---
title: "Cosmetic Product Development"
description: "A stage-gate roadmap for cosmetic product development: choosing a lab, writing the brief, testing, scale-up and the launch documents each market requires."
image: "https://cosmetic-labs.com/wp-content/uploads/cosmetic-product-development-guide-1200x1200-1.webp"
---
# Cosmetic Product Development

> A stage-gate roadmap for cosmetic product development: choosing a lab, writing the brief, testing, scale-up and the launch documents each market requires.

Source: https://cosmetic-labs.com/articles/cosmetic-product-development-guide
Created: 2026-10-23T17:32:17+00:00
Modified: 2026-10-25T09:07:13+00:00
Author: Emilie SCHOL

Cosmetic Product Development | Cosmetic Labs

## **Key takeaways**

Agree on product requirements and target markets before comparing supplier quotes.

Separate formula approval, testing, production approval and market access. A pleasant sample clears none of the other stages automatically.

Name an owner for every report, decision and release record, including work subcontracted by the lab.

Treat formula, packaging, process and claim changes as controlled changes that can affect earlier evidence.

Notification or registration is not a general regulator’s approval of the finished product.

Cosmetic product development turns an idea into three things: a formula, a process that reproduces it and a documented product that can be sold in a specific market. Choosing a lab is one decision inside that process, not a replacement for it. Before you pay for samples, decide what the product must do, where it will be sold, how it will be packed and who owns each deliverable.

This guide sets out a workable order of work for beauty founders and product teams, from the first brief to post-launch changes. The regulatory points rely on European Commission, US Food and Drug Administration and UK government guidance. The roadmap itself is a planning model, so adapt it to your product and get specialist advice for anything product-specific.

## Start with the launch decision, not the sample request
“A premium cream” or a list of fashionable ingredients is not a brief. It leaves the lab guessing what matters most, and a formula can feel right while missing the intended claim, pack, cost or manufacturing constraints.

Settle these points before you approach suppliers:

**Product and intended use:** leave-on or rinse-off, where it is applied, who uses it and how.
- **Markets:** where the first launch happens, not where the brand might expand later.
- **Claims:** the actual wording planned for the pack, product page and advertising.
- **Format and pack:** container, closure, dispensing system, fill size and any material restrictions.
- **Commercial boundaries:** budget, launch window, opening order and replenishment needs.
- **Priorities:** essential requirements ranked separately from preferences.
Classification comes early because it shapes everything after it. The FDA’s [“Is It a Cosmetic, a Drug, or Both? (Or Is It Soap?)” guidance](https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetics-laws-regulations/it-cosmetic-drug-or-both-or-it-soap) explains that intended use determines whether a US product is a cosmetic, a drug or both, and that claims on labels and in advertising can establish that intended use. A product sold as “skincare” is not necessarily regulated the same way in every country.

Turn these decisions into a [cosmetic formulation brief](https://cosmetic-labs.com/cosmetic-formulation-brief/). The first version only needs to be specific enough that two labs would quote the same job.

## Use a stage-gate roadmap with named evidence owners
A stage gate is a recorded decision to proceed, pause or revise. Its value is separating “we like this” from “we have the evidence for the next commitment.” The sequence below is a planning model, and stages can overlap once the team understands the dependencies.

DecisionEvidence or deliverableOwner to nameHold pointIs the concept defined?Versioned brief, markets and proposed claimsBrand product leadDo not compare prices quoted against different scopesIs the partner suitable?Capability evidence, scope, subcontractors and contractBrand buyer, with technical and legal inputResolve missing capabilities and rights before committingDoes the prototype meet the brief?Identified sample, evaluation record and approved specificationBrand approver and formulatorDo not approve a sample you cannot identifyIs the evidence appropriate?Agreed stability, compatibility, microbiological and claim reportsQualified technical leads and the relevant regulatory ownerRead failures and limitations, not just pass labelsCan production reproduce it?Transfer package, trial records and production specificationsManufacturer and brand quality leadResolve deviations before releaseIs market access ready?Market-specific safety, labeling, dossier and notification recordsThe legally accountable parties for each marketA submission receipt is not an approvalCan the product be maintained?Change control, complaints, traceability and follow-up arrangementsBrand and manufacturer, with regulatory duties allocatedReassess changes before implementing themFor each row, record who prepares the document, who reviews it, who approves it and where the final version lives. “The lab handles compliance” is not a responsibility statement. A lab can coordinate work without being the legally responsible party in the market concerned.

