...
By Amanda Greenwood
Associate News Editor
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
California is taking the lead in overhauling the way food is labeled in grocery stores by scrapping the long‑familiar "sell by" date from packaging in a move designed to cut confusion, reduce food waste, and ease pressure on household budgets.
The West Coast's economic influence means the bill could bring about similar changes nationwide if manufacturers wish to avoid additional costs of having two distinct labeling systems instead of one.
Under Assembly Bill 660, which takes effect next week on July 1, food sold in California must use standardized date labels and consumer‑facing phrases like "sell by" and other non‑standard wording (e.g. "expires on" or "freshest by") will no longer be permitted on covered products.
Read More on News
The requirements apply only to items manufactured on or after that date, meaning goods produced earlier can continue to be sold with existing labels during a sell‑through period.
The new law does not require all foods to carry date labels. It simply regulates the wording of labels when manufacturers choose—or are otherwise required—to include them.
Food items will be limited to just two standardized labels:
- Best if used by / best if frozen by (or BB if there isn’t enough room on the label to include the whole phrase on small packages), which refers to the quality of the product.
- Use by/ freeze by (or UB as an abbreviation), which is connected to consumer safety.
The bill was authored by Assemblymember Jacqui Irwin (D-Thousand Oaks), who said in an official statement: "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."
The law, passed with bipartisan support, does not apply to certain categories—infant formula, eggs and pasteurized in-shell eggs, beer and malt beverages, wine, and distilled spirits—which are already governed by separate labeling rules. Shellfish is also bound by other labeling conditions.
Newsweek has contacted the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) by email for comment.
Why The Change Is Happening
Erica Parker, a Policy Associate with Californians Against Waste, a co-sponsor of AB 660, highlighted the confusion caused by the current system in the statement. She said: "The inconsistent use of phrases like 'Sell By,' 'Expires On,' 'Freshest Before,' and others makes for an impossible-to-navigate system for consumers who don’t want to throw away good food or make their families sick."
State data cited by supporters of the bill shows Californians throw away roughly six million tons of food each year, with confusion over date labels a major contributor. Organic waste decomposing in landfills accounts for about 41 percent of the state’s methane emissions — a key factor driving support for the legislation.
Initial opposition from food and retail industry groups was largely neutralized after amendments to the bill. The author said changes made during negotiations "removed" opposition from stakeholders including the California Grocers Association, and the legislation was subsequently "toned down" to address industry concerns, contributing to broad bipartisan support.
One of the most misunderstood labels is "sell by." Many consumers interpret it as an expiration deadline, even though it’s intended to help retailers manage stock, not to indicate whether food is safe to eat.
By introducing a simplified, two‑label system, California aims to make it clearer what the dates actually mean—distinguishing between when food might decline in taste and when it could become unsafe to eat.
The Cost‑of‑Living Link
The timing of the policy is significant. With grocery costs still elevated for many households, reducing food waste has become a key concern for consumers trying to stretch their budgets.
Food prices in the U.S. have continued to rise in recent years, climbing by around 3.1 percent year‑on‑year in 2025, with further increases forecast for 2026.
At the same time, research from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) shows that Americans are losing substantial amounts of money to wasted food. The average U.S. consumer spends roughly $728 a year on food that goes uneaten, equivalent to nearly $2,900 annually for a family of four.
...
A significant share of that waste stems directly from confusion over labels.
A Harris Poll study cited by the Center for Science in The Public Interest (CSPI) indicates that the confusion between sell-by and use-by dates on labels causes 88 percent of Americans to throw food away, even though it’s still safe to eat. This confusion is estimated to account for $7 billion worth of wasted food every year.
If shoppers are discarding items prematurely due to misunderstood labels, they’re not only throwing away food, they’re also throwing away money.
The change is also expected to have wider economic effects. Keeping edible food out of landfills means fewer repeat trips to replace discarded groceries—something that could make a tangible difference to household budgets at a time when many families are feeling squeezed by higher living costs.
What It Means For Shoppers
...
For consumers, the shift should be relatively simple—but important.
- "Best if used by" will indicate when a product is at peak quality. Food may still be safe to eat after this date, but could lose flavor or texture.
- "Use by" will signal when food safety may become a concern, particularly for perishable items.
The goal is to provide clearer guidance at a glance, removing guesswork in the supermarket aisle and at home.
Importantly, while visible "sell by" wording is being eliminated, manufacturers can still use internal coded dates for inventory tracking.
What Happens Next
Companies that fail to comply with this new law could face penalties under the California Food and Agricultural Code, which include misdemeanor fines up to $1,000, as regulators move to enforce the new labeling rules.
For shoppers, the coming months may involve some adjustments as packages change appearance. But over time, officials hope the system will become more intuitive—helping consumers make better decisions about what to keep, what to eat, and what to discard.
At a time when many households are under pressure from high living costs, even small changes that reduce waste could have a meaningful impact. By clarifying what food labels really mean, California is betting that greater understanding can translate into both savings at the checkout and less waste in the bin.
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines