Federal Actions Focus on Greater Transparency for GMOs & Ultra-Processed Foods
This article first appeared in the September 2026 issue of Presence Marketing’s newsletter.
By Steven Hoffman
For years, leaders in the natural and organic products industry have advocated for a simple, fundamental consumer right: the right to know exactly what is in the food we eat. Despite the steady growth of the natural channel and the soaring consumer demand for clean labels, federal regulations have historically provided conventional food manufacturers with ample regulatory shelter. Through confusing digital disclosures, vague ingredient definitions, and self-certified safety standards, the conventional food sector has often avoided the level of transparency that natural and organic brands readily provide to their customers.
However, a confluence of landmark judicial and federal regulatory actions in August 2026 has signaled a significant paradigm shift. Within a single month, a federal court struck down the regulatory loophole allowing genetically modified organisms (GMOs) to be hidden behind QR codes, while the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) advanced efforts to formally define ultra-processed foods (UPFs) and tighten the oversight of self-certified food additives.
For business owners, executives, and professionals in the natural, organic, and regenerative agriculture markets, these actions validate decades of persistent advocacy. More importantly, they stand to reshape the competitive grocery landscape, potentially forcing conventional brands to reformulate their products or face a new era of mandatory, unavoidable on-package transparency.
The Demise of the QR Code Loophole
The movement toward transparent GMO labeling achieved a decisive victory when a federal district court issued a final remedy decision regarding the USDA's bioengineered food labeling rules. According to the Center for Food Safety, the court ruled that the USDA must rewrite its National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard by Jan. 1, 2028, effectively voiding the provisions that previously allowed companies to obfuscate GMO disclosures.
The litigation, which was championed by a coalition of natural food retailers and consumer advocacy groups—including Natural Grocers and PCC Natural Markets—targeted two specific, controversial loopholes in the original 2018 regulation. First, the USDA had allowed food manufacturers to use a digital QR code, text message, or web address as the sole method of disclosing bioengineered ingredients. Critics argued this was fundamentally discriminatory, as it placed an undue burden on consumers who either lacked smartphones, experienced poor internet connectivity in grocery aisles, or simply did not know that a digital scan was required to view ingredient information.
Second, the original rule exempted "highly refined" ingredients from being labeled as bioengineered if the modified genetic material was no longer detectable through standard DNA testing. This exemption allowed a vast swath of ultra-processed ingredients—such as highly refined corn syrup, canola oil and soy oil—to avoid GMO labeling entirely, even though they were derived from genetically modified crops.
As reported by Food Dive, the federal court has now mandated that the USDA close these loopholes. The court’s official vacatur order requires the agency to implement clear, on-package text or symbols and to comprehensively address the disclosure of highly refined, ultra-processed GMO ingredients.
The reaction from the natural products community has been swift and celebratory. Max Goldberg, editor and publisher of Organic Insider, noted in a recent LinkedIn post: “The headline that Big Food has been dreading. Why? Because the QR code loophole is dead. A federal court just ordered the USDA to rewrite its GMO labeling rules by January 1, 2028 — and this time, there's nowhere to hide. For years, up to 80% of GMO products dodged real disclosure. Sodas, cooking oils, ultra-processed staples — all slipped through. And when brands did 'disclose'? A QR code you needed a smartphone to scan. Not anymore. Clear on-package labels. Actual transparency. The right to know what's in your cart. Big shift coming for food brands. Bigger win for consumers.”
As noted by DTN Progressive Farmer, the ruling places the timeline squarely in the hands of the USDA, rejecting the agency's initial request to delay the implementation of new rules until 2029. According to Feedstuffs, the mandated January 2028 deadline means food manufacturers must begin auditing their supply chains immediately to prepare for the transition to mandatory on-package disclosures.
George Kimbrell, legal director for the Center for Food Safety, underscored the historical importance of the ruling. Speaking to Food Navigator, Kimbrell stated: “Yesterday's decision was the final nail in the coffin of the 2021 unlawful GMO labeling regulations. We are gratified that the district court, like the court of appeals before it, has agreed with our legal arguments and struck them down.”
