Titanium Dioxide TiO₂

Rutile unless you have a specific reason not to. It has the higher refractive index — about 2.73 against 2.55 in the pigment literature — and so materially greater scattering power, though how much greater depends on the grade, the treatment and the dispersion and is better established on your own system than taken from a published percentage. It also has far lower photocatalytic activity, which is why it holds up outdoors where anatase chalks. ASTM D476 makes the point for you by classifying anatase as Type I, free chalking. Anatase earns its place in three situations: interior coatings where exterior durability is not being paid for; paper and synthetic fibre, where its lower hardness is gentler on machine wires and its tone is brighter and bluer; and photocatalytic applications, where the photoactivity that ruins an exterior paint is the entire product. Anatase is also the softer crystal — Mohs 5.5–6.0 against rutile’s 6.0–6.5 — which matters if abrasion of screws, dies or wires is your problem. One more thing worth knowing: anatase converts irreversibly to rutile on heating, and there is no single transition temperature — reported values span 400–1200 °C depending on particle size, dopants and surface treatment, with the onset for bulk anatase usually around 600–700 °C. Treat any anatase grade as unsuitable much above 600 °C and confirm the figure with the producer for the grade you are buying.

Write the classification type, not just a percentage. ISO 591-1:2000 defines two types and five grades — Type A anatase as A1 and A2, Type R rutile as R1, R2 and R3 — and sets minimum TiO₂ content of 98% and 92% for A1 and A2 and 97%, 90% and 80% for R1, R2 and R3, with matter soluble in water at 0.6–0.7% maximum by grade and residue on a 45 µm sieve at 0.1% maximum across the board. Colour, scattering power, pH, oil absorption and resistivity of the aqueous extract are conditional requirements in that standard — they apply only by agreement between the parties, which is precisely why they belong on your purchase order rather than being assumed. The Indian specifications are close but not identical. IS 9788:2023 covers rutile for paints and uses the same R1/R2/R3 minima as ISO — 97%, 90% and 80% — with volatile matter 0.5/0.5/1.5%, matter soluble in water 0.5/0.5/0.7%, residue on 45 µm 0.1% and pH 6–8 measured at 27 °C. IS 411:2020 covers anatase for paints and is a single-grade specification requiring a minimum of 98% TiO₂ (97.5% in the 1991 edition), so it does not map onto ISO’s A1 and A2 and there is no such thing as an “IS 411 grade A2” to write on an order. Both current editions are freely downloadable from BIS’s own public archive, so quote the current one. Put the standard number and the edition year on the purchase order, and if a limit is commercially important to you, write the number and the test method next to it rather than relying on the standard reference alone. For internationally traded grades, ASTM D476-15(2021) classifies dry pigmentary titanium dioxide products into eight types grouped by composition, typical end use and some performance properties — in practice the published type tables turn on crystal form, chalk resistance, minimum TiO₂ and a minimum resistance figure — and most imported grades quote an ASTM type.

The method matters more than the number, because the same parameter measured two ways gives two answers. For a rutile pigment the ISO set is: TiO₂ content by ISO 591-1 clause 7; matter volatile at 105 °C by ISO 787-2; matter soluble in water by ISO 787-3; residue on a 45 µm sieve by ISO 787-18; pH of aqueous suspension by ISO 787-9; oil absorption by ISO 787-5; resistivity of the aqueous extract by ISO 787-14 (rutile grades only, in ISO 591-1); relative scattering power by ISO 787-24 and lightening power by ISO 787-17. The ASTM equivalents are D1394 for chemical analysis of white titanium pigments, D280 for hygroscopic moisture, D1208 for common pigment properties including pH, D281 for oil absorption by spatula rub-out and D332 for relative tinting strength by visual observation, with D2745 as the instrumental counterpart by reflectance measurement — D2745, not D332, is the one that matches the ISO photometric methods. The Indian standards route most of these through IS 33. One caution: resistivity is quoted in ohms on an ASTM D476 basis and in ohm-metres on an ISO 787-14 basis, and we have found no source that reconciles the two conventions. They are not different physical quantities: a figure “in ohms” is a resistance read in a defined measuring cell and converts to resistivity through that cell’s geometry constant. Because neither standard publishes the other’s cell, do not compare the two numbers directly — state which standard your limit is written under.

