More than 18 months ago, Marini SkinSolutions withdrew two of their products from the NSW market under direction of the State Environmental Protection Authority. Vivien Gardiner, Managing Director of JMSR Australia (Marini SkinSolutions), explained at the time that these products did not contain plastics but was told any physical particles in wash-off products were prohibited in NSW.
The physical particles, present in only two of Marini SkinSolutions’ 65 products, are made from biodegradable wax. The company complied and withdrew them from NSW sale.
On 3 November 2025, Marini SkinSolutions was included in a press release from the NSW EPA describing a number of products as containing plastic microbeads, despite withdrawing the products 18 months prior.
Here, Vivien Gardiner shares her opinion on the decision and its broader implications for the cosmetics sector.
I was disappointed to see Marini SkinSolutions publicly named as distributing products containing microplastics. This is not the case. The particles in only two of our 65 products are made from biodegradable wax and we removed these products from the NSW market more than 18 months ago, in full compliance with EPA direction.
Despite our efforts to show that the particles were not microplastics and are fully biodegradable, NSW EPA required their removal from NSW sale. We met that requirement in April 2024. So why issue a press release now, and why repeat an inaccurate claim?
Our aesthetics industry is being hammered from all directions by constantly changing regulations. Arbitrary decisions seem to be made by growing numbers of bureaucrats with broad authority to constrain or harm reputations in the private sector. We should not have been included in the EPA press release, yet we were given no notice or right of reply.
A closer look at the EPA decision
In April, 2024, NSW EPA wrote to us advising two of our products were banned under NSW law, due to the presence of ‘microbeads’ in the formulations. These are included to provide a sensory experience for the user and assist with physically disrupting corneocytic cohesion.
In the original formulations, the beads were comprised of polylactic acid but these have since been reformulated using synthetic wax. The Sydney clinic from which EPA sourced the stock was still carrying a few units of the older stock.
While classed as a ‘plastic’, polylactic acid is a commonly used substance and is derived from lactic acid polymerisation. It’s considered biocompatible, biodegradable and bioabsorbable. It’s what dissolving suture material is made from, as well as many uses in the food industry.
However, EPA advised us that any solid particles in wash-off products are banned, so upon receiving the directive from EPA, we immediately ceased supplying these products in NSW. We advised our NSW stockists to return any products they might have had in stock. We put clear notices on the two products on our website, advising they were not available in NSW.
EPA advised us we did not need to issue a product recall.
For some time now, the physical beads in the two products have been re-formulated using synthetic wax. Synthetic wax makes its way into the environment in a number of ways, surfboard wax being the most obvious.
It’s also the coating on slow-release fertilisers, is used in the food industry to make fruit appear shiny and prolong shelf life. It’s the coating on cheeses and lines disposable drink cups. It’s what we put on our shoes, cars and materials requiring waterproofing. It’s blended into the rubber in car tyres. It’s used as electrical insulation and as a mechanical lubricant and rust protectant. It’s in candles, crayons, chewing gum and cosmetics.
The CAS number for the synthetic wax beads used in the two Marini SkinSolutions products is 8002-74-2.
The wax beads are manufactured in the USA under Current Good Manufacturing Practice (CGMP) compliance and the material is accepted under the following international laws and regulations:
- Australia – AICIS
- Canada – DSL
- China – IECSC
- EU – EINECS – Cos Ing (2019/701/EC) Section 1; EU 95/45/EC 1223/2009/EC & Annexes; EU 511/2014, 2015/1866
- India – Drug & Cosmetics Act (6/2005)
- International – CITES Appendix I, II & III; OECD series 302 inherent biodegradability index
- Japan – ENCS – JSQI; Japan Standards for Cosmetics (No. 331, 2000 Nagoya Protocol)
- Korea – KECI
- NZ – NZIoC
- Taiwan – TSCI
- USA – TSCA Active Inventory; PCPC – California Safe Cosmetics Act of 2005; FDA Title 21; US Pharmacopoeia (USP31-NF26)
Marini SkinSolutions is itself CGMP compliant with the FDA. This is not necessary for cosmetics manufacture in the USA, Australia or elsewhere, but is a standard Marini SkinSolutions maintains as a signal to the market of their scientific expertise, ingredient provenance and formulation integrity. CGMP compliance is difficult, time-consuming and expensive. It requires regular audits and is the standard required for pharmaceutical formulation. It’s a higher standard than ISO compliance or legislative requirements.
Marini SkinSolutions is manufactured in California, which has some of the world’s strictest environmental standards. It would not be possible for them to be compliant with State laws and regulations yet include something in their products as profoundly hazardous as NSW EPA contests.
More than 18 months after withdrawing the products from the NSW market, NSW EPA issued a press release on 3 November, 2025, including us in a list of companies to which the ban notices were issued. Regardless of the composition of the particles, the CEO of NSW EPA is quoted as saying: ‘Microbeads don’t belong in skincare or our waterways – they can threaten marine life and people’s health’. This statement is fairly hyperbolic, considering all the other sources of actual plastic in the environment.
We calculate the total mass of particles which may have been washed off in NSW from our products as being less than one kilogram of a widely accepted biodegradable material.
With a budget of almost $300m for 2025-26 and a not-publicly-available salary for the CEO, we assume there’s a lot more ground for NSW EPA to cover than small cosmetics suppliers.
The aesthetics medical industry compliance requirements are becoming more and more onerous. Just ask any nurse or doctor trying to work out how to comply with the increasingly onerous and constantly changing Ahpra requirements.
Only a few weeks ago, we were required by AICIS (under the Federal Department of Health, Disability and Ageing) to provide evidence of not containing PFAS (per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances). Of course, we are compliant with this latest requirement, but what of the manufacturers of carpets, bedding, upholstery, cookware, cleaning products, tampons, dental floss, contact lenses, raincoats and shoes? Sure, they might be closely regulated in Australia, but people buy online from unregulated overseas jurisdictions every day. When will the department apply the same rules to Amazon?
We received no notice or right of reply from NSW EPA that their press release would be issued.
There are two ways to frame this. One is that Australia or its States and Territories are drilling down to protect the population and environment. Or, another is that as government departments swell in their numbers, and budget requirements increase, they must find more and more ‘enemies’ to target to justify their expenditure.
When we see press releases and restrictions being placed on the construction, transport or other big industries, we’ll be more likely to assume the former.
