# New Legislation



## garland68 (Jun 2, 2008)

Is anyone concerned about this?

http://www.cosmeticsdesign.com/news/ng. ... -cosmetics


----------



## Tabitha (Jun 2, 2008)

:shock: 

Most other countries alread have somthing like this in place.


----------



## garland68 (Jun 2, 2008)

But they don't have a $2,000 registration of each product.  That would mean that every lotion, cream, and other bath items. would cost the little guy A LOT of extra money


----------



## Tabitha (Jun 2, 2008)

I forget which country I am thinking about, but there is one where you have to register each product in each scent for a very steap fee.


----------



## garland68 (Jun 2, 2008)

But how many small businesses do you think will go out of business because of this?  Can you afford it?


----------



## Lane (Jun 2, 2008)

It seems like they are going after the BIG guys...which is great for us smaller companies, I think... Sounds like it is for cosmetics and not so much handcrafted soaps??  :?: crap...


----------



## pepperi27 (Jun 2, 2008)

It sounds like it applies to those who make cosmetics that claim to do something. And yes it sounds like they are going after big companies.


----------



## Tabitha (Jun 2, 2008)

lip balms, lotions, scrubs, lotions, bath bombs, etc, are all *cosmetics*.


----------



## Tabitha (Jun 2, 2008)

To answer your question, if it passes & if it applies to me, no I can not afford it. Not by a long shot.


----------



## garland68 (Jun 2, 2008)

I know.  I'm just starting out and this will fold me if it goes through.


----------



## Lane (Jun 2, 2008)

Tabitha said:
			
		

> lip balms, lotions, scrubs, lotions, bath bombs, etc, are all *cosmetics*.


 I JUST extended my line to cover Shampoo, conditoner, body whips...  :cry: This too, will put me under and I'll close shop if it passes...


----------



## Tabitha (Jun 2, 2008)

Look at the last statement: 





> Bailey also said cosmetics have the least potential to harm human health of the product categories regulated by the FDA and that of the 11 billion personal care products sold annually only 150 adverse reactions are reported annually and most of these are minor skin irritations.


I would have expected to be much higher, esp when I read some of the crap that goes into (or doesn't go into) some  homemade products people sell w/o putting the reasrch in first.


----------



## pepperi27 (Jun 2, 2008)

When is the decision going to be made? Can we find out if this applies to only commercial big business or homemade. Cause I skimmed through it so not sure if I missed it.


----------



## pepperi27 (Jun 2, 2008)

> The FD&C Act defines cosmetics as articles intended to be applied to the human body for cleansing, beautifying, promoting attractiveness, or altering the appearance without affecting the body's structure or functions. Included in this definition are products such as skin creams, lotions, perfumes, lipsticks, fingernail polishes, eye and facial make-up preparations, shampoos, permanent waves, hair colors, toothpastes, deodorants, and any material intended for use as a component of a cosmetic product. Soap products consisting primarily of an alkali salt of fatty acid and making no label claim other than cleansing of the human body are not considered cosmetics under the law.



So I'm confused I thought cosmetics meant what is above? Does that also mean things that are made from scratch?


----------



## Tabitha (Jun 2, 2008)

Even big companies make their items from scartch, just on a larger scale & with lots of help/employees.

I am confused as to what you are confused about.


----------



## pepperi27 (Jun 3, 2008)

What they describe as a cosmetic I don't make any of them? I just wasn't sure if they were also speaking about what you said lip balms, lotions and such. I need to read more forgive my confused question its just upsetting for us super small people trying to make good stuff.


----------



## Tabitha (Jun 3, 2008)

Ok, I undertsnd now (I think).

The FDA words things weird. They wrote:



> Included in this definition are products such as ...


 They should have added BUT NOT LIMITED TO. There are lots of items that fall under the realm of cosmetic. A cosmetic is most anything applied to the skin that does not make a medical claim  (because then it's a drug). Lye soap is a seperate catagory so it is not a cosmetic. Most M&P is a detergent rather than a lye based soap so it fells under the cosmetic umbrella.

The FDA is not black & white, it's shades of grey. That is the tricky part.


----------



## pepperi27 (Jun 3, 2008)

Oh ok just checking cause I read that thing again and they didn't get the specifics down.


----------



## Lane (Jun 3, 2008)

*sigh*


----------



## Lane (Jun 3, 2008)

Tabitha said:
			
		

> Look at the last statement:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You'd think the "Big Guys" had something better to worry about... like poverty or starving children and uneducated adults.... *grumble*


----------



## pepperi27 (Jun 3, 2008)

Exactly Lane...


----------



## IanT (Jun 3, 2008)

yeah this is exactly what we need in a failing economy...something to hinder businesses that build the economy....greeeeaaaat...


I cant wait til we have a new govt in place because this crap isnt working for us...the lobbyests get what they want and the general public gets froogled out of everything...bah!