Closing the GRAS Loophole and Modernizing Food Oversight
While the courts tackled GMO transparency, the executive branch moved to address the proliferation of chemical additives in the American food supply.
As announced on Aug. 10, 2026, HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. introduced two landmark food policy reforms designed to modernize federal oversight of ingredients. The most immediate regulatory shift involves a proposed rule to tighten the "Generally Recognized as Safe" (GRAS) designation.
For decades, the GRAS framework has served as a primary regulatory pathway for food manufacturers to introduce new ingredients into the market. Originally intended by Congress for common, historically well-understood ingredients like vinegar or baking soda, the GRAS provision has increasingly been utilized by companies to self-certify novel synthetic chemicals, preservatives, and artificial additives as safe. In many cases, companies could convene their own industry-funded expert panels to determine safety, effectively bypassing the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) review process altogether.
According to Food Business News, the proposed HHS rule will fundamentally alter this dynamic by requiring food and animal feed manufacturers to formally notify the FDA whenever they conclude that a new substance added to food meets the GRAS criteria. By ending the era of secret, self-certified additives, the administration aims to ensure that the FDA can properly review the safety data of novel ingredients before they ever enter the food supply.
This move has drawn widespread support from medical professionals and health experts who have long criticized the FDA's lack of authority over food additives. Former FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb voiced his support, stating that the reform is important because the FDA has generally lacked sufficient authority to meaningfully regulate these substances. This shift aligns closely with the long-standing demands of natural health advocates, who have consistently warned about the cumulative health impacts of unchecked synthetic chemicals.
The Drive to Define Ultra-Processed Foods
Alongside the GRAS rule proposal, the federal government took an unprecedented step toward formally defining a category of food that has dominated recent nutritional research and public health discussions: ultra-processed foods (UPFs).
As reported by Food Safety Magazine, the FDA and the USDA jointly submitted a white paper to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for final review, proposing the first-ever federal definition of ultra-processed foods. While there are international frameworks—such as the NOVA classification system developed by researchers in Brazil—the United States has historically lacked a uniform, statutory definition for UPFs.
Establishing a formal definition is far more than a semantic exercise. As highlighted by Food Industry Executive, the submission of the definition as a white paper signals a foundational step toward widespread regulatory changes. Once a federal definition is established and finalized, it can be utilized across multiple government agencies to shape public policy. This could eventually impact everything from the composition of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans and the National School Lunch Program to the eligibility of certain products within the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).
HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. emphasized the urgency of the initiative. “Nearly 60% of the American diet is made up of ultra-processed foods, and childhood obesity now affects more than one in five American children,” Kennedy noted in a statement. “We cannot reverse America’s chronic disease epidemic without transforming our food system.”
Writing for The Atlantic, journalist Nicholas Florko noted that Kennedy’s push to define ultra-processed foods is a central pillar of the administration's "Make America Healthy Again" (MAHA) agenda. By creating a standardized metric for what constitutes an ultra-processed food, the administration is laying the groundwork for a broader public health campaign aimed at reducing the consumption of heavily refined, additive-laden products that have been linked to rising rates of diet-related chronic diseases. As health advocates have pointed out, reining in UPFs is fundamental to tackling chronic disease in America, and establishing a federal definition is the required first step.
Industry Pushback and the Economic Argument
Unsurprisingly, these swift regulatory changes have encountered vocal resistance from conventional food industry groups and free-market advocates. The prospect of reformulating products, updating packaging to remove QR codes in favor of explicit text, and submitting GRAS ingredients for rigorous federal review represents a significant operational cost for legacy food manufacturers.