### What a gate record should contain
Keep each record short enough that someone joining the project can read it in a minute:

- **Gate and date:** which commitment is being decided.
- **Product version:** formula, pack and brief references the decision applies to.
- **Evidence reviewed:** each report or evaluation, with what it covers and what it does not.
- **Decision:** proceed, hold or revise, with the reason.
- **Open issues:** each with an owner and the condition that clears it.
- **Approver and storage location.**
Watch for evidence drift. Suppose sensory approval and a compatibility report both relate to pump pack P01, and the packaging supplier then switches to a different pump, P02. The sensory decision may still stand, but the compatibility report says nothing about P02. The correct record holds the production gate until a qualified test lead has assessed the change, rather than letting evidence for one pack quietly approve another.

## Choose a development route, then check the actual supplier
Pick the route by how much the product must change and which rights you need. Supplier labels such as white label, private label, custom formulation and contract manufacturing mean different things in different offers, so ask what each one includes in writing.

An existing formula can save development work, but you still need to confirm that the available evidence covers your pack, claims, branding and market. Custom formulation is a different task, and paying for it does not by itself give the brand unrestricted ownership of the formula or the freedom to manufacture elsewhere.

The [private label versus custom formulation comparison](https://cosmetic-labs.com/private-label-vs-custom-formulation/) covers the route decision. Then test each supplier against the brief:

- Can the team develop and manufacture this format?
- Which work happens on its own site, and which is subcontracted?
- What quality records and relevant evidence can it ?
- Who coordinates testing, documentation, packaging and filling?
- Can it support the opening order and later reorders?
- What happens when a sample, test or production batch misses the agreed criteria?
Ask for evidence tied to the facility and activity in question. A certificate covers a defined scope, not every product, subcontractor or service. The [cosmetic lab due-diligence checklist](https://cosmetic-labs.com/how-to-choose-a-cosmetic-lab/) helps you compare answers on substance rather than presentation.

## Settle formula rights and transfer deliverables before development
Owning a formula, being permitted to manufacture it and being able to move production in practice are three separate questions. A contract can grant exclusivity without a technical transfer package, and access to a safety report is not access to manufacturing know-how.

Before commissioning development, agree answers to these questions:

- Which existing intellectual property stays with the supplier?
- What rights apply to the formulation created for this project?
- Is exclusivity limited by market, category, time or purchase commitment?
- Which documents can the brand, its safety assessor and a future manufacturer see?
- Can production move, and what information and help would transfer with it?
- What happens to records and unfinished work if the relationship ends?
Have counsel in the relevant jurisdiction review the agreement. A development fee does not settle these rights on its own. The [cosmetic formula ownership and transfer questions](https://cosmetic-labs.com/cosmetic-formula-ownership/) turn them into a contract checklist.

## Budget the whole route and reconcile the minimum orders
Separate one-off development costs from recurring production costs. A formulation-only quote and a quote that includes testing, regulatory support, packaging and filling are not comparable, however similar the totals look.

Build a worksheet with separate lines for formulation, sample rounds, extra revisions, testing, safety or regulatory work, artwork checks, tooling, components, filling, freight, duties and contingency. Note the assumptions, exclusions, tax treatment, currency and payment trigger for each line. The [cosmetic development budget and quote comparison worksheet](https://cosmetic-labs.com/cosmetic-product-development-costs/) helps normalize offers. Any quote only means something alongside its scope, date and product assumptions.

Minimum orders need the same treatment across the supply chain. Bulk batch, bottle, printed carton and filling-run minimums can all differ, and each may apply per formula, shade, fragrance, size or artwork version. Purchased bulk is not the same as saleable units either.

