“Consumers’ expectations are moving toward products that are not tested on animals, and big personal product brands are changing their practices,” Holmes said. “There are alternative testing methods that are good for business, safe for consumers, and certainly move us forward to a humane approach by eliminating the cruel practices of the past,” according to Senator Holmes’s statement.

Beginning in 2020, manufacturers that fail to comply with the new law will be subject to fines, starting at $5,000 on the first day of violation. Following this, there will be an additional fine of $1000 per day every day the violation continues.

However, there are several exceptions to Illinois’s new law. The exceptions include situations where:

• Animal testing is needed for a human health problem and non-animal testing is not available
• Animal testing is required by a foreign government, “as long as none of the evidence from the test is used to substantiate the safety of the product in Illinois.” 
• Animal testing is done in compliance with federal regulations

Last year, California became the first state to pass a law surronding cosmetic and personal care product development that used animal testing, with the California Cruelty-Free Cosmetics Act.  The law, which goes into effect January 1, 2020, prohibits the importation and sale of new cosmetic products tested on animals.  Nevada followed next, with their Cruelty-Free Cosmetics Act, passed in June 2019.

California has led the statewide charge so far on limiting animal testing and cosmetic development. In 2002, the Golden State became the first in the U.S. to prohibit testing cosmetics and personal care items on animals, when an alternative test is available. Since then, New Jersey, New York, and Virginia have also passed their own state laws banning testing cosmetics on animals.  

“These state laws ban manufacturers and other testing facilities from using traditional animal testing methods when alternative testing methods have been approved by the Inter-Agency Coordinating Committee for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM),” according to NAVS.org.

With the passage of SB 241, Illinois now becomes the fifth state in the country to ban the sale of cosmetic and personal care products developed with animal testing.

On the international stage, over 30 countries have their own laws banning cosmetic testing on animals, including the 28 members of the European Union, Norway, Israel, India, Australia, and New Zealand.

Will more states join California, Nevada, and Illinois in banning the sale of cosmetic and personal care products developed with animal testing? While only time will tell, it’s important to note that several other states have pending bills about animal testing and product development and sales.

Pending state legislation about animal testing includes:

• Connecticut, SB 230:  Would phase out the sale and manufacture of cosmetics that utilize animal testing in any phase of their development.
• Hawaii, HB 704/SB 239/SB 756: Would make it unlawful for a manufacturer to import for profit, sell, or offer for sale in this State, any cosmetic, for which an animal test was conducted or contracted by or on behalf of the manufacturer, or any supplier of the manufacturer, on or after January 1, 2021.
• Maryland, SB 540: Would prohibit a person from conducting or contracting for cosmetic animal testing in the development of a cosmetic beginning October 1, 2020; would prohibit a person from selling, offering for sale, or transporting within the State certain cosmetics beginning October 1, 2021.
• Massachusetts, H 823/S 505: Would prohibit manufacturers and contract testing facilities in the state from using traditional animal test methods on any ingredient or product for which an appropriate alternative test method or strategy exists.” – NAVS.org

Take advantage of our new anti-aging guide, featuring the most innovative, highest-quality ingredients in the personal care industry.