Retail chains pull contaminated temporary tattoos from their ranges

Reactions from retailers

Despite the reactions of individual chains, Greenpeace continues to see gaps in child protection. The organization argues that many of the substances found could only end up on children's skin in the first place due to the lack of limit values for so-called chemical cocktails. The abstention of individual retailers does not replace clear legal regulations.

The Chamber of Labour Upper Austria pointed out that temporary tattoos are worn directly on the skin – and in the case of children, particularly on sensitive skin. This means the detected substances could enter the body more easily than with objects that do not have permanent skin contact. The consumer advocates therefore see a particular need for action.

Calls for stricter limit values

The findings were also picked up in political Vienna. ÖVP politician Norbert Totschnig was named in the reports as a respondent. No concrete federal policy measures were initially known. The discussion fits into a broader European debate about restrictions on PFAS in consumer products.

Greenpeace is calling for binding maximum values for the sum of multiple chemicals in a single product, as current regulation primarily focuses on individual substances. Without such a cumulative value, protection would remain incomplete, the organization argues.

Specifically, the bodies involved recommend that temporary tattoos for children be avoided where possible and that consumers look for labels such as the EU toy seal or independent test reports when purchasing. Parents should also prefer products labeled as phthalate-free and PFAS-free.

Recommendations for parents

The retailers announced that they would recall the products in question or no longer sell them. Whether authorities will also take steps, for example under the Product Safety Act, was part of the ongoing reporting. The coming weeks may show whether other chains follow suit.

The case also highlights the role of independent laboratory testing. While industry often refers to its own declarations of conformity, consumer protection organizations and chambers have repeatedly tested everyday products in recent years and made risks visible in this way.

Overall, it remains unclear how many different tattoo brands are actually affected. The 15 products tested only cover a portion of the market. Consumers therefore continue to rely on transparent information from manufacturers and retailers.