According to a statement from Americans for Tax Reform (ATR), the new food proposals advanced by HHS threaten to disrupt supply chains and increase consumer costs. ATR argued that by growing the regulatory state and enforcing stricter definitions on processed foods, the administration will invariably drive up the cost of manufacturing. “HHS’s new food proposals would raise grocery prices and grow the regulatory state,” the group warned, suggesting that the financial burden of compliance will ultimately be passed down to consumers at the checkout counter.
Conventional industry trade associations have echoed similar concerns regarding the GMO labeling mandate. They argue that replacing digital QR codes with on-package text could clutter labels and confuse consumers who are already overwhelmed by existing nutritional information. They further contend that highly refined oils and sugars derived from bioengineered crops are chemically identical to their non-GMO counterparts, arguing that forcing a bioengineered label on these ultra-processed ingredients is scientifically unnecessary and economically punitive.
A Competitive Advantage for the Natural Channel
Despite the pushback from the conventional food sector, the recent federal actions represent a profound validation for the natural, organic, and regenerative agriculture industries. For decades, independent retailers and natural product brands have voluntarily adhered to higher standards of transparency, often bearing the financial cost of non-GMO verification, organic certification, and clean-label formulation without any federal mandate requiring their competitors to do the same.
The death of the QR code loophole effectively levels the playing field. When conventional brands are forced to explicitly disclose the presence of bioengineered ingredients on their packaging by January 2028, consumers will be able to make direct, side-by-side comparisons in the grocery aisle. This increased visibility is expected to drive even greater consumer migration toward certified organic and Non-GMO Project Verified products, categories that already serve as the bedrock of the natural products industry.
Furthermore, the federal drive to define ultra-processed foods aligns perfectly with the core philosophy of the natural channel. Independent natural and organic food stores have long prioritized whole foods, minimally processed ingredients, and regenerative agricultural practices over synthetic formulations. If federal nutrition programs eventually integrate the new UPF definition to disincentivize the purchase of highly processed items, the market demand for nutrient-dense, clean-label alternatives will likely accelerate.
The closure of the GRAS loophole further reinforces consumer trust in the natural sector. As the FDA gains greater visibility into the synthetic additives utilized by conventional manufacturers, consumers will become increasingly aware of the chemical complexities inherent in highly processed diets. Brands that are committed to simple, recognizable, and transparent ingredient panels will find themselves perfectly positioned to capture the market share of health-conscious shoppers seeking refuge from synthetic additives.
Looking Ahead: The Path to 2028
While the regulatory wheels have been set in motion, the transition will not occur overnight. The USDA now faces a mandated deadline of Jan. 1, 2028, to finalize and implement the new bioengineered food disclosure rules. Concurrently, the proposed UPF definition and the GRAS notification rule must navigate the federal review process, including periods for public comment and potential revisions by the Office of Management and Budget.
For business owners and leaders in the natural products sector, the immediate path forward requires sustained vigilance and proactive consumer education. Retailers and manufacturers should begin preparing marketing and merchandising strategies that highlight their existing commitments to transparency, non-GMO sourcing, and minimal processing.
As the federal government finally moves to mandate the transparency that the natural channel has championed for decades, the industry is entering a new era. The days of hiding ingredients behind digital links and self-certified safety designations are drawing to a close. For the natural, organic, and regenerative food market, this is not just a regulatory victory; it is an affirmation of a business model built on integrity, health, and the consumer's fundamental right to know.
Steven Hoffman is Managing Director of Compass Natural Marketing, a strategic communications and brand development agency serving the natural and organic products industry. Learn more at www.compassnatural.com.
DOGE Days: From Supplements to Organic Farming, Natural Industry Feels Cuts
By Steven Hoffman
As the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, led by billionaire Elon Musk under the administration of President Donald Trump, cuts jobs and funding for programs at U.S. agencies across the board, natural and organic food and dietary supplement producers are feeling the impact of DOGE cuts to FDA, USDA, USAID and others.
