Sunscreens face the heat

Australians pride themselves on being sun-smart. But that confidence took a hit in June 2025 when consumer advocacy organisation CHOICE dropped a bombshell: 16 out of 20 sunscreens marketed as SPF 50 or 50+ failed to live up to their labels. Since then, in late August several brands have voluntarily paused sales of affected SPF 50+ sunscreens while they conduct further testing or await findings from the TGA’s investigation.

This renewed scrutiny comes at a time when the TGA is also considering proposed amendments to the Poisons Standard (SUSMP), which would limit the allowable concentrations of three common sunscreen ingredients: homosalate, oxybenzone and octocrylene, substances under global review for potential safety concerns.

The choice report: key findings

On 12 June 2025, CHOICE released the results of its latest sunscreen investigation, revealing that 16 out of 20 tested sunscreens failed to meet their labelled SPF or broad-spectrum protection claims under laboratory conditions.

The testing was conducted by an ISO-accredited laboratory following international standards ISO 24444:2019 (for SPF) and ISO 24443:2021 (for broad-spectrum/ UVA protection).

Some of the products that failed had been marketed as SPF50+ but returned lab results closer to SPF15 — 30 or did not provide sufficient UVA protection to qualify as ‘broad-spectrum’. The tested sunscreens included supermarket, pharmacy and department store brands readily available to Australian consumers.

CHOICE made the full results publicly available and called on the TGA to implement its own sunscreen compliance testing, rather than relying on third-party accredited laboratory reports.

‘We believe the TGA should invest in its own compliance testing instead of simply relying on reports provided by manufacturers, and the ACCC should investigate if consumers are being misled,’ the CHOICE report stated.

‘Sunscreen is always better than no sunscreen, but if consumers are being misled about the quality and longevity of their sunscreen protection, that represents a genuine health concern and a huge breach of consumer trust.’

Rafi Alam, CHOICE senior campaigns and policy adviser, took it a step further: ‘We’re calling on the TGA and ACCC to start an investigation into these sunscreen brands to ensure they are complying with the consumer laws and medical standards that keep us safe.’

TGA to investigate SPF findings

The TGA responded to the report, issuing a statement saying they will investigate the CHOICE findings and take regulatory action as required.

‘We note that several of the products in the CHOICE report provided results in the range of SPF 30. SPFs in the range of 30 to 59 provide ‘High protection’, while a SPF of 60 or higher (SPF 50+) provides ‘Very high’ protection. Therefore, products with an SPF of 30 are effective to use,’ the statement included.

The TGA reiterated that all sunscreens in Australia must comply with the testing and labelling requirements in the Australia/New Zealand standard for sunscreens, which incorporates internationally recognised ISO standards.

‘Currently, the internationally accepted ISO method of sunscreen SPF testing [(ISO 24444:2019, Cosmetics – Sun protection test methods – In vivo determination of the sun protection factor (SPF)] uses human subjects. It is a known issue that there is variability in SPF testing results across laboratories because testing on humans can be highly subjective and the response to a test can differ dramatically from one individual to another. While progress is being made internationally toward in-vitro sunscreen testing (eg, not on human subjects), which will improve consistency of results, these methods are not yet in place.

‘The TGA does not conduct human or animal testing, so where necessary, the TGA can outsource SPF testing to third party laboratories, The TGA can conduct other testing of sunscreen products in-house, such as laboratory broad spectrum performance testing as per the Australian Standard (AS/ NZS 2604), and content of the active ingredient testing.’

Meanwhile, several brands have voluntarily ‘paused’ from sale select sunscreens – including products from Ultra Violette, Naked Sundays, Found My Skin, Outside Beauty, Endota and Aspect Sun – as a precaution pending further testing.

The ABC revealed that five of the seven paused sunscreens share the same base formula, prompting the TGA to investigate possible formulation overlaps.

In an August statement to the ABC, the TGA said it is is aware that it is common practice for different sunscreen products to share the same or similar base formulations and ‘the TGA is currently investigating this matter and… will take regulatory action as appropriate.’

‘The TGA is investigating a selection of sunscreens and whether their sponsors hold sufficient evidence to support their SPF claims,’ the spokesperson said.

‘Sunscreen is always better than no sunscreen, but if consumers are being misled about the quality and longevity of their sunscreen protection, that represents a genuine health concern and a huge breach of consumer trust.’

TGA launches consultation to tighten ingredient rules for sunscreens

Independently of the SPF controversy, on 8 July 2025 the TGA launched a public consultation proposing new concentration limits for three widely used sunscreen chemicals: homosalate, oxybenzone and benzophenone, the latter a degradation by-product.

According to the TGA’s media release, this review was prompted by a mix of regulatory developments overseas, new exposure modelling using the Australian sunscreen exposure model, and an updated review of the scientific literature. The goal is to ensure sunscreens meet the highest standards of safety for prolonged and frequent use by potentially imposing new concentration limits or usage restrictions on these ingredients.

These ingredients have come under increasing global scrutiny due to potential human health risks, including endocrine disruption, genotoxicity and evidence of cancer in animal studies. In response to similar concerns, regulators in the European Union have already introduced concentration limits for oxybenzone, homosalate and benzophenone following scientific advice from the Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS).

In parallel, several countries have taken environmental action. Jurisdictions such as Hawaii, Palau, the US Virgin Islands, Thailand and Bonaire have banned the sale of sunscreens containing oxybenzone due to its documented effects on coral reefs. Studies have shown that even trace levels of the chemical can contribute to coral bleaching and marine ecosystem disruption.

The consultation, open for public and stakeholder feedback, will determine the thresholds at which these chemicals remain acceptable. Submissions closed 12 August 2025 and will be considered at the joint meeting of Advisory Committee on Medicines Scheduling (ACMS) and Advisory Committee on Chemicals Scheduling (ACCS) in September.

The CHOICE report and the TGA’s parallel ingredient review have placed Australian sunscreen regulation in the spotlight. But the TGA has emphasised that the sun protection benefits of these products continue to far outweigh any risks.