What Makeup Brand You Will Never Support

Impactful Ninja is reader-supported. When y'all buy through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Learn more than Learn more .

Chapter Disclosure

Hey beau impactful ninja ?

You may have noticed that Impactful Ninja is all about providing helpful information to make a positive impact on the globe and society. And that we love to link dorsum to where nosotros found all the data for each of our posts.

Well-nigh of these links are informational-based for you lot to check out their primary sources with one click.
But some of these links are so-called "affiliate links" to products that we recommend.

Why do we add these product links?

Kickoff and foremost, because we believe that they add value to you lot. For example, when nosotros wrote a post well-nigh the environmental impact of long showers, nosotros came across an EPA recommendation to employ WaterSense showerheads. So we linked to where you can find them. Or, for many of our posts, we also link to our favorite books on that topic then that you tin can get a much more holistic overview than one single blog mail service could provide.

And when there is an affiliate program for these products, nosotros sign upwardly for it. For example, as Amazon Assembly, we earn from qualifying purchases.

What do these affiliate links mean for you?

Kickoff, and most chiefly, we even so only recommend products that we believe add value for you.
When you buy something through 1 of our affiliate links, we may earn a pocket-size commission - but at no additional costs to you.
And when y'all buy something through a link that is not an affiliate link, nosotros won't receive whatsoever commission merely nosotros'll still exist happy to have helped you.

What do these chapter links mean for u.s.?

When we detect products that we believe add together value to you and the seller has an affiliate program, we sign up for it.
When y'all buy something through 1 of our affiliate links, we may earn a small commission (at no actress costs to you).
And at this point in fourth dimension, all money is reinvested in sharing the most helpful content with you. This includes all operating costs for running this site and the content cosmos itself.

What does this mean for me personally?

You may take noticed past the manner Impactful Ninja is operated that money is not the driving factor backside it. Information technology is a passion project of mine and I love to share helpful information with you to make a positive impact on the earth and society. Even so, information technology's a project in that I invest a lot of time and also quite some money.

Eventually, my dream is to one day plough this passion project into my total-time job and provide fifty-fifty more helpful information. But that'due south still a long fourth dimension to go.

Stay impactful,

Beauty brands worldwide have had several controversies surrounding the manufacture over the last few years, with most drama occurring on social media. And many makeup companies' blunders inspired some very entertaining headlines. Just when all the smoke and conversation room-grit had settled, we had several brands left standing in the unethical spotlight.

The nearly unethical makeup companies include brands that still test on animals like Nars, Clinique, Victoria's Secret, Maybelline, Benefit, Chanel, and more. Other makeup companies accept unethical working weather condition and practise individual labeling, selling other brands' products every bit originals.

We see a growing number of in one case-respected brands sell out on their commitments to ethical practices that kept united states loyal for decades. We accept also embraced several companies aslope our influencers on social media only to observe that we were duped into a scheme that sold poor-quality makeup at luxury prices. Nosotros're pledging to be more than savvy consumers and it starts by fugitive these unethical brands.

Related: Your actions and choices dramatically affect the world around you lot. But did yous know that in that location are uncomplicated, reliable techniques you lot tin can utilise to live more ethically in a way that is not only good for you but also for society at large? Check out the book Do The Right Thing: Living Ethically in an Unethical Earth (link to Amazon) to see how you lot can easily apply these in your daily life.

26 Makeup Companies Even so Conducting Animal Testing

According to PETA, the following popular makeup brands are still testing on animals, many of which were chosen out directly on PETA's website. Many of these brands are considered cruelty-free; withal, as you will see, this is not ever the example. With all these brands, the issue is in the fine print, wherein a make can legally claim to be cruelty-complimentary "except when required by law."

And if the make is sold in China–where animal testing is required by constabulary–and so this means the make is not actually cruelty-complimentary. If you are curious near whatever particular brand, yous can usually notice this data provided on their website.

O.P.I.

O.P.I. was once on PETA's Beauty Without Bunnies list. Nevertheless, the brand (owned by Coty, Inc.) was removed from the list when PETA discovered the visitor had abandoned its anti-brute testing policy and sold products in the Chinese market. Now it is just ane of many brands that have sold out its ethics and upstanding principles for the chance to make money in Red china.