Cuts to FDA have resulted in the resignation of James Jones, FDA’s top official in charge of food safety and nutrition, following what he called “indiscriminate” layoffs of dozens of food safety inspectors. Jones, who joined the agency in 2023, said the cuts would make it “fruitless” to continue his role. “I was looking forward to working to pursue the department’s agenda of improving the health of Americans by reducing diet-related chronic disease and risks from chemicals in food,” Jones wrote. News of the resignation was first reported on Feb. 17 by FoodFix.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services announced plans in mid-February to fire 5,200 probationary employees across its agencies, including the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The layoffs appeared to focus on employees in the agency’s departments for food, medical devices and tobacco products. It was not clear whether FDA employees who review drugs were exempted. However, Fierce Healthcare reported on Feb. 22 that hundreds of fired FDA probationary workers have received notices from the agency that their terminations were rescinded.
Following news of the DOGE’s layoffs at the FDA, including a number of staff firings at FDA’s office of Dietary Supplement Programs, the Council for Responsible Nutrition expressed concern about the FDA’s ability to effectively oversee dietary supplements and food safety. “As the FDA deputy commissioner steps down, it’s critical that the agency maintains adequate staffing and expertise to uphold consumer confidence in the food supply,” CRN said in a statement.
“While staffing changes can occur during any presidential transition, it is critical that the FDA maintains the resources, expertise and staffing levels necessary to ensure effective dietary supplement oversight that undergirds consumer confidence in the supplement market,” said Jeff Ventura, CRN’s VP of Communications.
USDA Pauses Two Major Organic Programs
At USDA, pauses and cuts in funding for organic transition and soil conservation programs are leaving farmers on the hook for millions of dollars they invested on the promise of reimbursement, while “accidental” firings of bird flu researchers at the agriculture agency have exacerbated the high price and limited availability of eggs. (According to USDA data, the price of eggs increased 38.2% since the beginning of 2025, with the cost of a dozen conventionally produced eggs exceeding of $8 in February 2025.)
Federal officials also are withholding funding for two major organic agriculture programs that make payments directly to farmers, jeopardizing millions of dollars in funding just ahead of the 2025 planting season, reported E&E News by Politico on February 6. “The pause on the $85 million Organic Market Development Grant program and the $100 million Transition to the Organic Partnership Program has jolted farmers, nonprofits and businesses struggling to make planting and hiring decisions. Even if the pause on funding is lifted, it could put farmers out of business,” wrote E&E News reporter Marcia Brown. According to Brown, USDA has yet to release funding for the programs, even though federal courts ordered an end to the across-the-board freeze.
In addition, USDA’s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as the Food Stamp program, is under DOGE scrutiny, plus the House of Representatives budget plan seeks to cut up to $230 billion from SNAP. Such funding cuts would affect sales for natural and organic food producers, including for such staple healthy products as organic dairy and plant-based foods that are frequently purchased by SNAP recipients.
According to Georgie Lee Smith, who blogs under the moniker Farmer Georgie, the loss of scientists and researchers at USDA agencies including the Agricultural Research Service (ARS) and the Animal & Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) will have a long-term negative effect on the ability of U.S. agriculture to respond to issues and opportunities, and maintain its position as one of the world’s leading food producers.
Beginning in mid-February, “DOGE took aim at the United States Department of Agriculture, aka the USDA, firing ‘probationary’ employees in what has been described as a ‘blood bath’ of terminations. To be clear, probationary periods can run from one year to three, depending upon the job, and apply even to long-time USDA employees who have recently taken a job promotion. Translation — it’s a lot of folks, many with significant dollars invested into their training,” Smith wrote.
“The researchers and scientists at ARS are on the frontline of nutrition, food safety and quality, livestock and crop production, natural resources and sustainable agricultural systems. Along with our land grant university systems, ARS researchers are often the first area of investment into solving critical food and agricultural issues, whether that’s preventing food-borne illness outbreaks to breeding more climate-resilient crops and livestock to new ways to combat pests and diseases impacting food production,” she wrote. Smith also pointed to the risks associated with cutting staff at APHIS, USDA’s agency responsible for combatting the escalating avian flu crisis.
