Cosmetics claims in influencer marketing: what a creator can promise about skin and hair

A creator can tell an audience how a cosmetic looks, feels, smells and fits into a routine, and what happened when they used it. A creator should not promise outcomes the brand cannot prove, give timelines, or suggest a product treats a condition. Rule 36 of the Cosmetics Rules, 2020 says no cosmetic may purport, or claim to purport, or convey any idea that is false or misleading to the intending user. Claims that sound like treatment risk a second rulebook entirely.

This post is the beauty slice of our ASCI influencer guidelines explainer and our guide to influencer marketing in India. It assumes you already know the label rules. Brands in skincare, haircare and make-up should read it alongside our beauty and skincare industry page, and the food-side equivalent in our post on FSSAI food claims.

The cosmetics rule, and what sits around it

Rule 36 is one sentence, but it matters because it applies to what a cosmetic is said to do, whoever says it. Two nearby provisions in the Cosmetics Rules show how the regulator thinks about claims.

• New cosmetics. Rule 2(r) defines a new cosmetic as one containing a novel ingredient. For these, the conditions of permission say no claims other than those permitted may be made on the label without the prior approval of the Central Licensing Authority, and Form COS-12 asks the applicant for supporting data for the claimed benefits, "to justify the nature of its effect".
• Standards. The Ninth Schedule lists finished cosmetics that must conform to Bureau of Indian Standards specifications, including skin creams, shampoos, hair oils, lipsticks and toilet soaps.

For a brand, the practical point is simple. The label, composition and permitted claims are on file with a regulator. A creator's script should never go beyond them.

Where a cosmetic claim becomes a drug claim

The Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954 defines "drug" to include any article, other than food, intended to affect or influence in any way the structure or any organic function of the body. It is a wide definition. Our reading is that a product promoted as growing hair, adding height, enlarging the bust or burning fat is being pitched for that purpose, whatever the pack calls it. We have found no decision that settles the point, so this is a risk reading, not a ruling.

Two parts of the Act then bite. Section 4 bars any person from taking part in publishing an advertisement relating to a drug that gives a false impression of its character, makes a false claim or is otherwise false or misleading in a material particular. Section 3(d) bars advertisements suggesting use of a drug for conditions in the Schedule. A few Schedule entries sit close to cosmetic marketing:

Penalty under section 7 is, on a first conviction, imprisonment of up to six months, a fine or both, and on a later conviction up to a year, a fine or both. Section 9 reaches the directors and managers of a company that commits the offence, unless they prove it happened without their knowledge or that they exercised all due diligence. Our post on health influencer rules covers the Act's wider reach. The Schedule does not list baldness, hair greying or fairness, but a claim need not be on the Schedule to be misleading under section 4 or under rule 36.

What ASCI keeps finding

ASCI's FY2025-26 press release gives the pattern. Personal care had 576 cases and was 16.9 percent of influencer violations. ASCI says the most common problems are claims of visible, rapid or guaranteed results, such as skin transformation, hair growth or instant outcomes, upheld because the scientific substantiation was missing, especially when results were presented as certain or universal. It also names impossible timelines, such as a problem gone in a single wash, manufactured scientific precision, such as a multiplier for how much stronger hair becomes, superlatives such as "India's No1", and "natural" and "safe" positioning. ASCI also noted "drinkable sunscreens" in food and beverage cases, a reminder that a cosmetic-style claim on a swallowed product is a food claim.

ASCI's Code adds a rule aimed at this category's audience: special care and restraint in ads addressed to people with a real or perceived inadequacy of physical attributes such as height or bust development, obesity or baldness, so claims do not exceed what generally accepted medical practice and the product's actual efficacy support.

A claim ladder for briefs

Use four rungs, and tell the creator which one the script sits on.

Two rules shape rung 1. Rule 13(1) of the CCPA's 2022 guidelines requires an endorsement to reflect the creator's genuine, reasonably current opinion and rest on adequate information about, or experience with, the product. So do not script a four-week result for a creator who has had the product for four days. And rule 4(1)(d) says an ad must not suggest its claims are universally accepted if informed or scientific opinion is significantly divided.

Before-and-afters, disclaimers and superlatives

Before-and-after content is a result claim. It should show the same person, lighting and angle, state the time between the images, and not exceed what the substantiation covers. Do not use a disclaimer to fix it. Rule 11 of the CCPA's guidelines says a disclaimer must not correct a misleading claim or contradict the main message, and ASCI's disclaimer guidelines give the same kind of example, a "lose up to 2 kg" claim that is disclaimed only under a strict calorie limit.

Disclaimers in video must be readable. ASCI's guidelines for disclaimers (13 July 2023) say a frame should carry no more than one disclaimer, limited to two full-length lines, each held for at least four seconds. They add a duration formula of five words a second plus a recognition period of two seconds for nine words or fewer and three seconds for ten or more. A disclaimer must be in the same language as the claim and not in italics. A tiny line flashed under a Reel fails this test whatever it says.

Superlatives and rankings. "India's No1" is a claim about ascertainable fact. ASCI's awards and rankings guideline expects the awarding organisation's name, the month and year, an award no more than 12 months old, and the awarding body's written consent.

Skin tone and body image

ASCI's guidelines for skin-lightening products say ads should not communicate discrimination by skin colour or show darker-skinned people as unattractive, unhappy or less successful, including in pre-usage depictions. Its gender-stereotype guidelines say ads must not suggest that a person's happiness or emotional wellbeing depends on conforming to idealised body shapes or features. The first is written for skin-lightening and fairness products, the second for ads generally, and both are ASCI's reading of its Code, which applies to creator posts that are ads. A "glow-up" that shows the before as unhappy, or a transformation arc that equates a skin tone with success, invites a complaint.

Dermatologist creators and "recommended by"

A dermatologist who explains how an ingredient works is on firmer ground than an influencer who is not qualified. ASCI's Addendum II expects people who give technical advice or promote prevention, treatment, cure or remedy claims for medical conditions to hold relevant qualifications and state them upfront, superimposed or in the opening remark of a video. Generic, non-technical content does not need this. A line such as "recommended by dermatologists" needs the named professional's permission and a current basis, under the Code's rule on references to persons and institutions.

How we would brief it

1. Build a claims sheet with three columns: the line, the evidence, the rung of the ladder. Put it in the brief before outreach.
2. Send the product early and give a realistic usage window, so rung 1 statements are true when posted.
3. Ban rung 4 in writing, and rung 3 unless the evidence file is attached.
4. Approve the final cut, checking disclaimer lines, timings and the label. Our compliance checklist has a ten-question sheet.
5. If a post will run as a creator ad, re-check claims at the new scale and read our usage rights guide. A teen audience adds further limits, covered in our post on children in influencer ads.
6. Plan seeding and UGC with the same sheet, as set out in our gifting and seeding service and UGC service.

What we could not source

We did not open the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, so we do not cite its definition of "cosmetic". We found no CDSCO or licensing-authority action against a creator, and no rule in the Cosmetics Rules that sets what an advertisement may say beyond rule 36. SPF and sunscreen testing standards are outside this post.

To plan a beauty campaign with the claim ladder in the brief, ask us for a creator plan.

This is general information, not legal advice.