not
conduct new cosmetic animal testing in violation of the prohibition on cosmetic
animal testing on or after January 1, 2027; and

c)

a
cosmetic manufacturer reviewing, assessing or retaining evidence from cosmetic
animal testing.

7.

Contains a severability clause.

8.

Defines terms.

9.

Becomes effective on January 1, 2027.

Prepared by Senate Research

January 30, 2026

SB/hk

Current Bill Text

SB1005 - 572R - S Ver

Senate Engrossed

cosmetics sales;
animal testing; prohibitions

State of Arizona

Senate

Fifty-seventh Legislature

Second Regular Session

2026

SENATE BILL 1005

AN
ACT

amending title 44, chapter 11, Arizona
Revised Statutes, by adding article 12.1; relating to sales of goods.

(TEXT OF BILL BEGINS ON NEXT PAGE)

Be it
enacted by the Legislature of the State of Arizona:

Section 1. Title 44, chapter 11, Arizona
Revised Statutes, is amended by adding article 12.1, to read:

ARTICLE
12.1. COSMETIC SALES

START_STATUTE
44-1781.

Definitions

In this article, unless the context otherwise requires:

1. "Cosmetic":

(
a
) means a
product that is either of the following:

(
i
) intended to
be rubbed, poured, sprinkled or sprayed on, introduced into or otherwise
applied to the human body or any part of the human body for the purposes of cleansing,
beautifying, promoting attractiveness or altering appearance.

(
ii
) Intended
for use as a component of a product described in item (
i
)
of this SUBDIVISION.

(
b
) Does not
include soap.

2. "Cosmetic animal
testing" means the internal or external application or exposure of a
cosmetic product, cosmetic ingredient or nonfunctional constituent to the skin
or eyes or any other body part, organ or extremity of a live nonhuman
vertebrate for the purpose of evaluating the safety of a cosmetic product or a
cosmetic ingredient or nonfunctional constituent for the use in a cosmetic
product.

3. "Cosmetic ingredient"
means a single chemical entity or mixture used as a component in the
manufacture of a cosmetic product.

4. "Cosmetic product" means
a finished and complete cosmetic.

5. "Manufacturer" means an
entity that is required to specify conspicuously its name and place of business
on the label of a cosmetic in package form pursuant to 21 Code of Federal
Regulations section 701.12.

6. "Nonfunctional
constituent" means an incidental ingredient as prescribed in 21 Code of
Federal Regulations section 701.3 on january 1, 2026.

7. "Supplier" means an
entity that provides, whether directly or through a third party, a cosmetic
ingredient used by a manufacturer in the formulation of a cosmetic product.
END_STATUTE

START_STATUTE
44-1782.

Cosmetic animal testing; prohibition

Notwithstanding any other law, it is unlawful
for a manufacturer to knowingly sell or offer for sale in this state a cosmetic
that used cosmetic animal testing during the development or manufacture of the
cosmetic if the cosmetic animal testing was conducted by the manufacturer, any
supplier of the manufacturer or any person hired or contracted by the
manufacturer.
END_STATUTE

START_STATUTE
44-1783.

Exceptions

A. This article does not apply if the
cosmetic animal testing is any of the following:

1. Conducted outside of the United
States and is required by a foreign regulatory authority. The
exception provided in this paragraph applies only if there is no evidence
resulting from the testing that is relied on to substantiate the safety of the
cosmetic ingredient or cosmetic product being sold by the manufacturer in this
state.

2. Conducted for a cosmetic or
cosmetic ingredient subject to regulation under the federal food, drug, and
cosmetic act (52 stat. 1040; 21 united states code sections 351 through
360
n
).

3. Conducted for an ingredient
intended to be used in a product that is not a cosmetic product and that is
conducted pursuant to a requirement of a federal, state or foreign regulatory
authority if either:

(
a
) The animal
testing does not result in evidence that is relied on to substantiate the
safety of a cosmetic sold in this state by a cosmetics manufacturer.

(
b
) All of the
following apply:

(
i
) the
MANUFACTURER has determined the need to rely on data that is obtained from the
testing BECAUSE There is not a nonanimal alternative method or strategy
recognized by a federal or state agency or the Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development for the relevant safety endpoints for the cosmetic
ingredient or nonfunctional constituent.

(
ii
) There is
documented evidence of the non-cosmetic intent of the animal testing.

(
iii
) There is
a history of use of the ingredient outside of cosmetics for a period of at
least twelve months before reliance described in subdivision (
a
) of this paragraph.

4. Requested, required or conducted
by a federal or state regulatory authority if all of the following apply:

(
a
) There is
not a nonanimal alternative method or strategy recognized by a federal or state
agency or the ORGANIsATION for Economic Co-operation and Development for the
relevant safety endpoints for the cosmetic ingredient or nonfunctional constituent.

(b)
There is a reasonable probability
that the cosmetic ingredient or nonfunctional constituent poses a specific and
serious adverse human health risk, and the need to conduct cosmetic animal
testing is justified and supported by a detailed research protocol that is
proposed as the basis for the evaluation of the cosmetic ingredient or
nonfunctional constituent.

(
c
) The cosmetic
ingredient or nonfunctional constituent is in wide use and, in the case of a
cosmetic ingredient, cannot be replaced by another cosmetic ingredient capable
of performing a similar function.

B. This article does not apply to any
of the following:

1. A cosmetic in its final form that
was tested on animals before January 1, 2027 if the manufacturer or a person on
the manufacturer's behalf does not conduct new cosmetic animal testing in
violation of this section from and after December 31, 2026.� This paragraph
applies if the cosmetic is manufactured before, on or after january 1, 2027.

2. An ingredient in a cosmetic that
is tested on animals before
January 1, 2027 if the
manufacturer or a person on the manufacturer's behalf does not conduct new
cosmetic animal testing in violation of this section from and after December
31, 202
6. This paragraph applies if the ingredient is
manufactured before, on or after january 1, 2027.

3. A cosmetic manufacturer reviewing,
assessing or retaining evidence from cosmetic animal testing.
END_STATUTE

START_STATUTE
44-1784.

Cosmetic sales; state preemption

The regulation of the sale of cosmetics is of
statewide concern.� The regulation of the sale of cosmetics pursuant to THIS
article is not subject to further regulation by a COUNTY, city, town or other
political subdivision of this state and preempts all inconsistent laws, rules,
regulations, codes, ordinances, policies or other laws adopted by any public
employer.

END_STATUTE

START_STATUTE
44-1785.

Violation; civil penalty

A manufacturer that sells or offers for sale a
cosmetic in violation of this article is subject to a civil penalty of not more
than $1,000 for the first day of the violation and an additional civil penalty
of $500 for each day that the violation continues.
END_STATUTE

Sec. 2.
Severability

If a provision of this act or its
application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the invalidity does
not affect other provisions or applications of the act that can be given effect
without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of
this act are severable.

Sec. 3.
Effective date

This act is effective from and after
December 31, 2026.