“Many farmers and ranchers are still holding onto hope that the funding freezes that have their grants and cost-share monies tied up are only a bump in the road. Perhaps these USDA terminations will be the same. But I’m afraid that is not the case,” Smith wrote on February 16. “Secretary (of Agriculture) Brooke Rollins issued a press release … that DOGE had terminated 78 USDA contracts totaling more than $132 million, with more than 1,000 contracts still under review. And DOGE tweeted they had eliminated an $8.2 million USDA contract to implement programs administered under Biden’s climate-smart initiative, which had funneled $3 billion in grant funds to agricultural producers, marketing organizations and forest landowners nationwide to support the adoption of climate-smart practices. Again, I can’t help but point out that the large majority of the climate-smart grants specifically supported the same ‘soil health/regenerative ag’ mantra that RFK Jr. is purporting. I feel like we just cut off our noses to spite our faces,” Smith commented.
Dismantling of USAID Impacts U.S. Farmers
For the U.S. agriculture economy, 40% of government food assistance comes from American farms through programs including the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which purchased $2 billion in food from American farmers in 2024. As such, the dismantling of USAID, along with its Food for Peace program, has eliminated a valuable market for farmers. It also has resulted in nearly $500 million worth of donated food sitting unused or rotting on docks and in warehouses, according to a report issued on February 10 by the Inspector General of USAID.
“Should parts of USAID be reformed or revisited? Certainly. But shutting down the entire agency in less than two weeks is not the way to do it,” wrote Erin Sikorsky, Director of the Center for Climate and Security and former aide to Wisconsin Congressman Ron Kind, in the Feb. 17, 2025, edition of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
“I know Wisconsinites are proud of the role our farm industry plays in supporting food security and preventing starvation worldwide. The Wisconsin Congressional delegation has consistently stood up for Wisconsin farmers, and they must do the same today by opposing this reckless destruction of these life-saving and economically important food aid programs. This action is a reversal of decades of bipartisan support for programs that provide global food aid and prevent starvation, precisely because such programs help American farmers, help those most in need, and prevent conflict and instability that threatens our national security,” Sikorsky wrote.
Steven Hoffman is Managing Director of Compass Natural, providing public relations, brand marketing, social media and strategic business development services to natural, organic, sustainable and hemp/CBD products businesses. Contact steve@compassnaturalmarketing.com.
Presence MarketWatch 2025
This article first appeared in the January 2025 issue of Presence Marketing’s newsletter.
By Steven Hoffman
With the Trump administration returning to the White House and the GOP controlling both the Senate and House of Representatives by narrow margins, the year 2025 is sure to bring significant change to regulatory policy, business and the economy, not just for the U.S. but also the world. To help leaders in the natural channel navigate the opportunities and challenges ahead, Presence Marketing will track and report on these issues over the course of the year ahead. Read on for a snapshot of some of the major issues that will impact the natural, organic and nutritional products market over the coming year.
Tariffs and Food Prices
President-elect Donald Trump ran on a campaign to lower grocery prices, which rose 23% since the onset of the Covid pandemic in Spring 2020. Food inflation has slowed over the past year, according to NBC News, and is now less than 2% as energy prices and supply chains have stabilized. Yet, experts caution that a combination of tariffs and mass deportations could have a further destabilizing effect on agriculture, food production and grocery prices. Trump has threatened to impose tariffs up to 60% on goods from China, and a 25% tariff on products from Mexico and Canada – all countries that are significant exporters of food and other products to the U.S. market.
In a Time Magazine interview in December 2024, Trump acknowledged it may be difficult to bring down grocery prices, saying, “Look, they got them up. I’d like to bring them down. It’s hard to bring things down once they’re up.” According to a study from the Peterson Institute for International Economics, Trump’s proposed tariffs on Mexico and Canada would have the biggest impact on prices for autos, vegetables, fuel, prepared food and animal products, reported CNN Business. The U.S. relies on Mexico for 89% of its imported avocados and 91% of foreign-grown tomatoes. “Higher tariffs on Mexico and Canada will … put upward pressure on U.S. food prices,” the Peterson Institute said. While it’s too soon to determine whether Trump will actually impose tariffs or if trade agreements can be reached to prevent them, “The only certainty is that new tariffs will be costly for the United States,” said the Peterson Institute study’s authors.
