The Year of the Horse: Why Speed, Strength, and Discipline Matter in Regulation

As the Year of the Snake slithers away and the Year of the Horse gallops in, it offers businesses an opportunity to reflect on what habits to shed – and how to move forward with greater focus and discipline.

In Chinese astrology, the Horse symbolizes energy, strength, speed, and confidence. It is rarely happy to stand still. The idiom 马到成功 (mǎ dào chéng gōng) – “When the horse arrives, success follows” – dates back to the Yuan dynasty (1271 to 1368 AD) when the arrival of the cavalry on the battlefield often signalled swift victory.

But success did not come from speed alone.

Across chemicals, cosmetics, and food regulations, we are seeing consistent enforcement signals. Frameworks are being refined. Obligations are tightening. Expectations of continuous compliance are becoming the norm rather than the exception.

The Horse’s defining trait is speed, but its power is shaped by training and guidance.

Speed Without Control Is Risky

A horse without reins can be dangerous. In business, the parallel is familiar: limited resources, innovation pressure, compressed product launch timelines. When compliance is treated as the final checkpoint rather than an embedded discipline, the result is often costly reformulations, re-labeling, or even market withdrawal.

In my view, reactive compliance is no longer sustainable in a multi-jurisdictional environment.

The Regulatory Calendar Is Tightening

A horse does not hesitate at the starting gate – and neither can companies.

Regulatory deadlines are increasingly strategic risk points. Many obligations now trigger automatically. The expansion of the EU SVHC Candidate list to 253 entries activates immediate supply chain communication and, sometimes SCIP notification requirements once thresholds are exceeded. These are not future considerations; they are operational obligations.

Similar pressure is visible across sectors. Defined transitional periods in food law, classification updates under the UK’s proposed Mandatory Classification List (the GB MCL), and consultation windows under ECHA’s authorization process all represent moments where early engagement can materially shape outcomes.

After transition deadlines – such as those linked to amendments under the EU Toy Safety Directive – non-compliant products cannot remain on the market. Regional measures, including Shandong’s expanded pollutant controls effective on February 1, 2026, reinforce the same message: regulatory systems are dynamic and increasingly responsive.

Compliance Is No Longer a One-Time Event

The strong horse does not just sprint – it endures long distances. Regulators are building systems, not simply issuing warnings. Compliance is no longer a one-time filing; it requires continuous monitoring, updating, and adaptation.

ECHA has reminded industry that REACH registration dossiers are "dynamic documents". Changes in substance composition, tonnage bands, new uses or revised CLP classifications can all trigger mandatory dossier updates.

South Korea's recent amendments to the Chemical Hazard Assessment Results similarly require companies to verify whether substances they manufacture or import have been newly classified as hazardous or reclassified. Where changes occur, Safety Data Sheets (SDS) and labels must be promptly updated.

In cosmetics, post-market vigilance and ingredient re-evaluations under the EU Cosmetics Regulation follow a similar pattern. Safety assessments are not static documents; new toxicological findings or SCCS opinions may require reformulation, relabeling, or withdrawal.Compliance now requires systems, not just submissions.

Transparency Is the New Baseline

Discipline wins races. Regulatory intelligence can no longer be reactive. Companies are finding structured review cycles – such as six-month Adaptation to Technical Progress (ATP) checks under CLP, substance monitoring, or PFAS screening strategies – are becoming essential to their business.

The disclosure of 67 previously confidential substances in South Korea following the expiration of data protection periods illustrates this shift toward openness. Regulators are steadily reducing opacity in chemical information.

Scientific opinions also signal future directions. When the EU’s Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS) concludes that certain cosmetic ingredients are “not safe” under proposed conditions, it often lays the groundwork for future restrictions, such as concentration limits, use restrictions, or reformulation pressure. These are early warnings, not isolated academic exercises.

In the food sector, increasing public access to risk assessments and EFSA opinions reflects a comparable move toward transparency in safety data and exposure assumptions.

PFAS regulation illustrates how a topic can evolve from policy discussion to enforceable infrastructure.

In the United States, finalized drinking water standards, expanded TSCA reporting, Superfund designations, and improved detection methods demonstrate measurable enforcement capability. The UK’s PFAS Plan similarly emphasises monitoring, potential UK REACH restrictions, strengthened reporting and transparency requirements.

Globally, analytical detection capacity is expanding. Measurement capability now extends across air, soil, wastewater, and consumer products globally. PFAS oversight is becoming more data-driven and enforceable.

In parts of Asia, emerging pollutant management frameworks reflect a “one substance, one policy” philosophy – such as pollutant management models emerging in provinces like Shandong – substance-specific controls and targeted implementation timelines rather than broad category bans. This modular approach signals increasing regulatory granularity.

The direction is consistent – regulation is becoming more precise, more transparent, with ever-evolving updates.

Reflection: Are You Riding or Reacting?

The Year of the Horse symbolizes momentum – but momentum without direction is wasted.

In my experience, for most organizations navigating multi-jurisdictional regulatory change, the challenge is not a single deadline. It is building the internal system that ensures no deadline becomes a crisis. Are compliance efforts guiding growth – or chasing it? Is regulation integrated early into product development and market strategy or bolted on at the end?

As 2026 unfolds, the companies that combine speed with discipline and endurance will be better positioned to navigate complexity across jurisdictions.

When the horse arrives, success follows – but only when preparation meets opportunity. If you are evaluating how to strengthen internal compliance systems across jurisdictions, we are always open to a conversation.