----------



## Guest (Jun 3, 2008)

Huh, sounds like what the USDA is trying to do with the National Animal ID System (NAIS). They are even using the same slant of 'global market' when most of us small-scale soapers (or farmers and pet owners in the case of NAIS) are attempting to stimulate the LOCAL economy and could care less about it on a global scale. Its unconstitutional and totally like our favorite Uncle Sam.

What concerns me is that this legislation does not define what constitutes a cosmetic item because I was under the impression that soap was not a cosmetic. Thats like NAIS which has been presented under the guise of disease and 'bioterror' prevention (puleeze!). The draft plan does not define exactly what a disease is. Funny, the raw milk legislation in my state defines everything in exact terms except for disease, when it was introduced to prevent disease also...

Scary, scary stuff.


----------



## Tabitha (Jun 3, 2008)

Playing devil's advocate a bit, there does need to be some form of regulation. I have seen lip balms sold with known allergens in them. They make your lips swell & are being marketed as *lip plumpers*.  It's an allergic reaction your lips are having to the allergen. 

I know you have all seen things that have made you flinch too. You did not buy them because you arte armed w/ knowledge, but the general population has not put 6 months research into body care & assumes the FDA is keeping them safe.


----------



## Guest (Jun 3, 2008)

If there is a problem with a product than the consumers should take it up with the producer, not the government.  But, that only happens in my perfect world.  This legislation has nothing to do with the safety of cosmetics and everything to do with the re-distribution of funds.  Hide and watch, the funds from this legislation, if it passes, will probably be used to fund a UN sub-money-dump or the like.   Like NAIS, this bill (what's it called, by the way?) is being introduced to help you (because without it we'd not no what to do  :cry: ) when Independent Americans don't need help and it clearly benefits none other than the big businesses and smothers the smaller guys.  Unlike NAIS, however, it is being introduced in a fairly legal form through our federal legislature.  Because of that we are not completely doomed.  I'm sure that, wether you are for it or against it, your federal representative (or his/her aide) would be fairly open to your thoughts.  Also,  because of past FDA research that has deemed various  natural and effective cancer treatments toxic, I do not trust anything they say.


----------



## Lane (Jun 4, 2008)

I've had a crappy day, re-reading this post made me angry...

*Sits on a large bucket of CO oil and folds arms*  :cry: 

It makes ME angry because I am producing products with NO to little chemical content, on a small scale. Using (mostly) raw ingredients, grown by small scale farmers, in my own country.... What I sale goes back into my community, fueling smaller businesses and helping people like me. 

I intentionally make no profit selling my products. I keep all of my payments on my PayPal and that is what I use to buy supplies. Every dollar earned goes right back into buying supplies, more money means I just spend more.

My financial adviser says I am completely insane to run a business to fuel business and to lose money doing it. 

Example, I had a good week so I bought my Shea from an organic grower and finally purchased a TOG beveler (woo!) My bars now cost more to make. TDid I raise my prices? Hell no. I sold about $200 last week and spent $260.

So I make products that are safer to the environment, I use all funds to fuel the handmade, local economy and support other crafters, I spread Eco awareness with every bar of soap I sell. BUT because I can't afford to spend thousands of dollars doing whatever I have to do to stay in "business' non of it matters.

I'm sorry, but I'd rather spend double buying higher quality ingredients and helping the CRAFT and art community.  I won't hand over thousands of my dollars to stay in business.

*grabs stick blender* It's time to start an underground Soaping Revolution...

*end rant*


----------



## Guest (Jun 4, 2008)

Grassroots movements are very effective when the little guy is being oppressed.  Has anybody taken it up with the Soapmaker's Guild?  I'm not a member, but I would be interested to know their stance.

I was under the impression that by January 2008 I'd have to take my goats underground because it would be illegal to have them without a premise ID, but there was so much public outcry that they postponed that deadline to a later date giving our people in DC time to throw bricks into the regime.  My point is that there's hope and it shouldn't pass because the officials would not be 1) supporting free trade and commerce and B) upholding the Constitution/Bill of Rights.


----------



## perfectsoap (Jun 4, 2008)

Sounds like CP or HP soaping will be excluded though?

So maybe I can sell my CP soap for a couple bucks more and send a free lip balm?  :roll: 
Jeff


----------



## garland68 (Jun 4, 2008)

Right now they just held a hearing on it.  That means that nothing is in place nor has anything been written up.  And the way our government reacts it will be a long time coming.  Nothing may come of it at all.  I just wanted to make people aware of what was happening.  Did'nt mean to start a fire storm


----------



## perfectsoap (Jun 4, 2008)

Oh geez all they want is $2000.00 per product, register the products and their ingredients annually with the FDA. OH and to report all anticipated and unanticipated adverse events?
Yes sirs, my lip balm may have an unanticipated adverse reaction to field mice if ingested in 90 degree weather.
That's it??
No problem, bring it on! 
I mean it's not like this is just a hobby for me that I take pride in and loose money at! 
Yeah 2000.00 per product and reporting all of my ingredients to an underfunded FDA will keep someone from adding lead to lipstick that they don't report! 
Well guess that shows my feelings...
Jeff


----------



## perfectsoap (Jun 4, 2008)

garland68, 
Glad you posted! I didn't know this was a topic  
I just like to vent! 
I just started 6 months ago, so it would figure I'd get on my feet and then the rules would change!
My life story! lol
Jeff


----------



## garland68 (Jun 4, 2008)

I'm just starting out too and that REALLY pissed me off when I read that.