NARS

NARS in one case served many as the staple brand for cruelty-free makeup. Unfortunately, in early 2020, the make updated its animate being testing policy, equally it recently joined into the Chinese market. What does that exactly hateful? Unfortunately this means that NARS now conducts animate being tests where required by police force. They are no longer a cruelty-costless brand.

L'Oreal

Fifty'Oreal is no exception to the legal loophole that allows them to claim that they no longer examination on animals. And while the company has made groovy progress in its commitment to eliminate animal testing, PETA still lists it equally a "exercise test" brand. Like PETA, we hope to see L'Oreal commit to leaving the Chinese market place and then that information technology can be fully free from animal cruelty.

Maybelline & Lancôme

Maybelline is a pop drugstore brand that many adore, and Lancôme has been the staple mascara provider for many over the years. But both companies share their policies with their parent company, L'Oreal. And so long as the brands are sold in Mainland china, where foreign cosmetics must undergo mandatory animal testing, Maybelline and Lancôme cannot be considered cruelty-free brands.

Benefit

Benefit has been hailed by many as cruelty-gratis, simply this is not true. The brand's policy is not to examination unless required by law, and information technology sells its products in people's republic of china. Benefit currently sells out of Sephora in China with no indication of leaving any time soon.

Victoria's Hugger-mugger

Victoria's Hush-hush spent years upholding a policy that said the brand would never test on animals. Never say never, as it were, considering the company ultimately chose profits over its principles, letting down many consumers when the brand expanded into China.

Plainly, the company that was in one case vowed confronting brute cruelty was simply against it until the toll was right. Victoria Clandestine now joins the others on this list to pay for the barbarous and deadly testing required in exchange for the chiliad amounts of coin companies stand to brand off the large Chinese population.

Revlon, Almay, and Elizabeth Arden

Revlon is the parent company of both Almay and Elizabeth Arden, and all brands share Revlon's policy that states animal testing is done "where required by police." Almay may seem to be cruelty-free with its "clean" and "effortless" mental attitude, merely it still is sold in China and is still subjected to required animal testing.

Elizabeth Arden fifty-fifty claims to be committed to eliminating animal testing; however, as long as the brands are sold in China, they will show themselves to be more committed to money.

Rimmel London

Rimmel London carries the claim that it is against fauna testing, but the make, like so many others, is sold in China. When asked near this, the company turned the arraign onto Chinese consumers, stating the people want Rimmel London products and that it wouldn't be correct to deprive them of what they desire. The visitor shares its policy with its parent company Coty, Inc.

Chanel

Chanel is non considered a cruelty-gratuitous brand. As is common with nigh of these companies, Chanel's policy on animal testing is unavailable on the make'southward website. Merely we know its products are sold in China, and we know that they must test on animals in order to do so.

Estée Lauder & Its Subsidiaries

Estée Lauder claims to be committed to eliminating animal testing, but not committed enough to end selling in the Chinese market place. It is as well the parent company of several popular subsidiaries which are also on PETA'south list, including:

Clinique
Bobbi Brownish
La Mer
GLAMGLOW
Origins

These companies are all subject to the aforementioned creature-testing policy with the clause that requires it in People's republic of china, keeping them all from existence cruelty-free.

In addition, Estée Lauder has managed to upset many of its customers over the 2020 vacation, equally many people placed orders but never had them fulfilled. The company took its time in responding to angry customers nearly the effect, just to offering a generic, insincere sounding, corporate response. Worse all the same, many customers still accept not received their product or a refund.

M.A.C. Cosmetics

M.A.C. is also owned past Estée Lauder, though many are unaware of the connectedness. Nosotros telephone call the brand out separately from its sister companies above considering information technology is hands 1 of the well-nigh well-known and most popular makeup brands ever. And for a long fourth dimension, M.A.C. was a cruelty-free brand.

Nonetheless, beingness a subsidiary of Estée Lauder, Thou.A.C. is also subjected to the beast testing policy since its products are sold in China.

