Louis Vuitton’s New Makeup Line: Another Indicator of Recession?

Earlier this month, luxury brand Louis Vuitton launched its first-ever makeup line, La Beauté, online. The collection will be available in stores from 29 August, marking a new chapter for the fashion house.

At the heart of this debut stands Pat McGrath, one of the most celebrated makeup artists in the industry, who has collaborated with Louis Vuitton’s runway shows for more than 20 years.

With 55 lipsticks—a nod to the Roman numeral LV—10 lip balms, 8 eyeshadow palettes, and a leather case with smaller accessories, McGrath not only reimagines Louis Vuitton’s heritage of vanity cases and toiletry trunks from the 19th and 20th centuries but also elevates the brand to an entirely new level of luxury.

This new level of luxury, however, hasn’t sparked the warmest reaction online. Many social media users questioned whether it’s reasonable to pay €140 for a lipstick or €220 for a four-shade eyeshadow palette. The prices even surpass those of other high-end houses like Hermès and Tom Ford, whose lipsticks cost less than half of Louis Vuitton’s.

While some critics dismiss the packaging as underwhelming and call the line “out of touch,” others are already unboxing their orders on camera with excitement. For them, the quality and design justify the price tag.

@daniellemarcan @Louis Vuitton has makeup. what do we think? #makeup #louisvuitton ♬ original sound – danielle

Take the LV Rouge Satin Lipstick, for instance: it delivers intense pigmentation that lasts up to 24 hours while also moisturising the lips. Each shade—like the burgundy highlighted here—is not only a nod to Louis Vuitton’s legacy of pioneering vision but also a celebration of individuality, designed to flatter every skin tone.

Another detail winning over consumers is the scent: a blend of rose, jasmine, and mimosa wax, created by LV’s master perfumer Jacques Cavallier-Belletrud. The creamy texture combines shea butter for hydration, natural mineral powders for smoothness, and hyaluronic acid spheres for a subtle plumping effect.

The last feature that surprised us the most is its refillable design. Instead of buying a completely new tube once you run out, you can purchase a refill for €60—choosing either the same shade or trying a new one. This makes the line not only more versatile but also more environmentally conscious, with reusable cases that can, in theory, last a lifetime.

But why would the brand choose to launch its first-ever makeup line at such high prices in a time of economic uncertainty? After all, who spends that much on a lipstick when rents are skyrocketing and everyday essentials climb higher in cost?

Perhaps Louis Vuitton is leaning on the “lipstick effect,” which suggests that in times of instability, women are more likely to buy small luxury items—particularly lipstick—as a form of gratification, indulgence, and a subtle symbol of status.

The concept of “lipstick index” was first introduced by sociologist Juliet Schor in her 1988 book The Overspent American. In the early 2000s, following the recession and 9/11, the theory was expanded by other scholars and picked up by cosmetics executives like Leonard Lauder. Their findings showed that spending on cosmetics often rises during downturns not only for indulgence but also for two other reasons.

Before we get to those, let’s return to indulgence. At first glance, it may seem unreasonable: who would spend their last bit of money on a luxury lipstick during hard times? But the answer is simple—a woman who wants to treat herself. For her, a small luxury is a reward for all her hard work. And why not? Knowing she may never afford a house or other “big” luxuries, she chooses to spend on herself, celebrating small joys instead.

This feels especially relevant today, with the influence of social media. Women constantly see influencers engaging in expensive consumer habits—buying overpriced perfumes, lip liners, and lipsticks—because, as they say, they “deserve it.” After watching enough of this content, it’s easy to feel pressured to make the same purchases, both to prove your self-worth to others and to avoid feeling left behind.

@aissatatdiallo I got the $160 @Louis Vuitton lipsticks + balm. Let’s unbox & try it on … Also, the products are refillable! When I took it out I was able to read out the shades 👇🏾 Baume: 030 Tender Bliss Satin: 896 Monogram Rouge Matte: 105 Nude Necessaire. Anyways I’d loveeee to hear your thoughts after. #LouisVuitton #labeautelouisvuitton #LvBeauty #PatMcgrath ♬ original sound – Aïssata

Of course, it’s empowering to see women treating themselves, recognising their value, and celebrating their achievements without guilt. Yet tying self-worth to costly beauty products can also feel dehumanising. In a hyper-capitalist world where status displays are not only normalised but encouraged, do we really know any other way to do it?

While the first explanation of the theory is tied to psychology, the other two lean more into sociology. A 2016 study suggested that the rise in cosmetic purchases during recessions could be linked to women seeking employment or trying to secure their current positions. In other words, by enhancing their appearance with makeup, women may believe they stand a better chance of being hired or keeping their jobs. However, other peer-reviewed studies found little evidence for this claim, calling much of it anecdotal.

And the final explanation, offered in a 2012 study, argued that women buy small luxury products not necessarily for themselves, but to attract men—specifically, as a way to secure a provider. Yet again, the evidence is shaky. Research on consumer habits during the Great Depression, for example, shows that both married and single women indulged in small luxury purchases at similar rates, suggesting beauty spending was more about personal gratification than attracting men.

Seen through today’s lens, the assumption feels even more outdated. Women now hold more power and financial independence than ever, while social expectations increasingly push men to refine their own appearance to gain attention. In some cases, the dynamic has even flipped entirely, with so-called “hobosexuals”—men seeking partners not out of romance but for financial security—illustrating just how much the relationship between gender, power, and consumption has shifted.

But the idea that women continue to crave luxury during hard economic times—but shift toward smaller, “more affordable” items—does make sense and is well supported in research. So, if Louis Vuitton was indeed relying on the lipstick effect, it’s no surprise they launched this collection at such steep prices without fearing tariffs or disappointing sales.

Yet rumours suggest the brand expected the line to sell out on release day—a prediction that never materialised. Maybe that’s because women today know other ways of self-indulgence, reaching for small luxuries that promise more than a logo stamped on packaging.

And yes, many of those come in bullet-shaped forms too. Just look at Harry Styles’ collection, which sold out instantly. Unlike a €140 lipstick, these items offer what buyers are really after: a guaranteed moment of pleasure and a fleeting escape from the weight of economic anxiety.

Words by Dana Shmyha