With 2026 almost to its conclusion, most states legislatures are looking ahead to their 2027 legislative sessions. However, some states are still wrapping up their 2026 session. For example, though its session does not officially adjourn until November 30, 2026, the last day for California’s chambers to pass legislation was August 31, 2026 and its governor was permitted to sign bills until September 30, 2026.  This session, California enacted a few bills related to food law topics. This is the third installment of NALC’s 2026 Food Law in the States Update and it will discuss those bills. To read the first two articles in the series, click here and here.

AB 2244

One bill that California enacted was AB 2244. This first-in-the-nation legislation directs the California Department of Health (CDPH) to create a “Non-Ultraprocessed Certified” seal and permits foods that are certified as “non-ultraprocessed” to bear it on their packaging. This legislation follows the landmark law California passed in 2025 that created the nation’s first statutory definition for “ultraprocessed food” (UPF). Codified at Cal. Health & Safety Code § 104661, the 2025 law defined UPFs as food or beverages that contain:

• A substance available in FDA’s Substances Added to Food database that has a FDA-defined technical effect, and
• Either 1) high amounts of saturated fat, sodium, or added sugar, or 2) a non-nutritive sweetener.

Further, the 2025 law banned UPFs that meet the definitions of “restricted school foods” or “UPFs of concern” from being served in schools. The law did not define either of these terms but directed the CDPH to consider certain factors before publishing their definition by June 1, 2028. For specific information on the 2025 law, click here to read NALC article “MAHA Movement: Defining Ultra-processed Foods.”

AB 2244 clarifies that a food product may bear the non-ultraprocessed seal only if has been certified by a state “accredited certification agent.” It further specifies that a product cannot be certified as non-ultraprocessed if it 1) meets the “additive criteria for UPF;” 2) if it is classified as a UPF of concern; or 3) if it is classified as a restricted school food. Specifically, the “additive criteria for UPF” provision refers to foods that contain an ingredient that meets the categories outlined in Cal. Health & Safety Code § 104661(a)(2). For example, if a food product contains a flavoring agent, such as Acetic Acid, it cannot be certified as non-ultraprocessed.

Under AB 2244, a product must be recertified as non-ultraprocessed every three years. Further, if a previously certified food is reformulated, it must be recertified before the product can use the seal. CDPH will maintain a data system for certified food products.

Accredited Certification Agent

The law directs CDPH to accredit certification agents “no later than June 1, 2029.” To be accredited as a certification agent, a person must register with the department, complete a required training, annually renew their agent status, and provide a list of the products they have certified to CDPH. An agent’s registration information will be made available to the public.

In order to keep their certification, agents must comply with CDPH regulations.  This includes the submission of specifically required information for each certified food product, while also allowing CDPH to access to other records created throughout the certification process, if requested.

Standardized Seal

CDPH is also directed to create a standardized seal for products that meet the requirements. The seal may either contain the phrases “non-ultraprocessed certified food standard” or “non-UPF certified.” Additionally, it may incorporate “images and themes associated with California and healthy, nutritious whole foods.” The law further clarifies that the seal may be placed on the product’s principal display panel, the information panel, or other areas on the package – as long as it does not obscure other mandated information.

Fees and Penalties

Further, through this law, CDPH is permitted to establish fees for the registration and renewal of both accredited certification agents and certified food products. The law establishes the Public Health Food and Nutrition Education Fund where these fees will be deposited. This fund will support the implementation of this law and will help educate the public and stakeholders about its requirements.

The law also includes a list of prohibited acts, such as making a false statement to an accredited certification agent during the certification process or using the non-ultraprocessed certified seal on a product that does not meet the qualifications. Enforcement authority is given to public actors including CDPH and prosecuting attorneys as well as private actors such as consumers, business entities or non-profit organizations.  In other words, private citizens and competing businesses are able to sue if they think that a manufacturer is using this seal in a way that violates the law.

