Buy a full case and the price per unit drops automaticallyRequest a sample
AccountCart0
All ContainersBottlesJarsCaps & ClosuresPumps & SprayersTubs & PailsJugsDroppersTinsTubesAccessories
Industries
Learn
The formats

The cuticle balm tin

Updated

On this page9
Forty-seven containers and not one of them is a tin, on the archetype named after tins.

What the archetype says

Poured solid balm or wax, tin or small jar, opened rather than dispensed. That describes a cuticle balm accurately and names a container the derived shelf does not contain.

What the shelf actually is

Forty-seven containers from 7 to about 59 mL, of which 30 are polypropylene and 17 are glass. By form 18 double wall jars, 11 single wall, 9 straight sided, 5 low profile and 2 hex. No metal at all.

The catalog does hold tins

Twenty-nine of them, including 24 round steel from about 7 to 355 mL and two rectangular steel. The derivation does not place them on this shelf, and that is recorded as an open task rather than worked around.

Why it happens, as far as we can tell

The archetype’s permitted materials include polypropylene, glass and metal, and the tins are recorded with the material Steel rather than Metal. A vocabulary gap one string wide, and it is in the open task too.

A jar is a legitimate answer for a balm

It is filled warm and opened rather than dispensed, so a small double wall jar works well and looks considered. The 47 containers are not a bad shelf, only a differently named one.

But a tin has real advantages here

Slim, pocketable, no thread to clog with wax, and a shallow pan is easier to get a fingernail into than a deep jar. For a cuticle or lip balm that matters.

So ask for the tins directly

They exist, they are round steel in useful sizes, and they are not on this shelf. Naming them here is the most useful thing we can do until the derivation is fixed.

Two problems, one string apart

The tins are recorded as Steel and the archetype permits Metal, and that single vocabulary gap is most of why a shelf named after tins has none. It is in the open task list with the fix identified.

References

21 CFR 701.3, the cosmetic ingredient declaration, which requires ingredients in descending order of predominance on the label of a cosmetic in package form. law.cornell.edu
Written from federal statute and from measured catalog data, not from a formulation bench. Whether a particular particle is a plastic microbead within 21 U.S.C. 331(ddd) is a question about that particle and its purpose. Nothing here is a determination about a specific exfoliant or a specific formula.