The arithmetic is simple, but each assumption needs checking. 100 kg of bulk filled at 0.05 kg per unit gives 2,000 units in theory. The real figure is lower once you account for density (if fill is specified by volume), the agreed fill quantity, trial losses, rejects and retained samples. The [manufacturing MOQ guide](https://cosmetic-labs.com/cosmetic-manufacturing-moq/) covers the questions behind the number.

**Before ordering:** get written confirmation that formula, component and filling quantities work together before placing separate non-cancellable orders.

## Evaluate prototypes against a versioned brief
Approve samples by reference and criteria, not by memory. Give every sample an identifier and record the formula version, date, pack and evaluation conditions, then tie all feedback to that identifier.

Keep sensory preferences apart from measurable requirements. “Too heavy” is a fair first reaction, but the formulator needs to know whether the problem is spread, residue, perceived absorption or dispensing. Compare against an agreed reference and describe the change you want without guessing which ingredient is responsible.

Record each sample as approved, rejected or accepted for further work, with reasons. Liking a sample tells you nothing about stability, preservation, safety, claim support or reproducibility at production scale. An early sample is also not the test article if later changes alter what will be sold.

Agree the change process before testing starts: which changes trigger a new sample round, an evidence review or repeat work. That call belongs to qualified technical and regulatory reviewers looking at the actual change.

## Commission distinct evidence for stability, packaging and microbes
These studies answer different questions, and one report cannot stand in for the others. Stability looks at how the product changes over time under the study conditions. Packaging compatibility looks at the product and its container together.

[Intertek’s Cosmetic Stability Testing page](https://www.intertek.com/beauty-personal-care/cosmetic-stability-testing/) distinguishes formula stability, final-pack compatibility and packaging functionality, with examples such as appearance, pH, viscosity, leaks and dispensing performance. These examples help you frame a test request, but they are not a standard protocol.

Microbial risk needs its own assessment. The FDA’s [“Microbiological Safety and Cosmetics” page](https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/potential-contaminants-cosmetics/microbiological-safety-and-cosmetics) lists contamination sources including raw materials, water, manufacturing conditions, ineffective preservation and packaging.

Two ISO standards cover different ground. The [ISO 11930 abstract](https://www.iso.org/standard/75058.html) describes evaluating a product’s antimicrobial protection through preservation-efficacy data, a microbiological risk assessment or both. The [ISO 17516 abstract](https://www.iso.org/standard/59938.html) addresses microbiological limits, meaning the microbiological quality of a tested product. Labs often call preservative-efficacy testing a **challenge test**, so ask which method a provider actually means. Both standards describe circumstances where a product may be considered low risk, but that is a reasoned conclusion for a qualified assessor, not an exemption to assume. Ask the testing provider which methods and editions apply and how they will interpret the results.

A good test request specifies the product version, sample numbers, packaging, study conditions, endpoints (the measurements evaluated, such as pH change or dispensing performance), acceptance criteria, observation schedule and report contents. Decide in advance who interprets a failure and who judges whether it affects safety, performance or launch.

Use the [stability and packaging compatibility testing checklist](https://cosmetic-labs.com/cosmetic-stability-packaging-compatibility-testing/) for the formula-pack study, and the [challenge testing versus microbial limits comparison](https://cosmetic-labs.com/cosmetic-challenge-test-microbial-limits/) to keep preservative-efficacy evidence separate from batch microbiological quality.

Accelerated studies are useful during development, but a period of accelerated exposure does not translate automatically into a guaranteed shelf life. Be wary of supplier summaries that omit the tested version, method, conditions or limitations. The evidence has to apply to the product your customer will actually receive.

## Match claims to evidence before committing to the label
Write the claim before commissioning the study meant to support it. “Consumers said their skin felt hydrated” and “instrumentally measured hydration increased” are different claims needing different evidence. A study must match the wording, population, conditions and duration you intend to claim.

For the EU, the Commission’s [cosmetics legislation page](https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/sectors/cosmetics/legislation_en) points to both the Cosmetics Regulation and the common criteria for cosmetic claims. An ingredient supplier’s brochure does not substantiate what the finished product is advertised to do, so have a specialist review the wording against the evidence.

