S. 263/H. 426: An Act to protect consumers from contributing to inhumane animal testing for cosmetics
MSPCA Position: Support
Sponsors: Senator Mark Montigny and Representative Jack Patrick Lewis
Status: Referred to Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure. Hearing held 10/20/2025.
This legislation would prohibit the sale of most cosmetics newly tested on animals. An estimated 350,000 animals, including rabbits, guinea pigs and mice, suffer and die in cosmetics testing worldwide every year. Substances are forced down their throats, dripped into their eyes, and smeared onto their skin. Twelve other U.S. states have already passed similar sales bans: California, Hawaii, Illinois, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Virginia and Washington.
Despite the widespread availability of humane alternatives, animals continue to suffer and die in cosmetics safety testing for products like shampoo, deodorant, moisturizer, cologne, aftershave, mascara, and more. These assessments can involve skin and eye irritation tests where chemicals are rubbed onto shaved skin or dripped into the eyes of restrained rabbits. Other tests deliver doses of chemical substances to mice through force-feeding, lasting weeks or months so researchers can look for signs of general illness or specific health hazards such as cancer or birth defects. Widely condemned “lethal dose” tests are still performed, in which animals are forced to swallow large amounts of chemicals until they die. At the end of testing, animals are killed, typically by asphyxiation, neck-breaking or decapitation.
Animal testing for cosmetics is not only cruel but also unnecessary, due to the many modern alternatives that exist, such as organs on chips and sophisticated computer models. These methods are often faster, less expensive, and provide more accurate information about how humans respond to certain products and ingredients. Cosmetics companies can also create innovative products using the thousands of ingredients that already have a history of safe use and do not require any additional testing. Some of the largest multinational consumer products companies have already moved away from animal testing, and some have even developed new technologies themselves, such as L’Oréal’s human skin model, EPISKIN. (Learn about our legislation to reduce unnecessary household product testing on animals.)
As the public has become increasingly aware that animal testing for cosmetics is cruel and unnecessary, it has exerted pressure on companies to move away from outdated animal methods. There are now hundreds of companies that sell cosmetics no longer tested on animals or using ingredients tested on animals, including Avalon Organics, Burt’s Bees, Beauty Without Cruelty, Kiss My Face, and Tom’s of Maine. Additionally, some stores, including Whole Foods and Trader Joe’s, have adopted policies of selling personal care products that have not been tested on animals.
Digital tools are also readily available to help consumers find non-animal tested products, such as The Coalition for Consumer Information on Cosmetics’ (CCIC) Leaping Bunny Program, which maintains a single, comprehensive standard for cruelty-free labeling. Licensees of the program are required to sign a pledge to not test on animals during any stage of product development, and the company’s ingredient suppliers must make the same pledge. CCIC also commissions on-site audits. Learn more about cruelty-free labeling, the Leaping Bunny Program, and the Leaping Bunny mobile app.
Yet, despite consumer pressure and the availability of non-animal methods, most cosmetics companies are not cruelty-free, making legislation like this crucial in facilitating the shift away from outdated animal testing. By prohibiting the sale in Massachusetts of most cosmetics newly tested on animals, the Commonwealth will ensure that safer and more humane cosmetics products are available to its citizens.
