CirculeID

concept

The DPP for Cosmetics

Cosmetics reach the passport through packaging rules and green claims before ESPR names them. What that means for formulation, labelling and supply chain data.

CirculeID Research5 min read1,231 words

Cosmetics face passport-adjacent obligations sooner through packaging rules and green claims substantiation than through an ESPR delegated act. Packaging recyclability, recycled content and ingredient origin claims are the attributes that arrive first, and none of them is about the formulation itself.

What this gives you

Which PPWR packaging thresholds bite first for cosmetics, the ingredient transparency the passport can carry, and how refill schemes use the same record.

Key takeaways

  • Packaging regulation reaches cosmetics before product ecodesign rules do.
  • Cosmetic Regulation (EC) 1223/2009 already requires a product information file — a useful foundation.
  • Ingredient origin claims are the highest-risk area under green claims rules.
  • The primary pack, not the formulation, is where most passport work concentrates.

Cosmetics sit in an unusual position. The sector is heavily regulated on safety and largely unregulated on circularity, and the obligations now arriving reach it sideways — through packaging and through advertising rules rather than through product ecodesign.

What already exists to build on

Regulation (EC) 1223/2009 requires a product information file for every cosmetic placed on the EU market, held by the responsible person and available to authorities.

That file already contains a great deal of what a passport would want: composition, safety assessment, manufacturing method and evidence for claimed effects. It is a considerably better starting point than most sectors have.

Packaging arrives first

Regulation (EU) 2025/40 on packaging and packaging waste applies to cosmetic packaging like any other, and for a sector where the pack is a large share of both cost and environmental impact, this is the more consequential instrument.

Packaging attributes cosmetics need to declare, and why each is difficult
AttributeWhy it is requiredWhere the difficulty sits
Material compositionRecyclability assessmentMulti-layer laminates and coatings
Recycled contentMinimum content targetsFood-contact-grade supply is constrained
SeparabilityWhether components part in sortingPumps, valves and metal springs
Decoration and inksContamination of the recyclateDirect printing and shrink sleeves
Empty pack weightFee calculation and reportingRarely recorded per component
Packaging attributes cosmetics need to declare, and why each is difficult

Dispensing systems are the recurring problem. A pump is a small assembly of several polymers and a metal spring, it is functionally necessary, and it makes an otherwise recyclable bottle difficult to process unless the consumer separates it.

Green claims are the enforcement risk

Cosmetics marketing makes more environmental and origin claims per product than almost any other consumer category, which puts the sector directly in the path of Directive (EU) 2024/825.

  • Natural and naturally derived — meaningful only against a stated definition and a calculation method.
  • Ingredient origin — a specific geographic claim requires chain of custody, not a supplier’s word.
  • Refillable — requires refills to actually be available for the product’s market life.
  • Recyclable — assessed against the collection reality of the market, not technical possibility.
  • Carbon claims — the directive constrains offset-based neutrality claims specifically.

The second is the one that generates the most exposure. A named-origin botanical claim is precisely the kind of assertion that requires traceable evidence, and botanical supply chains typically run through consolidators who blend material from many growers.

Where EUDR touches the sector

Regulation (EU) 2023/1115 covers palm oil and its derivatives, which appear in cosmetics extensively — in surfactants, emulsifiers and emollients that carry chemical names bearing no resemblance to their origin.

This catches formulators who reasonably believed they had no palm exposure. A derivative several reaction steps downstream is still within scope, and establishing whether an ingredient qualifies requires asking the supplier a question most have not been asked before.

The ingredient name at the end of this chain says nothing about its origin.

What a cosmetic passport should carry

The useful design separates what the consumer needs from what the recycler needs, since they are almost disjoint sets and only one of them is interested in the formulation.

For the consumer: ingredient function in plain language, substantiation behind any claim on the pack, refill availability, and what to do with the empty container in their specific market. For the recycler: pack material by component, separability, and the decoration that affects recyclate quality.

A sensible first step

Build the packaging specification as structured data before anything else. Most brands hold pack details across artwork files, supplier drawings and purchasing records, and none of those is queryable.

A component-level pack record — every part, its polymer, its weight, its decoration and whether it separates — answers packaging reporting, recyclability assessment, fee calculation and the consumer disposal question at once. It is the highest-return data work available to the sector.

Doing this work now also positions the sector for whatever ESPR eventually requires. Regulation (EU) 2024/1781 gives the Commission the power to bring product groups into scope through delegated acts, and cosmetics has not been prioritised in the first working plan.

That is a reason to prepare rather than to wait. The eighteen-month window between a delegated act and its application is short for a sector with thousands of stock keeping units and packaging specifications held largely in artwork files, and the packaging record is the part that transfers regardless of what the act eventually asks for.

Frequently asked questions

Do cosmetics need a Digital Product Passport?

Not yet through an ESPR delegated act, but passport-adjacent obligations arrive sooner through packaging rules and green claims substantiation. For most cosmetic brands the practical requirements landing first concern the pack and the marketing claims rather than the formulation itself.

Does the product information file help?

It is a strong foundation with the wrong shape. Regulation (EC) 1223/2009 already requires composition, safety assessment and claim evidence, but the file is built for a regulator inspecting one product confidentially, not for a consumer scanning a pack or a recycler sorting containers.

What makes cosmetic packaging hard to declare?

Dispensing systems above all. A pump is a small assembly of several polymers and a metal spring, it is functionally necessary, and it makes an otherwise recyclable bottle difficult to process unless the consumer separates it before disposal, which most do not.

Which green claims carry the most risk?

Named ingredient origin claims. A specific geographic assertion requires chain of custody evidence rather than a supplier’s word, and botanical supply chains typically run through consolidators who blend material from many growers, which makes the claim difficult to substantiate after the fact.

Does EUDR apply to cosmetics?

Yes, through palm oil derivatives that appear extensively in surfactants, emulsifiers and emollients. This catches formulators who reasonably believed they had no palm exposure, because a derivative several reaction steps downstream remains in scope while its ingredient name gives no hint of origin.

What should a cosmetic passport show a consumer?

Ingredient function in plain language, the substantiation behind any claim printed on the pack, whether refills are available, and what to do with the empty container in their specific market. Recyclers need an almost disjoint set focused on pack materials and separability.

Where should a cosmetics brand start?

With a component-level packaging record: every part, its polymer, its weight, its decoration and whether it separates. That single dataset answers packaging reporting, recyclability assessment, fee calculation and the consumer disposal question at once, which no other data work matches.

Sources

  1. Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 on cosmetic productsEUR-Lex, European Union, 2009-11
  2. Regulation (EU) 2025/40 on packaging and packaging wasteEUR-Lex, European Union, 2025-01

Continue reading

Next step

Einen darauf aufgebauten Pass ansehen

CirculeID macht aus den oben beschriebenen Anforderungen einen funktionierenden digitalen Produktpass für Ihre Produkte.

Index