Food, Farm Workers and Mass Deportation
California’s Monterey County is the fourth-largest crop-producing county in the nation, with the agriculture industry there contributing $4.4 billion to the economy, and with an estimated 55,000 farm workers, including many who are undocumented. As such, the area’s growers have expressed concern that much of their workforce could disappear as a result of potential mass deportations once the Trump administration takes office. In an interview on Dec. 19, 2024, with NBC Bay Area News, Monterey County Farm Bureau CEO Norm Groot said, “It will absolutely impact food prices at the consumer level. If it impacts local and nationwide supplies, that will have a price increase.” NBC reported the farm bureau is teaming up with county officials and other stakeholders to create a task force in addressing local concerns around mass deportations, including concerns around family and child separation. "It's interesting that four years ago during the pandemic, they were essential," Groot said. "And now all of a sudden we’re looking at it from a different perspective and trying to understand how that dynamic has changed."
And it’s not just Monterey County – while it’s estimated that undocumented workers make up only 5% of the total U.S. workforce, the share of undocumented workers across the nation’s food supply chain is at least 16%, reported Successful Farming. In some industries this number is higher – the Idaho Dairymen’s Association estimated that nearly 90% of the state’s dairy workers were born outside of the U.S. According to a September 2024 study by the Peterson Institute, mass deportation could lead to a 10% increase in food prices. Between higher food prices that could come with proposed tariffs – and potential government bailouts funded by U.S. taxpayers to provide assistance to farmers affected by deportations – Americans could potentially get “double-whammied” by the higher costs and supply chain disruptions these proposed policies could bring.
RFK, FDA and the Nation’s Health
MAHA has become a rallying cry for many in the natural health and nutritional supplements industry as Congress weighs the nomination of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Kennedy, a lawyer, environmentalist and controversial health advocate, is Trump’s pick to lead the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), a Cabinet-level position that oversees the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), National Institutes of Health (NIH), and others.
On one hand, RFK’s team is weighing a rewrite to the FDA’s rules overseeing food additives and taking a hard look at the harmful chemicals and pesticides used in food production. On the other hand, RFK’s top lawyer Aaron Siri stirred controversy when it was reported in December 2024 by CNN and others that he had petitioned the FDA to revoke approval of the polio vaccine. The World Health Organization declared that polio was eradicated in 2019 but warned it could re-emerge if vaccination coverage declines. According to a Dec. 4, 2024, article in Forbes, Kennedy criticized the FDA in a post on X (formerly Twitter) for “suppressing” a wide range of items, including “psychedelics, peptides, stem cells, raw milk, hyperbaric therapies, chelating compounds, ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, vitamins, clean foods, sunshine, exercise, nutraceuticals, and anything else that advances human health and can’t be patented by Pharma.”
Kennedy will have an ally in Martin Makary, M.D., a surgeon, public policy researcher at Johns Hopkins University and a member of the National Academy of Medicine, and President-elect Trump’s choice to serve as FDA Commissioner. In September 2024, Makary joined RFK at a round table in Congress on health and nutrition, where he criticized how food in the U.S. is grown and processed. "We have poisoned our food supply, engineered highly addictive chemicals that we put into our food. We spray it with pesticides that kill pests. What do you think they do to our gut lining in our microbiome?" Makary said. In related news, Trump’s pick for Surgeon General, Dr. Janette Nesheiwat, a family medicine doctor who runs a chain of urgent care clinics in New York, was a regular Fox News contributor and is an advocate for nutritional supplements, marketing her own brand of dietary supplements called BC Boost, containing vitamins C, B-12, D and Zinc.
