Korean cosmetic regulatory data is hard to work with for three reasons. It is written in Korean. It is spread across two government agencies — MFDS for the rules and KCIA for the ingredient classifications. And what looks like a single restriction on paper is often three different texts in three different formats: a Korean notice, an English-translated CosIng entry, and a provisional KCIA clause. The K-Beauty Cosmetic Ingredients API is the version of that data we wish we had had when we started. It exposes 21,796 ingredients with their regulatory status across 10 markets — the EU, Korea, ASEAN, China, Japan, Taiwan, Brazil, Argentina, Canada, and the US — through a single, consistent JSON interface. The Korean source text is preserved in the payload, but the fields most regulatory workflows depend on come back in English or numeric form. The 19 posts we have published on this blog are all built on this same database, in English. This post walks through what the API actually returns,...
Every few months, a post goes viral claiming that Europe bans more than a thousand cosmetic ingredients while the US bans barely a dozen. The numbers are usually right, but they compare only two markets. We wanted the full picture, so we counted the ingredient restrictions in all 10 markets our database covers. The gap is wider than the usual comparison suggests. The EU accounts for 5,301 ingredient restrictions in our data. The US has 111. The eight markets in between fall into a pattern that says more about regulatory philosophy than about safety. The ranking Each number below counts how many cosmetic ingredient restrictions — prohibitions plus concentration limits — each market has in our regulatory database. Rank Market Total Prohibited Restricted 1 EU 5,301 4,039 1,262 2 ASEAN 4,843 3,891 952 3 China 4,145 3,373 772 4 Korea 4,046 3,356 690 5 Brazil 4,022 3,220 802 5 Argentina 4,022 3,220 802 7 Taiwan 2,137 1,459 678 8 Canada 1,947 1,699 248 9 Japan 386 95 ...