A claim study brief should name the finished product, proposed wording, population, any comparator, endpoints, method, analysis and limitations. Decide how you will handle unfavorable or inconclusive results before the artwork is fixed, and resist upgrading a claim because a result sounds impressive out of context. The [cosmetic claims substantiation guide](https://cosmetic-labs.com/cosmetic-claims-substantiation/) includes a claim-to-evidence planning table.

## Transfer the product to production and agree on release
Technology transfer is the handover of the information and know-how needed to make the defined product in the receiving plant. A lab sample and a production batch are made in very different conditions. The transfer package should cover the formula, raw-material specifications, manufacturing instructions, in-process checks, finished-product specifications, packaging and the relevant test and safety records, with confidentiality terms that match the contract.

Be clear about what a pilot or production-representative trial is meant to show. Record equipment differences, observations, deviations and actions. Scaling every ingredient by the same factor does not guarantee the same mixing, heating, cooling or filling behavior.

Before commercial release, name who reviews the batch record, checks results against specifications, handles deviations and authorizes release. The manufacturer’s quality release and the brand’s commercial acceptance are often separate decisions, and both should be explicit. The [cosmetic pilot batch and scale-up checklist](https://cosmetic-labs.com/cosmetic-formulation-scale-up/) covers the handover in detail.

## Complete the documentation for each target market
There is no single global certificate for cosmetics. Each market has its own accountable parties and documents, and the notes below are an orientation rather than a full compliance assessment.

### European Union
The [European Commission’s CPNP guidance](https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/sectors/cosmetics/cosmetic-product-notification-portal_en) describes the notification portal under Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009. Notification through CPNP is not a product approval. The safety assessment, responsible person, product information file and labeling remain separate obligations.

The [EU cosmetic launch checklist](https://cosmetic-labs.com/eu-cosmetic-compliance-checklist/) maps roles and handoffs, and the [Product Information File guide](https://cosmetic-labs.com/product-information-file-pif-for-cosmetic-products) covers the dossier.

Great Britain and Northern Ireland need separate treatment. The UK government’s [“Making cosmetic products available to consumers in Great Britain” guidance](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/making-cosmetic-products-available-to-consumers-in-great-britain) applies to England, Scotland and Wales, excludes Northern Ireland and points to separate Northern Ireland guidance. A product sold across these markets needs a specific assessment, not a generic “EU/UK compliant” label.

### United States
The [FDA’s overview of the Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act of 2022 (MoCRA)](https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetics-laws-regulations/modernization-cosmetics-regulation-act-2022-mocra) describes duties including safety substantiation, serious adverse-event reporting, facility registration and product listing, with some exemptions. Which party carries each duty matters, and registration and listing are not FDA approval of the product.

The [MoCRA requirements for cosmetic brands](https://cosmetic-labs.com/mocra-requirements-cosmetic-brands/) separate brand tasks from facility tasks. Check the FDA’s current position on any provision still subject to rulemaking.

## Control changes after approval
An approval covers an identified product and evidence package. Any later change should prompt a check of what the approval actually covered. Use the table to decide who needs to look at a change. Whether retesting is required depends on the specific change.

Proposed changeReview questionsPeople to involveFormula or raw materialDoes it affect specifications, safety, preservation, stability or claims?Formulator, quality lead, safety assessor or regulatory specialistContainer or dispensing systemDo existing compatibility and performance findings still apply?Packaging supplier, manufacturer and test leadManufacturing site or processWhat transfer evidence, trials and record updates are needed?Outgoing and incoming manufacturer, quality and regulatory leadsClaim or target marketDoes classification, evidence, labeling or notification change?Brand, claims specialist and the relevant regulatory ownerAfter launch, keep access to batch records, complaints and the safety information each market requires. Agree how the manufacturer and brand  issues, investigate problems and escalate to the legally responsible party. Settle record access and continuity now, before a supplier change or closure makes it urgent.

## Your next step: prepare one evidence-ready brief
Start with one product, one launch market set and a ranked brief, with proposed claims, pack assumptions and commercial constraints attached. Send the same document to each shortlisted supplier and ask them to state deliverables, exclusions, subcontractors and decision owners against it.

