Microplastics & Glitter in Cosmetics: The EU Ban Explained

“Is glitter banned?” is a question a lot of cosmetic makers are asking and the answer is a phased yes for plastic glitter and other intentionally added microplastics in the EU. The rules roll out over several years by product type, with some long deadlines and a labelling requirement along the way. This guide explains the EU microplastics restriction and what it means for cosmetics.

This is one of the bigger sustainability-driven changes affecting cosmetics; for the other 2026 updates, see our pillar guide to cosmetic regulation changes in 2026.

What is the microplastics restriction?

The EU restricts intentionally added synthetic polymer microparticles commonly called microplastics through Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/2055, which amends the REACH chemicals framework. It entered into force in October 2023 and aims to reduce microplastic pollution, particularly in the marine environment, by phasing these particles out of products including cosmetics. Plastic glitter and exfoliating microbeads are the most visible cosmetic examples.

The restriction targets solid plastic particles that are insoluble in water and do not biodegrade, present at or above a small threshold concentration. It is a phased restriction, not an overnight ban, with different deadlines for different product categories to give industry time to reformulate.

Microbeads and loose glitter first

The earliest cosmetic impact was on exfoliating microbeads and loose plastic glitter, which were restricted from October 2023. Rinse-off scrubs containing plastic microbeads already voluntarily phased out by much of the industry and loose plastic glitter sold for general use were the first to go. This is why “microplastic-free” scrubs became the norm and why much glitter on sale shifted toward alternatives.

From the start, though, the rules carved out materials that are not considered microplastics: glitter and particles made of biodegradable, soluble, natural or inorganic materials (such as glass or certain minerals) fall outside the restriction. So “glitter” is not banned as such plastic glitter is restricted, while compliant alternative glitters remain usable.

The phased deadlines for cosmetics

For cosmetics that still rely on microplastics, the restriction phases in by product type. Rinse-off cosmetics must be free of intentionally added microplastics by October 2027. Leave-on cosmetics (and encapsulated fragrances) follow by October 2029. And make-up, lip and nail products the hardest to reformulate have the longest runway, until October 2035.

These staggered dates reflect how difficult reformulation is in each category. Decorative products lean heavily on synthetic polymer film formers and glitter for long wear, shine and texture, so they were given more time. The direction of travel, though, is clear: intentionally added plastic microparticles are on their way out across the board.

The labelling step for make up and nail products

There is an interim requirement worth knowing for the long-deadline categories. From October 2031, make-up, lip and nail products that still contain microplastics must carry a statement indicating the product contains microplastics, in order to keep being sold up to the 2035 cut-off. So before those products are banned outright, consumers will be told when they contain microplastics.

For brands, this creates a marketing as well as a compliance consideration: a label flagging microplastics is unlikely to appeal to increasingly eco-conscious shoppers. Many brands are choosing to reformulate ahead of the deadlines rather than carry such a statement, treating early reformulation as a competitive advantage.

What counts and what doesn't

The restriction applies to solid, insoluble, non-biodegradable synthetic polymer particles intentionally added to a product above the threshold concentration. It does not catch particles that are natural, soluble, biodegradable or inorganic, nor in general polymers that form a film during use, such as those in some nail products that cure into a solid layer. The precise boundaries can be technical, and there is official guidance with decision trees for borderline cases.

This is why ingredient-by-ingredient analysis matters: whether a given polymer in your formula is caught depends on its exact nature and how it is used. Common cosmetic microplastics to watch for include certain acrylates copolymers and conventional plastic (PET) glitter, but only a proper check against the definition can confirm a product's status.

Microplastics and UK sellers

This restriction sits in EU chemicals law, so it directly governs products placed on the EU market (and Northern Ireland). UK brands selling into the EU must comply with the relevant phase-out and labelling dates for their product categories. Great Britain operates its own chemicals regime and has been considering its own approach, so the GB position may differ another reason to track the two markets separately and check the current GB requirements.

In practice, because many brands sell into the EU and because reformulating to remove plastic microparticles is broadly desirable, a lot of UK makers are moving to compliant alternatives regardless. Plant-based and mineral glitters and natural exfoliants are increasingly available as substitutes.

Why many brands are reformulating early

On paper, make-up and nail brands have until 2035 a decade before the microplastics restriction bites for their category. Yet many are reformulating now rather than waiting. Part of the reason is the 2031 labelling step: few brands relish printing “contains microplastics” on packaging aimed at increasingly eco-aware shoppers, so the practical deadline to avoid that label is sooner than the headline 2035 date suggests. The long runway is really a window to reformulate, not a reason to delay.

There is also a market dimension. Retailers, marketplaces and consumers are moving against plastic microparticles faster than the law strictly requires, and “microplastic-free” has become a positive selling point in its own right. Brands that reformulate early can market the change as a benefit, while those that leave it late risk being seen as laggards and risk a rushed reformulation that compromises performance.

Reformulating away from plastic glitter or film-formers is not always trivial: alternatives can behave differently, and decorative performance like long wear and sparkle can be hard to match. That is exactly why early action helps it gives time to test alternatives properly, run stability and compatibility checks, and update the safety documentation, rather than scrambling against a deadline. Treating the transition as an innovation project rather than a last-minute chore tends to produce better products and smoother compliance.

Microplastics action checklist

• Identify any intentionally added microplastics (plastic glitter, microbeads, certain film-formers).

• Note the category deadlines: rinse-off 2027, leave-on 2029, make-up/lip/nail 2035.

• Remember the 2031 labelling step for make-up, lip and nail products.

• Switch to biodegradable, soluble, natural or inorganic alternatives.

• Check the EU vs GB position if you sell in both.

• Update your CPSR, PIF and labelling after reformulation.

Frequently asked questions

Is glitter banned in cosmetics?

Plastic glitter (non-biodegradable, insoluble synthetic polymer) is restricted in the EU and being phased out, while glitter made of biodegradable, soluble, natural or inorganic materials is not caught by the rules and can still be used.

What is the EU microplastics restriction?

Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/2055, amending REACH, restricts intentionally added synthetic polymer microparticles in products including cosmetics, phased in by product type from October 2023 onwards.

What are the deadlines for cosmetics?

Microbeads and loose plastic glitter from October 2023; rinse-off cosmetics by October 2027; leave-on cosmetics by October 2029; and make up, lip and nail products by October 2035, with a microplastics content label required from October 2031.

Does the microplastics ban apply in the UK?

It is EU law, so it governs the EU market and Northern Ireland. UK brands selling into the EU must comply; Great Britain runs its own chemicals regime and its position may differ, so check current GB requirements.

What can I use instead of plastic glitter?

Compliant alternatives include biodegradable, soluble, natural or inorganic options such as plant-based (cellulose) glitters and mineral effect pigments, plus natural exfoliants in place of microbeads.

References: Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/2055 amending Annex XVII of REACH (EUR-Lex); European Commission microplastics Explanatory Guide; ECHA guidance. General information only, not legal advice; verify current requirements for your products and markets.