California's New Food Rules: From Sugar Warnings to "Non-Ultraprocessed" Seals

On September 28, 2026, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed a package of food and consumer health bills that his office described as advancing California's "holistic healthcare" strategy. The bills create a first-in-the-nation state seal for non-ultraprocessed foods, require added-sugar warnings on chain restaurant menus, set a nutritional floor for chain restaurant children's meals, bar sales of over-the-counter diet pills and certain supplements to minors, and establish a state program to connect in-state healthy food vendors with public institutions.

Although several operative dates are years away, the laws may impact product formulation, menu design, merchandising, e-commerce, and marketing decisions, and several introduce enforcement hooks that California plaintiffs and public prosecutors are likely to test.

Key Provisions of the New Laws

AB 2244: Non-Ultraprocessed Certified Food Standard

This law creates an official state seal that food makers can choose to put on products that are certified by an accredited certification agent as not ultraprocessed. Products containing certain additives, such as emulsifiers, coloring or flavoring agents, or artificial sweeteners will not qualify for the seal. The law also addresses retail sales of these items: large grocery stores with more than $10 million/year in sales that carry more than 25 certified items must make at least three of those certified items easy to spot.

• Certification. The California Department of Public Health (CDPH) will not be certifying these products itself. Instead, it will approve third-party certification agents who will certify qualifying food products as "Non-Ultraprocessed Certified." This must begin by January 1, 2029. Certified products must be recertified at least every three years. CDPH will maintain an online list of all products currently certified as "Non-Ultraprocessed Certified."
• Eligibility. Products cannot be certified as "Non-Ultraprocessed" if they contain the additive classes identified in the recent California law that defines "ultraprocessed foods" to include stabilizers, thickeners, emulsifiers, coloring or flavoring agents, flavor enhancers, and nonnutritive sweeteners. Products classified as "ultraprocessed foods of concern" or classified as "restricted school foods" cannot be certified as "Non-Ultraprocessed."
• Labeling. The seal may appear on the front of the package or elsewhere, provided it does not obscure required labeling. No official design for the seal has been released yet.
• Enforcement. Misuse of the label will be unlawful under the California Retail Food Code; violation of the California Retail Food Code is generally a misdemeanor. There is a private right of action under AB 2244 in addition to public enforcement: A person who misuses the label or otherwise violates this law may be enjoined in a court of competent jurisdiction by CDPH, the California attorney general or a city or county attorney, or by a consumer, business entity, or nonprofit organization.

SB 869: Added-Sugar Warnings on Chain Restaurant Menus

By January 1, 2029, covered restaurant chains offering standard menu beverage items with high added sugar content must display an added sugar icon immediately adjacent to those qualifying beverages on their physical menus, drive-through menus, and digital menus. Covered chain restaurants will also need to display a clear and conspicuous warning explaining the meaning of the added sugar icon.

• Covered entities. SB 869 applies to restaurants and similar retail food establishments that are part of a chain of 20 or more locations operating under the same name with substantially the same menu items (this matches the criteria for federal menu labeling requirements). This includes cafes and delis located inside another retail establishment.
• Trigger. "High added sugar content" means 100% or more of the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) daily reference value for added sugar (which is 50 grams). "Standard menu beverage item" covers beverages prepared or poured at the restaurant and listed on its menu, including fountain drinks, blended beverages, and variable items listed as a single item, but not those modified or customized by the customer either while ordering or while at a beverage dispenser.
• Required disclosures. On or before January 1, 2029, covered chain restaurants must display (1) a sugar-cube-in-a-black-triangle icon immediately adjacent to each covered beverage and (2) a clear and conspicuous warning that the icon means the item meets or exceeds the FDA's daily recommended limit. The chain does not have to use the word "warning."
• Format. The information must appear directly on drive-through menus. For other menus, it may appear on the physical menu or in a digital format, such as a QR code. A chain that uses a digital format must post a statement that the information is available digitally and provide an alternative, such as a handout or chart.
• Enforcement. Local health officials are charged with enforcing the law, and violation of the law will qualify as a misdemeanor.
• Overlay with federal menu labeling requirements. Rather than displacing the federal rules, SB 869 is likely to operate in tandem with them: the federal rules govern calorie declarations, while SB 869 layers a separate added-sugar disclosure onto a subset of beverages. In practice, covered chains will need to design menus that satisfy both.
• Likely constitutional challenge. Because the law faced heavy pushback from the industry, a formal constitutional challenge is likely before the law's compliance deadline.

SB 977: Chain Restaurant Children's Meals

Covered chain restaurants that sell children's meals must offer at least one meal that meets specified nutrition standards, including containing no more than 550 calories and including at least two servings of the specified types and quantities listed below. Chain restaurants must also train their employees by July 1, 2027, on how to comply with the new requirements. Other than the date of the training requirement, the law itself is silent on an enforcement date.

