Can block a launchCanadaBeauty & personal care

Saying not tested on animals creates a burden of proof

Canada prohibits making a claim on the label of or in an advertisement for a cosmetic that is likely to create an impression that it was not tested on animals unless the person has evidence that no such testing occurred, and requires that evidence to be produced to the Minister on request.

The phrase means nothing in the United States and is a documented, on-demand evidentiary burden two hours north, so a single North American label is a decision about which regime the copy has to survive.

92

92 of a possible 97Tier A, primary document or measured outcome. Nothing at this tier is allowed past 97, however good it looks.

Verified August 5, 2026Rechecked every 365 days, next by August 5, 2027.

Constraint

Held since August 5, 2026A rule, law or policy that limits what you may do or say. The earliest date we are willing to say this held. It may well have been true before that; we do not backdate a record past the evidence we have read. Supported, version 1.

This entry is wrong if

Section 16.3 is repealed, or Health Canada states that a not-tested-on-animals claim carries no evidentiary requirement, or the provision is shown never to have come into force.

Written before the record was published, not after. If you can show this, send it to hello@tryorbt.com and the correction goes on the record with the entry.

Evidence

  1. Tier Aregulation

    Department of Justice Canada (Justice Laws Website): Food and Drugs Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. F-27

    16.3 (1) No person shall make a claim on the label of or in an advertisement for a cosmetic that is likely to create an impression that the cosmetic was not tested on animals after the day on which this section comes into force unless the person has evidence that no such testing occurred after that day.

    Enacted by 2023, c. 26, s. 505. The publisher prints the enacting provision and not the day the section came into force, so the asserted-from date here is the day we read the page rather than a commencement date we did not verify.

    Read 2026-08-05 · Open government · page hash cacdd724a800

  2. Tier Aregulation

    Department of Justice Canada (Justice Laws Website): Food and Drugs Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. F-27

    (2) A person who makes a claim described in subsection (1) shall, on the request of the Minister, provide the Minister with the evidence referred to in that subsection.

    Read 2026-08-05 · Open government · page hash cacdd724a800

History

  1. v1created

    Initial entry from primary regulator text, read 2026-08-05. Where the publisher prints an enacting provision without a commencement date, the asserted-from date is the day we read the page rather than a date we did not verify.

Append-only. Nothing in this list is edited or removed once written, including the entries that record our own mistakes. Every change to every record is on the corrections page, and the same log is in entries.json under revisions.

  • canada
  • animal-testing
  • cruelty-free
  • claims
  • labelling
  • compliance
  • beauty

Cite this entry

“Saying not tested on animals creates a burden of proof”, The Orbt Market Index 0.1.0, entry omr:ca:the-cruelty-free-claim-must-be-evidenced, retrieved September 9, 2026, https://tryorbt.com/markets/entry/ca--the-cruelty-free-claim-must-be-evidenced. Dataset: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22679129

For a deck, a brief or a chat.

Free to quote, cite and act on. Not to resell or redistribute — the sources ask that of us, and each one’s terms are named. Machine-readable: entries.json carries this record under the id omr:ca:the-cruelty-free-claim-must-be-evidenced, with the same evidence and falsifier.

Read next

Everything we hold on CanadaEvery record for this corridor