Estee Lauder Fined $750,000 Over PFAS Cosmetics CEPA Violations

According to Environment and Climate Change Canada, the fine was imposed on 13 January 2026 by the Ontario Court of Justice, and the decision was published in a news release dated 2 February 2026. In addition to the monetary penalty, the court ordered the company to notify its shareholders about the conviction. The fine is directed to the Government of Canada’s Environmental Damages Fund.

What Happened and Why PFAS Was Central

The enforcement action followed a routine inspection in May 2023, during which officers found that certain eyeliner products listed Perfluorononyl Dimethicone as an ingredient. The substance is described as a per- and polyfluoroalkyl substance (PFAS), sometimes referred to as “forever chemicals” due to persistence in the environment.

Under CEPA, the importation, sale and distribution of cosmetic products containing Perfluorononyl Dimethicone were treated as a significant new activity. In practical terms, that meant the company was required to notify the government before the activity occurred, allowing authorities to assess potential health or environmental risks in advance. The news release states that the company’s failure to notify constituted a breach of subsection 81(4) of CEPA.

Compliance Orders and Escalation to Conviction

The case also illustrates how non-compliance can escalate. On 8 June 2023, officers issued an environmental protection compliance order setting out steps the company needed to take to meet the significant new activity requirements. Environment and Climate Change Canada reports that the company did not comply with that order, resulting in a second violation under subsection 238(1) of CEPA.

As a consequence of the conviction, the company’s name is expected to be added to Canada’s Environmental Offenders Registry, which records certain corporate convictions under federal environmental laws.

Summary

For cosmetics manufacturers, importers and brand owners, the case reinforces the need for ingredient-level screening against CEPA triggers, robust internal escalation when notification duties may apply, and disciplined response to compliance orders. It also underlines that enforcement outcomes can extend beyond fines to include court-ordered communications and public registry listings.