Over the past decade, green advertising has shifted from a reputational concern into a legitimate financial and legal risk. As 2026 settles in, this trend is only expected to intensify due to the regulatory shifts within the United States and on a global scale.

Within the United States, the second Trump administration has made it clear that its priorities favor energy production and economic growth rather than environmental and sustainability initiatives. In addition, both the United States Federal Trade Commission’s Green Guides and a draft EU Green Claims Directive lost steam throughout 2025. However, even though federal policies and regulations have weakened, individual states have seized the opportunity to advance their own policies. This evolving patchwork of local regulations has made it increasingly difficult for corporations to track and maintain compliance. Furthermore, state level laws are anticipated to expand throughout 2026. For example, jurisdictions such as Virginia and New Jersey, who both have new Democratic administrations, will likely notice an uptick in environmental and sustainability litigation.

So why is the cosmetic industry specifically as higher risk?

In the beauty and personal care product sectors, consumer purchasing decisions are often influenced by brands that promote their products as “clean,” “all-natural,” and “sustainable.” These claims tend to invite heightened scrutiny, and brands that cannot verify their claims across their entire supply chain will face substantial risk. Within the past year, major industry leaders in the personal-care industry have been subject to greenwashing. Among those, Nivia brand products are at issue for allegedly falsely advertising high percentage of natural ingredients and Ulta Beauty is currently defending a class action alleging to have misled consumers seeking environmentally sound products. Additionally, global recalls, ranging from banned fragrance ingredients to labeling errors, signal an intentional push for stricter cosmetic oversight.

Looking forward:

Culminating everything noted above, we expect lawsuits to be filed in all shapes and sizes citing to greenwashing. Specifically, we expect that “recyclability” claims will be a major litigation trigger as states like California have their own product labeling laws with a 2026 implementation deadline. We expect class plaintiffs to bundle greenwashing claims paired with more traditional consumer fraud claims. For example, claims that “eco-friendly” products contain PFAS, talc, or other flagged chemicals that are commonly incorporated in cosmetics. Lastly, because cosmetics are directly tied to consumer safety, even a single consumer experience can support a claim. For example, products advertised as “gentle” or “non-irritating” may be deemed misleading if any consumer experiences an adverse reaction creating a major risk for a class to form.

Whether you’re a small mom-and-pop retail shop or the CEO of a globally recognized brand, it’s critical to cover all your bases before making any green claims. That responsibility extends beyond your own role in manufacturing or retail and reaches throughout the entire supply chain. To conclude, it’s important to keep in mind that missed FDA and other agency deadlines do not provide safe harbors.