SESSION WATCH
Died HOUSE · SESSION 2026

No. HB 1333

Testing of Cosmetics on Animals
Send via email
SPONSOR
Driskell
FILED BY
Fentrice Driskell — District 67, Democrat [search donations]
EFFECTIVE
1/1/2027
DIED IN
Industries & Professional Activities Subcommittee

Filed under Healthcare.

PROVIDED SUMMARY

Testing of Cosmetics on Animals; Provides that it is unlawful for person to manufacture, repackage, sell, hold, or offer for sale cosmetics that have been tested on animals as part of manufacturing process; prohibits manufacturers from using animal testing as part of cosmetics manufacturing process; prohibits manufacturers from repackaging, selling, holding, or offering for sale cosmetics that have been tested on animals; provides that manufacturers, upon issuance of cosmetic manufacturer permit, consent to specified inspections by DBPR & to submit to DBPR certain written documentation by specified date each year; provides for criminal penalties; provides administrative penalty; provides for cause of action by DBPR.

Full bill text →

Plain English Summary

AI-GENERATED
Bans manufacturing or selling cosmetics tested on animals.

Makes it illegal to manufacture cosmetics using animal testing, or to repackage, sell, hold, or offer for sale any cosmetic that was tested on animals, with narrow exceptions for foreign or federal requirements.

Violators face a second-degree misdemeanor charge, a $5,000 administrative fine for each violation, and a separate fine for every day a violation continues.

Getting a cosmetic manufacturer permit means automatically consenting to an annual state inspection, and permit holders must file written proof of compliance every January.

A small-business exemption from needing a permit no longer applies to a manufacturer, however small, that tests its cosmetics on animals.

KEY PROVISIONS
§ 1 Bans animal testing in cosmetics manufacturing majors. 499.0095

AIA cosmetics manufacturer may not use animal testing as part of making its products, with narrow exceptions for testing required by federal law, foreign regulators, or non-cosmetic purposes.

“A manufacturer may not use animal testing as part of the process to manufacture cosmetics.” bill text, line 44 →
§ 2 Bans selling or holding animal-tested cosmetics majors. 499.0095

AISeparate from the manufacturing ban, a manufacturer may not repackage, sell, hold, or offer for sale any cosmetic that was tested on animals, regardless of where that testing occurred.

“A manufacturer may not repackage, sell, hold, or offer for sale cosmetics that have been tested on animals.” bill text, line 46 →
§ 3 Adds a $5,000-per-violation administrative penalty majors. 499.0095

AIBeyond criminal charges, a violator faces a $5,000 administrative fine for each violation, and every day a violation continues counts as a separate violation, so fines can compound daily.

“a person who violates this section is subject to an administrative penalty of $5,000 for each violation” bill text, line 74 →
§ 4 Makes violations a second-degree misdemeanor majors. 499.0095

AIManufacturing, selling, or holding cosmetics tested on animals is also a crime -- a second-degree misdemeanor -- separate from and in addition to the administrative fine.

“commits a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083” bill text, line 71 →
§ 5 Requires manufacturers to consent to annual inspections moderates. 499.0095

AIGetting a cosmetic manufacturer permit means automatically consenting to the state entering and inspecting the premises once a year to check compliance; refusing entry is itself a separate violation.

“consents to the department's authorized officer or employee entering and inspecting the premises on an annual basis” bill text, line 58 →
§ 6 Strips the small-manufacturer exemption for animal testers moderates. 499.01

AIManufacturers with $25,000 or less in annual cosmetics sales are normally exempt from needing a permit, but that exemption no longer applies to one that tests its cosmetics on animals.

“unless such person manufacturers cosmetics using animal testing as part of the manufacturing process” bill text, line 97 →
§ 7 Lets DBPR sue to enforce the ban moderates. 499.0095

AIBeyond fines and criminal charges, the Department of Business and Professional Regulation may file suit or other legal proceedings to enforce compliance with the animal-testing ban.

“the department may institute such suits or other legal proceedings as are required to enforce this section” bill text, line 80 →
TIMELINE
3/13/2026
Died in Industries & Professional Activities Subcommittee
1/15/2026
Now in Industries & Professional Activities Subcommittee
1/15/2026
Referred to Commerce Committee
1/15/2026
Referred to State Administration Budget Subcommittee
1/15/2026
Referred to Industries & Professional Activities Subcommittee
1/13/2026
1st Reading (Original Filed Version)
1/9/2026
Filed
1 EARLIER →
STATUTES IT CHANGES
s. 499.005
+21 / −0
s. 499.005
+24 / −0
s. 499.0095
+367 / −0
s. 499.01
+20 / −6
s. 499.003
+4 / −4
s. 499.0051
+4 / −4