• Covered entities. The law applies to restaurants or similar retail food establishments that are part of a chain with 20 or more locations doing business under the same name and offering for sale substantially the same menu items (this matches the criteria for the federal menu labeling requirements).
• Nutrition floor. A covered chain restaurant that sells a children's meal must offer at least one children's meal that meets minimum nutrition standards. Those standards include a cap of 550 calories and at least two servings of specified types and quantities of food, as follows:
  • A serving of one-half of a cup or more of fruit.
    • For purposes of this section, 100% fruit juice counts as a serving of fruit.
  • A serving of one-half of a cup or more of vegetables.
  • A serving of one-half of a cup or more of nonfat or low-fat dairy.
  • A serving of meat or a meat alternative equal to at least one of the following:
    • One ounce of meat, poultry, or seafood.
    • One egg.
    • One-fourth of a cup of soy products or pulses, including beans, peas, or lentils.
    • Two tablespoons of nut butter.
    • One ounce of nuts and seeds.
  • A serving of eight or more grams of whole grains that meets at least one of the following conditions:
    • The serving contains 50% or more of whole grain ingredients.
    • The first ingredient in the serving's ingredient list, in descending order of predominance, is whole grains.
• Training. The law states that by July 1, 2027, covered chain restaurants "shall include information on how to comply with the requirements … during any of the employee's ongoing training program and a new employee's training process." The law does not provide any additional detail about this instruction.
• Enforcement. SB 977 amends the existing law related to children's meals (which already requires default healthy beverages). Violations of that chapter are infractions enforced by local enforcement agencies.

AB 2030: Sale of Diet Pills and Weight-Loss / Muscle-Building Supplements to Minors

It is now illegal in California to sell over-the-counter (OTC) diet pills, dietary supplements, weight-loss, or muscle building supplements to any person under the age of 18. The law requires specific identification checks to prevent these kinds of sales from taking place. Anyone who violates this law will be liable for civil penalties up to $500 for each violation. Enforcement of these provisions will be carried out by the Office of the Attorney General, or county or city attorneys.

• Prohibition. AB 2030 bars sales of OTC diet pills and dietary supplements for weight loss or muscle building to anyone under 18, both in stores and through online or delivery channels.
  • Scope is functional, not label-based. A product can be covered even if its label never says "weight loss" or "muscle building." Relevant factors include listed ingredients (such as creatine, green tea extract, garcinia cambogia, or steroids), whether labeling or marketing implies effects on weight, appetite, metabolism, muscle, or strength, and whether the seller groups the product with weight-loss or muscle-building items.
  • In-store duties. Retailers must check valid ID for any purchaser who does not reasonably appear to be over 18.
  • Online and delivery duties. Sellers must verify the purchaser's name, date of birth, and address against a commercial database of government sources, and must require an adult signature with photo ID at delivery. Delivery compliance may be difficult because carriers and platforms apply varying age-verification practices. Retailers should ensure delivery partners can identify covered products and verify purchasers' ages.

• Enforcement. Civil penalties of up to $500 per violation, enforceable by the attorney general, county counsel, or city attorneys.

AB 1731: Healthy Food for California Public Institutions Program

AB 1731 requires the Office of Farm to Fork within the California Department of Food and Agriculture, upon legislative appropriation, to establish a program that identifies California vendors capable of supplying healthy food to public institutions and to implement related initiatives as funding allows. AB 1731 is a procurement and program measure rather than a consumer protection mandate. It matters mainly to in-state producers and distributors that want to sell to schools and other public institutions.

To be approved, a vendor must:

• Source and distribute whole or minimally processed food products grown or produced in California using climate-smart agriculture practices and production systems. If sourcing from multiple farms or ranches, at least 50% of those suppliers must be California operations using climate-smart practices.
• Be capable of serving public institutions.
• Maintain and provide detailed source-tracking information, including the originating farm or ranch and relevant certifications.
• Retain purchase invoices from supplying farms and ranches and submit to potential audits after approval.
• Align with the office's stated priorities.
• Maintain strong compliance systems to ensure supplying farms and ranches follow all applicable laws, regulations, and food safety standards.

Practical Implications of the New Laws and Signals for Industry

• AB 2244's label is voluntary, but the litigation risk is not. California consumer class actions frequently target front-of-package claims. Once a state seal exists, plaintiffs may argue that a certified product fails the standard, or that uncertified products using similar terms (such as "minimally processed" or "clean") are misleading by comparison. Companies should keep formulation and supplier-ingredient records that can withstand both a certifier audit and discovery.
  • Supply chain diligence will drive certification. Because the additive exclusions reach flavoring agents, emulsifiers, and similar inputs, manufacturers will need ingredient-level representations from suppliers. Contracts should address specification changes, functional analysis for why an ingredient is included, notice of reformulation, and indemnity for certification loss.
• Under AB 2030, supplement sellers face a product-classification problem. AB 2030's functional test means a merchandising or website taxonomy decision, such as placing a product on a "fitness" or "weight management" page, can bring it within scope of the law. Retailers and brands should inventory products against the ingredient and marketing factors, align e-commerce categories, and implement age-verification systems that meet both the database-verification and adult-signature requirements.
• AB 2244 and AB 2030 pose near-term risk for public and private enforcement. AB 2244's retail provisions and AB 2030 authorize enforcement by the attorney general and local prosecutors. AB 2244 further provides a private right of action allowing consumers, business entities, and nonprofit organizations to seek an injunction against anyone who "engages, has engaged, or proposes to engage" in misuse of the "Non-Ultraprocessed Certified" seal. AB 2030's per-violation penalties can accumulate quickly across transactions, and California prosecutors routinely pair statute-specific penalties with Unfair Competition Law claims.

+++

Kristi Wolff is a partner in DWT's Washington, D.C., office, Alli Condra is of counsel, and Maxwell Graves is an associate in the firm's Portland office. For questions or more insights, please reach out to the authors or another member of our food and beverage team. To stay informed, sign up for our alerts.