Chinese Netizens Decry La Roche‑Posay’s “Water‑Only” Facial Mist as an Overpriced “Tax on Intelligence”
La Roche‑Posay, the French‑origin skin‑care brand known in China as 理肤泉, has found itself at the centre of a heated online debate after consumers discovered that its flagship facial mist, priced at more than 100 yuan (roughly $15‑$16), lists “water” as its only active ingredient. The revelation sparked a wave of criticism on Weibo, where users dubbed the product a “tax on intelligence” (智商税) and questioned how a simple spray of water could command such a premium price.
2 September 2025
The uproar began when shoppers posted photos of the product’s ingredient list, noting the stark simplicity of the formula. Many expressed disbelief that the “special” French thermal spring water—lauded by the brand as a key differentiator—could justify the cost. Comments such as “Does French water cost more than our domestic water?” and “sprayed nothing” (喷了个寂寞) summed up the skepticism. Some users suggested that a regular sterile saline solution would serve the same purpose at a fraction of the price, while others pointed to the brand’s emphasis on the high‑cost spray nozzle as an attempt to shift focus away from the ingredient issue.
In response, La Roche‑Posay’s official customer‑service team addressed the concerns on September 1. Speaking to reporter @经视直播, the brand confirmed that water is indeed the sole active component of the mist, but clarified that it is not ordinary tap water. The spray contains natural thermal spring water drawn from the town of La Roche‑Posay in France. According to the company, this water undergoes rigorous screening, processing and sterilisation, preserving its natural minerals and trace elements. La Roche‑Posay also argued that the near‑hundred‑yuan price reflects significant production costs, especially the expense of the proprietary spray head. The nozzle, the brand says, delivers a wide‑angle, fine mist that evenly coats the skin, a feature it believes adds tangible value beyond the liquid itself.
Despite the clarification, many netizens remain unconvinced. The “tax on intelligence” label persists, with users questioning whether French spring water truly holds a premium worth the price tag. A smaller segment of commenters expressed a more nuanced view, acknowledging that the “money is in the spray head” and noting that such mists can provide relief for sensitive or dermatitis‑prone skin—particularly during seasonal changes or when wearing masks—if used as part of a broader moisturizing routine.
The episode underscores a broader shift in consumer expectations within China’s booming beauty market. Shoppers are increasingly demanding transparency about ingredients and pricing, and are quick to call out perceived over‑inflation. The debate also revives the “ingredients‑vs‑efficacy” conversation that has long divided “ingredient‑savvy” (成分党) and “effect‑focused” (功效党) segments of the market.
Industry analysts say the incident could have lasting repercussions for brands that rely on premium positioning without clear, substantiated benefits. “If a product’s formulation appears simplistic, the brand must articulate the science, the sourcing, and the added value in a way that resonates with an increasingly discerning audience,” one market observer noted. The controversy may also prompt regulatory bodies to tighten scrutiny over cosmetic labeling and marketing claims, especially those that emphasize “natural” or “thermal” water without detailed substantiation.
For La Roche‑Posay, the challenge now lies in rebuilding trust while maintaining its upscale image. Whether the company’s focus on the sophisticated spray mechanism will appease critics remains to be seen, but the episode serves as a vivid reminder that in today’s digital age, consumers are quick to call out products they perceive as glorified basics masquerading as luxury.