----------



## Lane (Jun 4, 2008)

garland68 said:
			
		

> Did'nt mean to start a fire storm


  I'm just a pissy little thing when it comes to the Gov. wasting time and money on stupid crap like this...


----------



## Guest (Jun 4, 2008)

Well - it looks as though any decision will be a long time coming. 

There is no way in H*** the cosmetic industry is going to sit back and do nothing about the enormous fees being proposed here. Even if they can afford it - it will mean increasing prices to products that have already been subjected to price increases because of other economical factors. The industry will put up a fight if the legislation ever gets that far.

Don't sweat it yet. Just keep doing what you are doing the best way you know how to do it and keep an eye on the situation for now. It's highly unlikely that the final registration fee will be anywhere near $2000 per product. There's no justification for it if all they really want is stiffer rules for the industry to follow.


----------



## perfectsoap (Jun 4, 2008)

> There is no way in H*** the cosmetic industry is going to sit back and do nothing about the enormous fees being proposed here.


You mean "Heck"? lol
I'm not to sure about the big boys fighting too hard. I'm guessing $2000 per type would bury me, but to Estee Lauder it would be like skipping a latte every other Tuesday on the odd months on leap year.
Jeff


----------



## Guest (Jun 5, 2008)

I disagree. They have thousands of formulations for all different skin types, colors etc per product. And they don't like parting with money in these types of situations. It's a slippery slope. $2000 is just what is proposed. Whose to say they won't go higher? Those types of fees tend to increase over time.

now - Estee Lauder could afford it - but could Lush or Zum? There's a huge "middle class" in the industry as well that to me are "big guys."


----------



## Guest (Jun 5, 2008)

OK - I was just reading about this on another forum and realized I had misread the info. It's not $2000 per product. It's actually proposing annual fees that range from $2,000 to $10,000 per manufacturing center. This would still be way high for most small businesses but other countries do charge a registration fee. Many are on a sliding scale determined by annual sales and profits which should be proposed. Time to write some letters. 

These are my concerns:

1. The proposal verbage is way too vague and open to varying interpretations.

2. If the FDA cannot regulate what is voluntary now - how can they regulate this? I am all for standards and believe we should have stricter standards but it sounds to me like we will be paying a fee for paperwork only if the FDA is not able to enforce the standards. 

3. This is being proposed to regulate cosmetics being imported? Well - then China should maybe pony up the fees.

Again - I think we should all remain calm and take a hard look at the products we are selling. This is something that we should all be doing now anyway. Be prepared for a fee but when this all shakes out - it could be nothing like the original proposal. Until then - join whatever groups you can and write letters to your legislators and to your suppliers and guilds so that they can write letters on your behalf and theirs. It's ok to get mad - but do something with that energy that will help.

A link to the actual proposed legislation:
http://energycommerce.house.gov/FDAGlob ... 60AXML.pdf

Link to what Indie Beauty network is doing:
http://www.indiebusinessforum.com/showthread.php?t=206
ps. I am not suggesting that you pay this group money to sign their petition.


----------



## beadella (Jun 11, 2008)

Hi everyone,

I spoke to one of the high mucky mucks at WSP and she spoke to the owner, and then called me back to reasure me that this kind of thng comes up every now and then, and even if it did pass, it wouldn't affect the small cottage biz like most of us. 

Also, I don't personally know much about Indy Beauty, but the lady I spoke to said the co. owner didn't think too highly of her (the head of IB) and said that she could just be trying to incite smaller cottage industry types into sending her the mun for the petition.  Like I said, I don't know one way or the other, just passing along what I got from the WSP lady.

It may all be a tempest in a teapot for the small folks like us, that is definatly the impression I got, and she even mentioned China, by way of saying that this bill is really aimed at places like that.

She basically said to just relax and not worry about it............  

I must admit, before I spoke to her I was in quite a lather about this whole thing myself!!  (no pun intended............well maybe just a teeny one!!)  

Anyway, hope that helped, at least a little bit...............

tootles,

Della


----------



## garland68 (Jun 26, 2008)

Here is more info...

At least there is someone on our side...

http://www.cosmeticsdesign.com//news/ng ... aK0A%3D%3D


----------

