Key Points<\/p>\n
California now requires standardized date labels on most packaged foods sold in the state, replacing dozens of terms with just “best if used by” and “best if frozen by.” The law applies to nearly all packaged foods except eggs and infant formula.<\/p>\n
The new labels are intended to reduce food waste by making date labels easier to understand. They indicate when a product is at or past its peak quality.<\/p>\n
Clearer date labels could help consumers waste less and save money. Research cited by Californians Against Waste estimates the average American spends more than $1,300 a year on food that goes uneaten, often because confusing labels lead people to discard edible food.<\/p>\n
California is making grocery shopping a little easier by removing all ambiguity from \u201cbest by\u201d dates<\/a>.<\/p>\n On July 1, 2026, the state\u2019s Assembly Bill 660 took effect, requiring food manufacturers to use uniform terminology on product labels. According to the\u00a0California Department of Food and Agriculture<\/a>, the bill does away with the more than 50<\/a>\u00a0date-related phrases used on packaging, including \u201cexpires on,\u201d \u201cbest before,\u201d and \u201cenjoy by.\u201d Instead, nearly all packaged food sold in California will use one of two labels: \u201cbest if used by\u201d and \u201cbest if frozen by.\u201d The California Department of Food and Agriculture explains that these labels indicate when a product is at or past its peak quality. The rule covers all packaged food except eggs and infant formula.<\/p>\n Also gone are \u201csell by\u201d date labels, which were never indicators of safety or quality but were designed to help stores track inventory. Under the new labeling law, retailers can continue to use coded \u201csell by\u201d dates to track stock rotation, just not in a way shoppers will see.<\/p>\n What the new labels mean for food waste<\/p>\n The nonprofit advocacy organization\u00a0Californians Against Waste<\/a>, which cosponsored the bill, hopes it will have a far-reaching impact on a particularly significant issue in California and across the country: reducing food waste.<\/p>\n Californians alone throw out 6 million tons of food waste each year, and the organization believes that confusing food labels are a major contributor to the problem.<\/p>\n Related: Most Americans Misread Food Labels \u2014 and It Could Be Costing Them $700 a Year<\/a><\/p>\n \u201cFood is the single most common material landfilled in California, and decomposing food and other organic waste in landfills accounts for 41% of the state\u2019s point-source methane emissions,\u201d the organization shared in a statement<\/a> about the new bill. \u201cMethane is a potent greenhouse gas responsible for about 30% of the global warming that is now driving climate change.\u201d<\/p>\n The shift is unlikely to impose a significant burden on food manufacturers or require costly production changes. \u201cWe don\u2019t need to build some kind of huge infrastructure and invest tons of money to solve this,\u201d Nick Lapis, the organization\u2019s director of advocacy, told the\u00a0Associated Press<\/a>. \u201cWe just need companies to use the same words across brands.\u201d<\/p>\n Confusing labels have an economic cost, too<\/p>\n Beyond contributing to food waste, confusing date labels have also imposed a financial cost on consumers. Californians Against Waste cites research showing that the average American spends more than $1,300 a year<\/a>\u00a0on food that goes uneaten, often because it is discarded while still good due to unclear labeling.<\/p>\n In California alone, the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery estimates that roughly 2.5 billion meals\u2019 worth of edible food is wasted and ends up in landfills.<\/p>\n