You will not clear every gate in the first meeting. Aim for a d route that shows what can be decided now, what needs testing or specialist advice and what stays on hold. That gives you a sound basis for choosing a lab, and gives the lab a clear basis for doing the work.

Spotted an error or an outdated requirement? [Contact Cosmetic Labs](https://cosmetic-labs.com/platform/contact) with the passage and a supporting source. Cosmetic Labs runs a [directory connecting beauty brands with cosmetic labs](https://cosmetic-labs.com/platform). Publisher details are in the [legal notice](https://cosmetic-labs.com/compliance/notice).

Author: Emilie SCHOL    Founder of Cosmetic Labs, the B2B platform connecting cosmetic brands with labs, CROs and raw-material suppliers. Former Business Development Manager at QIMA Life Sciences (cosmetic & pharma CRO). Based in Toulouse, France.

Updated on

October 25, 2026

First posted on

October 23, 2026
Sources
## Sources and references
References supporting this page are listed below. Source access dates and supported claims are recorded in the evidence notes where available.
[Is It a Cosmetic, a Drug, or Both? (Or Is It Soap?)](https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetics-laws-regulations/it-cosmetic-drug-or-both-or-it-soap)

URL

[https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetics-laws-regulations/it-cosmetic-drug-or-both-or-it-soap](https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetics-laws-regulations/it-cosmetic-drug-or-both-or-it-soap)

Publisher

US Food and Drug Administration
[Cosmetic Stability Testing](https://www.intertek.com/beauty-personal-care/cosmetic-stability-testing/)

URL

[https://www.intertek.com/beauty-personal-care/cosmetic-stability-testing/](https://www.intertek.com/beauty-personal-care/cosmetic-stability-testing/)

Publisher

Intertek
[Microbiological Safety and Cosmetics](https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/potential-contaminants-cosmetics/microbiological-safety-and-cosmetics)

URL

[https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/potential-contaminants-cosmetics/microbiological-safety-and-cosmetics](https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/potential-contaminants-cosmetics/microbiological-safety-and-cosmetics)

Publisher

US Food and Drug Administration
[ISO 11930:2019 Cosmetics – Microbiology – Evaluation of the antimicrobial protection of a cosmetic product](https://www.iso.org/standard/75058.html)

URL

[https://www.iso.org/standard/75058.html](https://www.iso.org/standard/75058.html)

Publisher

International Organization for Standardization
[ISO 17516:2014 Cosmetics – Microbiology – Microbiological limits](https://www.iso.org/standard/59938.html)

URL

[https://www.iso.org/standard/59938.html](https://www.iso.org/standard/59938.html)

Publisher

International Organization for Standardization
[Legislation](https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/sectors/cosmetics/legislation_en)

URL

[https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/sectors/cosmetics/legislation_en](https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/sectors/cosmetics/legislation_en)

Publisher

European Commission
[Cosmetic product notification portal](https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/sectors/cosmetics/cosmetic-product-notification-portal_en)

URL

[https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/sectors/cosmetics/cosmetic-product-notification-portal_en](https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/sectors/cosmetics/cosmetic-product-notification-portal_en)

Publisher

European Commission
[Making cosmetic products available to consumers in Great Britain](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/making-cosmetic-products-available-to-consumers-in-great-britain)

URL

[https://www.gov.uk/guidance/making-cosmetic-products-available-to-consumers-in-great-britain](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/making-cosmetic-products-available-to-consumers-in-great-britain)

Publisher

GOV.UK

Date

October 4, 2021
[Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act of 2022 (MoCRA)](https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetics-laws-regulations/modernization-cosmetics-regulation-act-2022-mocra)

URL

[https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetics-laws-regulations/modernization-cosmetics-regulation-act-2022-mocra](https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetics-laws-regulations/modernization-cosmetics-regulation-act-2022-mocra)

Publisher

US Food and Drug Administration
[Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on cosmetic products (recast)](https://publications.europa.eu/resource/cellar/9382f98e-9b27-11f1-b25c-01aa75ed71a1.0001.02/DOC_1)

URL

[https://publications.europa.eu/resource/cellar/9382f98e-9b27-11f1-b25c-01aa75ed71a1.0001.02/DOC_1](https://publications.europa.eu/resource/cellar/9382f98e-9b27-11f1-b25c-01aa75ed71a1.0001.02/DOC_1)

Publisher

Publications Office of the European Union

Date

May 18, 2026
[IP Assignment and Licensing](https://www.wipo.int/en/web/business/assignment-licensing)

URL

[https://www.wipo.int/en/web/business/assignment-licensing](https://www.wipo.int/en/web/business/assignment-licensing)

Publisher

World Intellectual Property Organization
[Registration & Listing of Cosmetic Product Facilities and Products](https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/registration-listing-cosmetic-product-facilities-and-products)

URL

[https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/registration-listing-cosmetic-product-facilities-and-products](https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/registration-listing-cosmetic-product-facilities-and-products)

Publisher

US Food and Drug Administration
FAQ
## Frequently asked questions

### Can I use one compliance file for the EU, GB and US?

No single file or certificate establishes compliance across those markets. The EU uses a responsible person, CPSR and PIF alongside notification. Great Britain has its own responsible-person and OPSS notification arrangements, and Northern Ireland needs separate treatment. US MoCRA assigns different duties to responsible persons and facilities. Reuse underlying evidence only after checking each market’s requirements and applicability.

### Does choosing a private-label formula let me skip testing review?

No. Check what the available evidence covers before adopting the offer. A previous study may concern another formula version, pack or intended use. Ask qualified reviewers which reports remain applicable and what further work is needed. The development route can change the work you commission, but it does not establish product safety or substantiate new claims.

### When should I check whether my claims make the product a drug?

Check intended use and classification before commissioning the evidence and label artwork. FDA says US classification depends on intended use, which can be established through labeling, advertising and Internet claims. Some products are both drugs and cosmetics. Have the relevant specialist assess the actual wording for each market, because cosmetic claim testing cannot resolve a classification problem.

### What if the packaging changes after compatibility testing?

Hold the affected commitment until a qualified reviewer assesses whether the earlier report covers the new packaging. Record the old and new component references, relevant differences and any further evidence required. Packaging can affect product stability, leaks and dispensing. A report for one pump does not automatically approve a replacement, even when the formula and brand name stay unchanged.

### Does cosmetic notification or listing mean the product is approved?

No. CPNP is an EU notification system, and the safety assessment, PIF and other market duties remain separate. FDA likewise says cosmetic facility registration and product listing do not indicate approval. Keep submission records alongside the underlying evidence and accountable-party map. A receipt records a submission, not a technical conclusion that the product is ready for launch.

### Can I assume I may move production after paying for development?

No. Check the agreement’s manufacturing permissions, disclosure terms and transfer deliverables before making the commitment. WIPO distinguishes assignment from licensing, so development payment does not itself describe the rights granted. Legal reviewers should assess the permissions, while technical reviewers assess whether another site can use the formula information, process instructions and supporting records.

Continue with

[Google](https://cosmetic-labs.com/?lean_auth=start&provider=google&redirect_to=https://cosmetic-labs.com/&error_return=https://cosmetic-labs.com/articles/cosmetic-product-development-guide)
[LinkedIn](https://cosmetic-labs.com/?lean_auth=start&provider=linkedin&redirect_to=https://cosmetic-labs.com/&error_return=https://cosmetic-labs.com/articles/cosmetic-product-development-guide)

© 2026 Cosmetic Labs. All rights reserved.