This needs care, because the position changed and a lot of published material is out of date. IARC classifies titanium dioxide in Group 2B, possibly carcinogenic to humans, on the basis of lung tumours in rats from inhaled dust — Monographs Volume 93, published 2010 from a 2006 working group. That evaluation stands and has not been revisited; it concerns inhalation, not skin contact or ingestion. The European position is different now. Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/217 had given titanium dioxide a harmonised classification of Carcinogen Category 2 by inhalation for powders containing 1% or more of particles of 10 µm or less aerodynamic diameter, with the EUH211 and EUH212 statements. The EU General Court annulled that classification on 23 November 2022, and the Court of Justice dismissed the appeals by France and the Commission on 1 August 2025 in joined cases C-71/23 P and C-82/23 P, so the annulment is final. The Commission published a notice on 10 December 2025 confirming that titanium dioxide powder containing 1% or more of particles at or below 10 µm is not subject to harmonised classification as Carcinogen Category 2 via inhalation. That is a notice rather than a regulation, so do not let anyone tell you Annex VI was amended by regulation. The practical consequence for a buyer is that safety data sheets genuinely disagree: some suppliers declare the product not classified under GHS at all, and others still declare Carcinogenicity Category 2 and Reproductive Toxicity Category 2. Work to your own supplier’s current sheet, do not assume two sheets for the same nominal grade say the same thing, and control respirable dust either way — IARC 2B is the stable reference point and it has not moved.

Not from this page, and the answer differs by jurisdiction, so here is the position rather than a promise. India still permits titanium dioxide as a food additive — INS 171, specified in the Food Safety and Standards (Food Products Standards and Food Additives) Regulations, 2011 at item 3.2.1, as a white, tasteless, odourless, infusible powder of minimum 99% TiO₂ with limits on mercury at 1.0, antimony at 2.0, lead at 2.0 and arsenic at 1.0 mg/kg. We have found no FSSAI ban or restriction proposal, and the July 2025 amendment to those regulations does not mention it. The European Union banned it: Commission Regulation (EU) 2022/63 removed E171 from the permitted lists with effect from 7 February 2022 and a transition to 7 August 2022, after EFSA concluded in May 2021 that a concern for genotoxicity could not be ruled out and that E171 could no longer be considered safe as a food additive. That ban is food only. Titanium dioxide remains authorised as a colourant in EU medicinal products — the Commission reaffirmed that in August 2025 after the EMA found no viable substitute — and it remains permitted in EU cosmetics under Regulation 1223/2009, including as a UV filter, subject to restrictions on inhalable powder forms introduced by Regulation (EU) 2021/850. So the same molecule is lawful in food in India and unlawful in food in the EU, while staying lawful in EU medicines and cosmetics — which matters if you export, and is exactly the distinction most summaries get wrong. Separately, food, pharmaceutical, skin-care and cosmetic grades sit outside the scope of India’s anti-dumping measure on Chinese material, and evidencing that exclusion has already produced an advance ruling and a CBIC circular. Food-business obligations under the FSS Act apply to whoever places food-grade material on the market, and that is a licensing question to settle before an order, not after. Tell us the end use at enquiry stage and we will say plainly whether we can serve it.

The trade unit is the 25 kg bag, and in India it is the only format we can evidence from producer documentation — KMML’s published datasheets for its rutile grades specify 25 kg multiwall paper bags, which is why that is what the catalogue row says, IS 9788 calls for multiply paper bags unless otherwise agreed, and IS 411 simply requires moisture-proof packing as agreed between the parties. In practice the same 25 kg unit turns up in paper, PP and HDPE depending on supplier. Larger formats exist internationally — one-tonne FIBC and semi-bulk bags, and dry bulk at selected locations — and imported material is offered in 500 and 1,000 kg FIBC. Container loading depends on stowage and on the port’s gross-weight limit rather than on a rule of thumb, so we will confirm it per shipment instead of quoting a figure here. Tell us which format your tipping arrangement is built for and we will confirm what is actually available for the grade you want rather than quote a packing we cannot source.

