Sephora kids grew up, now Italy wants answers

It started as a meme, the so-called "Sephora kids" – a term coined to describe the surge of pre-teens flocking to beauty retailers for multi-step skincare routines typically associated with older clientele. Now the phenomenon has taken a more serious turn.

Last week, Italy's competition watchdog launched an investigation into Sephora and Benefit Cosmetics over what it described as an "insidious" marketing strategy involving young micro-influencers. 

These creators, it alleged, encouraged the compulsive purchase of cosmetics among children and adolescents – a particularly vulnerable group – including those under the age of ten. The brands, it alleged, had also failed to clearly state that products such as serums, face masks and anti-ageing creams were not intended or tested for use by minors, either in store or on social media. 

LVMH, which owns Sephora, said it and its subsidiaries would "fully co-operate with the authorities." Benefit declined to comment further given the ongoing investigation.

Italy will now decide whether the brands fell short of their obligations – and could impose fines or demand changes to their marketing if affirmed. The industry, meanwhile, faces a broader reckoning over how it reaches young audiences, and what responsibility it carries for the market it helped create.

An industry grappling with the market it built

The rise in youth-led skincare content has been building for some time, most notably on TikTok and Instagram, where the line between genuine recommendations and paid advertising is often hard to distinguish.

Last June, a study from Northwestern University found that routines posted by teen influencers contained an average of eleven potentially irritating active ingredients – raising questions not just about disclosure, but about the suitability of the products themselves.

Brands and retailers, for their part, have been searching for a workable position – with reception seemingly split depending on how involved the target audience is in the product itself.

Last September, Sephora stocked Sincerely Yours to considerable fanfare. The brand, co-founded by fifteen-year-old influencer Salish Matter alongside her father Jordan Matter, was developed with dermatologists and shaped by input from over 60,000 of its teen community. 

The launch was so popular, it drew 80,000 fans to a New Jersey mall, requiring police intervention. Products were formulated specifically for younger skin, with no harsh actives. 

Just two months later, actress Shay Mitchell launched Rini, a children's skincare line also developed with paediatric chemists – framed around a similar argument, but met with considerably less enthusiasm. 

Critics argued the brand was not solving a problem but commercially exploiting one, and that launching a line for children as young as three normalised the very behaviour that had drawn scrutiny. Mitchell appeared on national television to defend it.

More recently, brands without the built-in audience of a teenage co-founder have adopted a different approach. 

Last month, Gen Alpha skincare brand Evereden gave equity stakes to three teenage creators – aged 14, 15 and 17 – bringing them into product development rather than simply paying for posts.

The argument is straightforward: if you cannot beat them, invite them to the table.

A regulatory reckoning

Italy's move makes it the first European competition authority to formally investigate cosmeticorexia-linked marketing practices – and the first to decide whether existing consumer protection rules are sufficient to cover them.

The agency is no stranger to moving fast against high-profile names. It previously fined companies linked to Italian influencer Chiara Ferragni more than €1 million over a misleading charity campaign. The case prompted tighter transparency rules for Italian influencers and a wider European conversation about accountability in creator-led marketing.

Perhaps the bigger question is what Italy's move signals for the broader regulatory framework that is already shifting.

Social media restrictions for under-16s are advancing across multiple jurisdictions, each reflecting a growing view that existing frameworks have not kept pace with how young audiences are reached online.

The consensus, it seems, is that the industry has had enough time to self-regulate. Regulators are now moving in.

Join 2,000+ professionals tracking the creator economy. Subscribe to our weekly newsletter.