Mary Kay

Mary Kay representatives are ofttimes unknowing peddlers of misinformation when it comes to the brand's policy on animal testing. They all echo the make's claim near non testing on animals, but Mary Kay has the aforementioned "where required by police force" dominion as all the rest listed here.

In 1989, the company announced the halt of all brute testing on its products. Unfortunately, in 2012, Mary Kay decided to start selling its products in China, and they began testing on animals once over again and continues to do so today.

Avon

Avon is another brand that benefits from misleading their representatives, who then fool the customers unwittingly for them. The company holds claim equally the first major makeup company to end animal testing on its products dorsum in the '90s, as they have "a deep respect for fauna welfare."

But it was discovered that Avon authorizes and pays local Chinese officials to conduct animal testing for them. This way, the make can withal sell its products in Red china without bothering it with that pesky legality clause like all these other brands on this list. Although, it would seem like its "deep respect" claim is just a advisedly worded lark from the fact that Avon is not a cruelty-free brand.

Bourjois

Bourjois is a trendy French makeup brand previously owned past Chanel, which was likely involved with animate being testing. Coty Inc. acquired the brand in 2015, but we know that this was a mere sidestep as far every bit ethical practices are concerned. Bourjois products are tested on animals, and the brand is not considered cruelty-free.

Brand Up for Always

Brand Up For Ever is a theatrical-quality make dearest by makeup artists for its bright, long-lasting appearance. Owned past LVMH (Louis Vuitton/Moët Hennessy), Make Up For Ever is sold at Sephora, and, aye, it is also sold in China. For this reason, this brand was also chosen out by PETA for creature testing.

Dior & Guerlain

Dior and Guerlain are both LVMH owned likewise, and, like all luxury brands that sell in mainland People's republic of china, they test on animals. Guerlain says they "are strongly opposed to animate being testing and have developed recognized expertise in alternatives to animate being testing." But this just sounds like another clever way of saying someone else does testing on the brand's behalf.

Burberry

Burberry has managed to convince some that they are more ethical than they are, leading to some misbelief that the company remains cruelty-costless. This is due, in role, to its PETA entrada, and while the visitor has made some improvements, it still has a long manner to go. Unfortunately, Burberry is nonetheless testing on animals since its products are sold in Cathay.

4 Makeup Companies That Don't Seem To Intendance About You

Z Palette

You may retrieve the hype in 2017 on social media surrounding something chosen the Z Potter. This is a special device created by Z Palette that, at the fourth dimension, the company called "game-irresolute."

The device's purpose was to save you fourth dimension, makeup, and money by removing makeup from its original packaging. The heat helps to release the makeup from its packaging, substantially melting lipsticks and concealers, which y'all tin can then employ to create your own palettes. This was an exciting prospect for many, who ultimately chose to buy into the idea and purchase the device, which came with a pretty hefty $85 price tag.

Notwithstanding, many were taken aback when they received their order to detect that they essentially had purchased cipher more a hotplate. Many hurt customers voiced their negative feedback on Z Palette's social media accounts, questioning both the price and practicality. Just the replies from the brand'southward Public Relations personnel in charge of social media shocked and insulted customers.

Z Palette's social media responses to several customer critiques were considered by many as bullying from the visitor. Many responses called customers names, while some clearly expressed the brand was uninterested in retaining customers that they didn't deem worthy. Z Palette also insulted its customers' intelligence, mocking that there was a difference between hotplates and induction, yet offered no education on the matter.

The company comments were and then bad that some speculated they had been hacked and someone was trying to make them look bad. Alas, they had non been hacked.

At the fourth dimension, many boycotted the visitor; afterward, many retailers dropped the brand. Now, years after, Z Palette has dropped the price on its Z Potter to $59. Even so, there has been no endeavour to "re-brand" or atone for the ugliness of its past, which leaves many nonetheless bitter and boycotting the bullies they have established themselves to be.

Morphe

While many customers rave about this brand and its low prices, Morphe has a difficult fourth dimension convincing others that they intendance about annihilation other than manipulating them out of their coin. Information technology took some time for those who follow beauty influencers and makeup brands on social media to figure it out because they seem to exist a good company that's all nearly working with influencers. Though, that ought to have been the first inkling.