No. It is not a dangerous good, has no UN number and no hazard class, and supplier safety data sheets record it as not regulated for ADR, IMDG or IATA carriage. Because the Indian road-transport rules for dangerous goods operate on the same UN class framework, a bagged pigment movement is ordinary freight — no TREM card, no placarding, no specialist driver endorsement. It is also not combustible and carries no dust-explosion classification. The only two things worth writing into a transport instruction are to keep the bags dry and to keep them off food and feed.

We do not publish prices, and there is no published Indian assessment to point you at — ICIS assesses Asia on a CFR basis, Europe and the United States, and TZMI covers North America, Europe and China, but none of them prices India separately, and the market is usually described as opaque. Your landed rupee price is built from the titanium feedstock cost, the process route and surface treatment of the grade, Chinese export supply, ocean freight into the Asian CFR number, packing, volume, credit terms and delivery point. The largest Indian variable at the moment is the anti-dumping position on Chinese material, which has reversed twice: duty imposed 10 May 2025, the notification quashed by the Calcutta High Court on 22 September 2025 and collection stopped by CBIC in December 2025, and fresh DGTR findings on the remand issued 3 August 2026 recommending duty again. Check the operative customs notification on the date your bill of entry is filed. Send the crystal form, the grade type and treatment, the tonnage, the packing and the delivery location and we will quote landed against the producer’s certificate of analysis.

No. Velora is a bulk supplier and trader, not a manufacturer. India has very few producers and they are easy to name from public sources: KMML at Chavara runs the chloride route and describes itself as India’s only chloride-process rutile producer; Travancore Titanium Products at Thiruvananthapuram runs the sulphate route for anatase; VV Titanium Pigments and Meghmani are the other Indian producers named in public sources. The domestic industry in the DGTR anti-dumping case was KMML, Travancore Titanium Products and VV Titanium Pigments. India is a structural net importer, so a large share of merchant material is imported. We source from producers and importers and supply against the producing plant’s certificate of analysis for the lot, with the safety data sheet and the TDS on request. If you need material from one named plant on every consignment — which is a reasonable thing to want in a pigment, because tint and dispersion behaviour are plant-specific — say so at enquiry stage, because it changes what we can commit to and it is better settled before an order than after a colour complaint.

The HSN code for titanium dioxide is 3206 11 90 (Pigment based on titanium dioxide, 80% or more TiO₂ on the dry matter — other). Two headings are genuinely in play for this product and the difference is not academic. Heading 2823 is titanium oxides, and 2823 00 10 is titanium dioxide as a separate chemically defined compound. Heading 3206 covers other colouring matter, and subheading 3206 11 covers pigments and preparations based on titanium dioxide containing 80% or more TiO₂ calculated on the dry matter — within which the Indian tariff reserves 3206 11 10 for pearlescent pigment, so ordinary bulk pigmentary material falls to 3206 11 90, and a TiO₂-based pigment below the 80% threshold falls to 3206 19. The legal test is whether the material is a chemically defined compound or a preparation: Chapter 28 Note 1(a) admits separate chemically defined compounds “whether or not containing impurities”, Chapter 32 Note 1(a) pushes those out of Chapter 32, and Chapter 32 Note 3 then pulls in preparations based on colouring matter, expressly including colouring pigments of Chapter 28, where they are of a kind used for colouring. Surface-treated pigmentary grades are in practice declared in Chapter 32 and untreated technical material in 2823 00 10, but we have not been able to cite a WCO Explanatory Note or an Indian ruling squarely on that line. What is on the record is that India’s anti-dumping measure on Chinese titanium dioxide described the product under all three of 2823 00 10, 3206 11 10 and 3206 11 90, which tells you the authorities expect to see it declared under any of them. Treat this as information, not tax advice, and match the code on your own bills of entry. Source: the Indian customs tariff as listed in the GST HSN directory, checked September 2026.