Brooke Rollins Nominated to Lead USDA
President-elect Trump in November nominated Brooke Rollins, President and CEO of the America First Policy Institute, a conservative think tank based in Texas, to lead the U.S. Department of Agriculture. “As our next Secretary of Agriculture, Brooke will spearhead the effort to protect American farmers, who are truly the backbone of our country,” Trump said in a statement. Rollins is a graduate of Texas A&M University, with an undergraduate degree in agriculture development. “From her upbringing in the small and agriculture-centered town of Glen Rose, Texas, to her years of leadership involvement with Future Farmers of America and 4H, to her generational family farming background, to guiding her four kids in their show cattle careers, Brooke has a practitioner’s experience, along with deep policy credentials in both nonprofit and government leadership at the state and national levels,” the statement said.
“We congratulate Brooke Rollins on her nomination as Secretary of Agriculture. This is an important moment for U.S. agriculture, and we are optimistic about the opportunities her leadership will bring to rural America,” Amy France, chairwoman of the National Sorghum Producers in Scott City, KS, told Successful Farming. "Sorghum farmers are at the forefront of innovation, contributing to domestic biofuels and heart-healthy, nutritious, ancient grain foods. We are eager to work with her to advance policies that strengthen the sorghum industry and benefit growers nationwide.”
“The Department of Agriculture plays a pivotal role in safeguarding our food supply, addressing food insecurity, managing our forests, as well as supporting America’s farmers and rural communities who are on the frontlines of the climate crisis,” said Rebecca Riley, Managing Director, Food and Agriculture, for the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). “Rollins needs to invest in America’s farmers – from small family farms to larger-scale operations – and to work toward a resilient and equitable food system that puts healthy food on the table, restores our soil, protects the climate, and safeguards the health of our communities … now is not the time to undermine climate-smart farming practices, favor industrial agriculture at the expense of small producers and consumers, or gut the nutrition programs that many Americans rely on,” Riley said.
California’s AB 660 Sets Landmark Food Date Labeling Standards
California Governor Gavin Newsom in September 2024 signed into law the nation's first mandatory food date labeling reform bill. California Assembly Bill 660 (AB 660) standardizes the use of “Best If Used By” and “Use By” dates on food labels, and prohibits the use of “Sell By” dates. The new law requires manufacturers to use the same phrase for date labels across their products, reported Food Safety. Beginning July 1, 2026, companies selling food products in California must only use “Best If Used By” to indicate the date by which a product will reach its peak quality, and “Use By” to indicate the date by which a product’s safety can no longer be guaranteed. The use of consumer-facing “Sell By” dates will be prohibited to reduce the chances of consumers confusing “Sell By” dates with quality or safety dates.
“On grocery store shelves today, there are more than 50 differently phrased date labels on packaged food. Some phrases are used to communicate peak freshness of a product or when a product is no longer safe to eat. Others, like ‘Sell By,’ are used only to inform stock rotation in stores but mislead some consumers into thinking the product is no longer safe to eat. AB 660 will close this gap by requiring manufacturers to use the same phrase for date labels across their products,” NRDC said in a statement.
Of course, as goes California, so goes the country. “AB 660 is game changing, not just for California, but for the country. It will be the first law of its kind to end the ridiculous confusion that causes consumers to throw out almost $15 billion of perfectly good food nationwide. It will also help reduce the significant toll that wasting food has on our planet,” Dana Gunders, President of reFED, told BioCycle Magazine. “Having to wonder whether our food is still good is an issue that we all have struggled with. Today’s signing of AB 660 is a monumental step to keep money in the pockets of consumers while helping the environment and the planet,” said Assemblymember Jacqui Irwin, author of the bill.
Steven Hoffman is Managing Director of Compass Natural, providing public relations, brand marketing, social media and strategic business development services to natural, organic, sustainable and hemp/CBD products businesses. Contact steve@compassnaturalmarketing.com.