With all the drama surrounding the brand, customers have started accusing Morphe of not caring about quality, which no longer lives up to the hype, claiming the make is merely focused on exploiting influencers to make coin, abusing the trust and loyalty that influencers accept with their followers.

Only possibly the make's biggest scandal was in 2020 when the Jaclyn Hill original palette formula was changed without warning. The modify had caused the pallets to no longer exist vegan–a feature that was very of import to many of its customers. When originally confronted, the company lied almost the alter it had attempted to go along subconscious.

In one case the public called information technology out, Jaclyn apologized, claiming she was unaware of such details. The company also admitted it withheld such data from her. Of course, this is more proof for many customers that the brand but exploits influencers to pawn its cheap makeup off on their followers.

Another controversy surrounding the brand for years at present is that Crowne and Morphe are the same company. The BeautyGuruChatter community on Reddit believed Morphe to exist a private labeling visitor. If true, this means the make does not make its ain products; rather, it purchases products from other companies and places its ain name and logo on them. And if that'southward the example, then Morphe'southward claims that information technology develops its own formulas are bogus.

And that means you lot could be buying the same stuff with a Crowne label at a lower price.

ColourPop

ColourPop is a brand that is generally well-loved by its customers for great products and affordable prices. But a few stumbles with some launches accept had customers scratching their heads.

One such stumble was a few years agone at the release of its contour Sculpting Stix. Names like "Typo" and "Yikes" were used to name darker shades, which some felt was disrespectful to the company'due south customers of colour. The company was quick to apologize and modify the names, only the damage had been done for many. ColourPop has been very selective virtually how information technology names its shades ever since.

The make likewise was accused of selling contaminated lipsticks in reviews that surfaced afterwards several customers had issues with their products from the Disney drove. Claims of hair, white fuzz, and blackness dots on the exterior of the products were reported. Accusations of poor-quality products continue to make full review boards online.

But the thing everyone is talking nigh these days is the speculation that ColourPop is reselling its products repackaged as Kylie Cosmetics. Both companies originally denied this to exist true, yet many remained skeptical.

It was subsequently discovered the two brands merged nether a parent company of their own creation, Seed Dazzler, to better control all aspects of their business organization. Information technology's not a horrible concern determination by whatsoever stretch, but this doesn't sit down well for many consumers, equally many feel the association was a downgrade for the company. And it certainly didn't squelch the theory that they repackage their products.

Kylie Cosmetics

Kylie, Kylie, Kylie. She certainly has had her fair share of bug with her beauty launches. And she has been defendant of nearly every unethical and poor business organization practice there is, leading many to the conclusion that her makeup brand is worth less than the hype information technology rode in on.

Start, the make was called out for its terrible lipstick applicators. Kylie addressed this issue. Simply so the accusation surfaced that her lipsticks were just ColourPop'due south old products repackaged. And we already know how that turned out.

The make was as well called out for overpriced and late shipping, and Kylie was fifty-fifty sued for intellectual property theft.

Then in that location was the scandal, which did not laissez passer the smell examination for many of Kylie's customers. Her Royal Peach Palette had several complaining the smell gave them headaches, with at to the lowest degree 15 customers filing complaints with the Ameliorate Concern Agency proverb they smelled chemicals and glue when they opened the container.

Overall, many feel that the buzz behind the brand was hyped to inflate the company's perceived value by its customers–an exaggeration that is required in the entertainment business concern and pays off in spades. And many have noticed Kylie'southward sudden absence from the makeup scene, accusing her of not caring now that her company isn't in the ideal lime-light she prefers.

And to the dismay of many, the brand is not completely vegan, adding insult to the many, many injuries. (Though the brand does have some vegan products.) It is also not Leaping Bunny certified. However, to its credit, the brand is considered cruelty complimentary. But it should exist noted that Kylie Cosmetics is 51% owned by Coty Inc., which does participate in animal testing in some places (mostly in Red china).

