Crown and Care Act in Maryland Illuminates Long Standing Issues with Equity

Title: The Maryland Crown and Care Act : More Harm than Good? Background: As of July 1st, 2026, the State of Maryland passed the Crown and Care Act aiming to restrict and regulate certain chemicals within beauty and cosmetic products. This legislation expands upon a preexisting list of substances that have been prohibited in cosmetics for the state of Maryland. In 2021, HB 643 prohibited 24 hazardous chemicals in beauty products, and the legislation was effective January 1st, 2025. The Crown and Care Act-protecting communities from harmful hair chemicals was effective July 1st, 2026. While this bill may appear to be mutually beneficial to both the consumer and the producer, it may not be all that simple. Project Aims: This independent study was undertaken to address the following questions i) To what extent are stores complying with this law (act)? ii) Were there any brands/companies that were predominantly supplying these harmful products? iii) Does this act have the potential of limiting access to hair care products? Methodology: A mixed methods approach using both qualitative and quantitative research designs was utilized for this study. Data on consumer sentiments was obtained through text mining of social media postings around this topic. To examine the extent to which stores are complying with the law, performed an in-store audit of hair products that were being sold by different retailers as of October 1st, 2026 (three months since the law took effect). As shown in Table 1, the retailers included Target, Walmart, and Beauty 7. Results and Discussion: A majority of the chemicals that have been banned were being used to create synthetic hair, perm solutions, and other products that are advertised for coarser hair types. Many consumers have expressed their support for this bill online, because brands selling harmful and potentially cancerous products now are being held responsible with greater fines and consequences. Additionally, these consumers are happy that this bill was passed and put into effect much quicker than its predecessor, HB 643. Salon owners have also taken to social media discussing how being more informed about what is in their products has allowed them to make informed choices about what to stock in their store. One user stated under an Instagram post about the legislation that “Maryland state board of cosmetology should follow suit as well and require stylist[s] to take education on these dangerous chemicals when renewing cosmetology license“.(1) It’s apparent that the passage of the Crown and Care Act was well received throughout the state. But, as products are taken off of shelves, a question arises; Is it possible that the Crown and Care Act might result in beauty products in Maryland becoming less affordable? While it is positive that potential cancerous products are no longer being sold to the unsuspecting public, there is also a potential that the remaining products will become less affordable because companies know that consumers will be in need of replacement products. Manufacturers of products without harmful chemicals might drive up prices of their products because cheaper alternatives are no longer available. Additionally, hair appointments might cost more since salon owners will be using more expensive products, and in turn have to make a profit. “I guess many of the braiding salons are about to be sanctioned. 😐 I use Dudley’s products and Donna's recipes in my hair.”(2) Another concern is the possibility for stores disregarding the legislation entirely, which poses even more danger to consumers who are unaware of the negative effects. User nidia1020 commented on an Instagram post just days after the legislation was passed that “I don’t know if this is really working well operationally because a lot of this stuff has still been in stores[.]”(3) Future Studies: Are there price disparities between products that are prohibited and those that are not? To examine for disparities and equity regarding exposure to toxic hair products, we will asses whether the toxic containing hair products were being marketed for coarser, textured, coily hair or straight and general hair types. The next step in measuring and understanding the effects on the general public was to see if stores were abiding to the legislation in the first place, and then documenting effects on the consumers. Store name Were products with banned chemicals still available to consumers? If yes, which chemicals were present? If yes, were those products marketed towards coarser types of hair? Target Yes No Lead and Lead Compounds Formaldehyde Heavy Metals Parabens N/A Yes No N/A Walmart Yes No Lead and Lead Compounds Formaldehyde Heavy Metals Parabens N/A Yes No N/A Beauty 7 Yes No Lead and Lead Compounds Formaldehyde Heavy Metals Parabens N/A Yes No N/A Results: Store name Were products with banned chemicals still available to consumers? If yes, which chemicals were present? If yes, were those products marketed towards curly hair? Target Yes No Lead and Lead Compounds Formaldehyde Heavy Metals Parabens N/A Yes No N/A Walmart Yes No Lead and Lead Compounds Formaldehyde Heavy Metals Parabens N/A Yes No N/A Beauty 7 Yes No Lead and Lead Compounds Formaldehyde Heavy Metals Parabens N/A Yes No N/A