---

## Site identity

- Organization: Cosmetic Labs
- Description: Cosmetic Labs is a directory and a platform to meet all your cosmetic product development needs. From sourcing raw material to finding the best CRO for your needs.
- Website: https://cosmetic-labs.com

```json
[{"@type":"Article","headline":"Cosmetic Product Development","url":"https:\/\/cosmetic-labs.com\/articles\/cosmetic-product-development-guide","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/cosmetic-labs.com\/articles\/cosmetic-product-development-guide#webpage"},"image":{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https:\/\/cosmetic-labs.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/cosmetic-product-development-guide-1200x1200-1-1024x1024.webp","width":1024,"height":1024,"caption":"Two people examine a green pump bottle together at a table."},"datePublished":"2026-10-23T17:32:17+00:00","dateModified":"2026-10-25T09:07:13+00:00","author":{"@type":"Person","name":"Emilie SCHOL","url":"https:\/\/cosmetic-labs.com\/members\/39984"},"inLanguage":"en-US","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/cosmetic-labs.com#organization"},"citation":[{"@type":"CreativeWork","name":"Is It a Cosmetic, a Drug, or Both? (Or Is It Soap?)","url":"https:\/\/www.fda.gov\/cosmetics\/cosmetics-laws-regulations\/it-cosmetic-drug-or-both-or-it-soap","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"US Food and Drug Administration"}},{"@type":"CreativeWork","name":"Cosmetic Stability Testing","url":"https:\/\/www.intertek.com\/beauty-personal-care\/cosmetic-stability-testing\/","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Intertek"}},{"@type":"CreativeWork","name":"Microbiological Safety and Cosmetics","url":"https:\/\/www.fda.gov\/cosmetics\/potential-contaminants-cosmetics\/microbiological-safety-and-cosmetics","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"US Food and Drug Administration"}},{"@type":"CreativeWork","name":"ISO 11930:2019 Cosmetics \u2013 Microbiology \u2013 Evaluation of the antimicrobial protection of a cosmetic product","url":"https:\/\/www.iso.org\/standard\/75058.html","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"International Organization for Standardization"}},{"@type":"CreativeWork","name":"ISO 17516:2014 Cosmetics \u2013 Microbiology \u2013 Microbiological limits","url":"https:\/\/www.iso.org\/standard\/59938.html","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"International Organization for Standardization"}},{"@type":"CreativeWork","name":"Legislation","url":"https:\/\/single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu\/sectors\/cosmetics\/legislation_en","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"European Commission"}},{"@type":"CreativeWork","name":"Cosmetic product notification portal","url":"https:\/\/single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu\/sectors\/cosmetics\/cosmetic-product-notification-portal_en","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"European Commission"}},{"@type":"CreativeWork","name":"Making cosmetic products available to consumers in Great Britain","url":"https:\/\/www.gov.uk\/guidance\/making-cosmetic-products-available-to-consumers-in-great-britain","datePublished":"2021-10-04","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"GOV.UK"}},{"@type":"CreativeWork","name":"Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act of 2022 (MoCRA)","url":"https:\/\/www.fda.gov\/cosmetics\/cosmetics-laws-regulations\/modernization-cosmetics-regulation-act-2022-mocra","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"US Food and Drug Administration"}},{"@type":"CreativeWork","name":"Regulation (EC) No 1223\/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on cosmetic products (recast)","url":"https:\/\/publications.europa.eu\/resource\/cellar\/9382f98e-9b27-11f1-b25c-01aa75ed71a1.0001.02\/DOC_1","datePublished":"2026-05-18","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Publications Office of the European Union"}},{"@type":"CreativeWork","name":"IP Assignment and Licensing","url":"https:\/\/www.wipo.int\/en\/web\/business\/assignment-licensing","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"World Intellectual Property Organization"}},{"@type":"CreativeWork","name":"Registration & Listing of Cosmetic Product Facilities and Products","url":"https:\/\/www.fda.gov\/cosmetics\/registration-listing-cosmetic-product-facilities-and-products","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"US Food and Drug Administration"}}],"@id":"https:\/\/cosmetic-labs.com\/articles\/cosmetic-product-development-guide#article"},{"@type":"WebPage","name":"Cosmetic Product Development","url":"https:\/\/cosmetic-labs.com\/articles\/cosmetic-product-development-guide","mainEntity":{"@id":"https:\/\/cosmetic-labs.com\/articles\/cosmetic-product-development-guide#article"},"isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/cosmetic-labs.com\/articles#webpage"},"breadcrumb":{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/cosmetic-labs.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Blog","item":"https:\/\/cosmetic-labs.com\/articles"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Cosmetic Product Development","item":"https:\/\/cosmetic-labs.com\/articles\/cosmetic-product-development-guide"}]},"inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/cosmetic-labs.com\/articles\/cosmetic-product-development-guide#webpage"}]
```