Terminal but certainly not least, reports have surfaced that call out unethical working weather in the brand's laboratories. Information technology is said that employees accept not been provided sufficient protective equipment and brand minimum wage without benefits. Some workers have also claimed to get headaches from chemical smells.

The Mica Issue in the Makeup Industry

If you oasis't yet heard nearly the mica controversy, information technology'southward fourth dimension you did. This information has been spreading around the globe for years at present, with many in America only now becoming aware of the issue. And unfortunately, the news is grim, equally there is almost no escaping unethical beauty.

Believed to accept etymological influence from the Latin micare, meaning to flash, smooth, or glitter, mica refers to a collection of several crystalline minerals. Mica is used equally an ingredient for dozens of industries to add together shimmer to anything from paint to toothpaste to lotion and, yes, cosmetics. In fact, you'd be difficult-pressed to find a piece of makeup you ain that doesn't have mica in information technology.

Refinery29 helped betrayal mica's event in an investigative documentary and an accompanying article chosen Mica: The Makeup Industry's Darkest Hole-and-corner. We suggest you take half an hour to check out. Information technology does a nice job of compacting an overview of this incredibly circuitous topic that has exposed the earth to nevertheless another instance of child labor.

Bharat has a large monopoly on the mica mining manufacture, accounting for roughly 60% of the earth's mica, with 25% coming from regions where child labor is prevalent. And those who live in these villages that are abundant with this resource oftentimes find themselves at the mercy of its demand. Corruption has infiltrated the industry throughout the supply chain, and many families are forced to put their children to work considering they are so dependent upon the income.

Unfortunately, it has been discovered that there is admittedly no transparency in many of these mines, so in that location is no mode of knowing if the mica used in your makeup was sourced with child labor or not.

Some makeup brands have embraced synthetic mica as an upstanding alternative to this association with child labor. And while this is a great option, the complexity of the issue wherein so many of these families rely on the manufacture to survive, the answer is non in boycotting the natural ingredient birthday.

While you can choose to accost this matter however yous come across fit, we suggest that y'all assist put the pressure on makeup companies to practise their part by supporting brands that are actively involved in taking action and avoiding brands that aren't. Many brands have come together to form the Responsible Mica Initiative (R.M.I.), which is committed to eliminating child labor from the Mica supply chain in us of Bihar and Jharkhand in India by 2022.

But it should be noted that the sourcing of natural ingredients for cosmetics has environmental, social, and governance risks (referred to as E.S.G. risks), which range beyond the entire supply chain and threatens the reputation of the dazzler manufacture as a whole. Indeed, unsustainable and unethical practices are so deeply instilled within the manufacture, and the trouble is worse than many originally thought it to exist.

Avoid Brands Using Unethical Ad

Studies in neuroscience have revealed that a mere v% of cognitive activities, including emotions, deportment, and decisions, are conscious. The other 95% are non-conscious. This can explain why so many of us tend to gravitate "naturally" toward more eco-friendly and upstanding brands.

Simply research also shows that consumers are driven by emotions when it comes to dazzler products.

It was also determined that consumers get higher satisfaction and greater validation in brands that strengthen and feed the perception that using a production is "caring for oneself." And often, companies are promoting themselves every bit "natural" or "organic" or "safety" (even when they aren't) to play into your unconscious decisions to buy green.

And unfortunately, the F.D.A. doesn't even regulate most of these claims in cosmetics products, and companies can get abroad with making these claims.

But what'due south worse is many brands have resorted to literal fearfulness-mongering in some of their advertisements to convince you they are the superior make. Such tactics are highly unethical, and you should exist cautious to avoid falling for them. Oftentimes, anyone trying to focus on something or someone else is unremarkably trying to hide their own crimes, failures, or shortcomings.

Concluding Thoughts

Unfortunately, unethical practices have go somewhat commonplace for makeup companies. Indeed, the entire beauty industry is inadvertently associated with child labor due to its use of mica. And fast-makeup brands have proven to be just as unsustainable as fast-manner brands. Many companies are trying difficult to avoid these upstanding pitfalls, but we consumers must do our due diligence to ensure we back up brands that are genuine in such efforts.