Clearly Identifiable

Last, AB 2244 requires that certain retail operations make at least 3 or more items bearing the non-ultraprocessed seal “clearly identifiable.” Clearly identifiable is defined as a “manner of offering a product for sale [. . .] that allows a reasonable customer to readily distinguish the product from other products.”  Retail operations that must comply with this requirement are “grocery stores” with gross annual store sales of more than ten million dollars that offer for sale more than 25 certified food items. Under this chapter, grocery store does not include “an establishment primarily engaged in retailing automotive fuels [ . . .] with a limited line of groceries,” nor does it apply to establishments that sale a “limited line of groceries [. . .] such as a convenience store or food mart.” Similar to violators of the non-ultraprocessed certified seal provisions, a grocery store that is not in compliance with this standard may be subject to enforcement action by certain public actors. However, there is no private right of action for consumers or competing businesses.

Effect of AB 2244

It is important to remember that the non-ultraprocessed certified seal is voluntary for food manufacturers. Further, the law’s definitions for both food and food products do not include any language specifying that the product must originate in California or be manufactured by a California company. Thus, it can be inferred that the non-ultraprocessed certified seal is available for use by out-of-state manufacturers seeking to sell their food products in California.

Additionally, though this law was created and passed by the state of California, federal food laws will still apply to food products bearing the seal. Food labels are regulated on the federal level by two agencies – the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the US Department of Agriculture (USDA). The non-ultraprocessed certified seal would be considered a “third party certification.” These certifications are voluntary labeling claims used on a food’s packaging which verifies that it was produced, processed, or packaged according to a standard established by an independent third party. While the non-ultraprocessed certified seal is technically run by a government operator, the State of California, it would still fall under the “third party” category because it is not operated by one of the federal agencies with authority over mandatory food labels.

The two federal agencies that regulate food labels have different standards regarding the pre-market approval of food product labels. Specifically, FDA does not require the labels of food under its jurisdiction to receive pre-market approval, while USDA does require it for certain labels. Thus, for products under FDA’s authority bearing California’s non-ultraprocessed certified seal, the label will not be required to undergo pre-market approval; however, for some USDA-regulated products, it might. To learn more about third-party certifications and their interaction with federal labeling laws, click here to read NALC article “Food Foundations: What are Third-Party Certifications?”

SB 869

California also enacted SB 869 – legislation which will require “chain restaurants” that offer beverage items with a certain sugar content to display an “added sugar icon” on their menu. Chain restaurants are defined as a food facility that “serves food for immediate consumption” and is “part of a chain with 20 or more locations doing business under the same name” with the same menu items. This definition includes cafes or delis located within another retail establishment. For example, a Starbucks located inside of a bookstore would qualify.

This law would require that chain restaurant menus include an icon that classifies a beverage as containing a “high added sugar content” if it contains a certain amount of added sugars. Specifically, the law would require the icon’s use for beverage items with “100 percent or more per serving of the daily value for added sugar used by the [FDA] on January 1, 2026, to calculate the percent daily value for nutrition labeling of food.” Per the FDA, daily value is “the recommended amount of nutrients to consume or not to exceed each day.” The “percent daily value” is “how much a nutrient in a single serving . . . contributes to your daily diet.” For example, if the daily value for added sugar is 50g and a beverage contains 5g in one serving, the percent daily value for added sugar in a single serving of the beverage is 10%. So, consuming that drink would provide a person with 10% of their recommended consumption quota of added sugars for that day. Here, California is saying that if a beverage menu item contains over 100 percent of the daily value, or recommended daily intake, of sugar in a single serving, then the menu should bear the “high added sugar content” icon next to the beverage’s listing.

The law applies to “standard menu beverage items” which are “prepared or poured at, and listed on a menu of, a chain restaurant and that is intended to be consumed by drinking.” This definition includes fountain drinks, blended beverages, or a beverage item that comes in different flavors but is listed as a single item. The following are exempt from this rule – prepackaged beverage items, beverage items on a menu for less than 60 days per calendar year or fewer than 90 consecutive days, beverage items without a high added sugar content that are modified by the consumer themselves, beverages containing alcohol, and frozen diary products intended to be eaten with a spoon. Thus, a coffee drink blended with certain sugary syrups and containing a high added sugar content would count, but a plain black coffee that the customer added sugar and syrup to would not.

According to SB 869, the added sugar icon will be the image of a sugar cube inside a black triangle. Qualifying chain restaurants will be required to bear that imagine on their menus “immediately adjacent to each standard menu beverage item with high added sugar content.” The icon is required to be listed on all menu formats utilized by the restaurant – including its drive-through menus, physical copies, and menu boards. Additionally, the icon may be displayed through a quick response code or other digital format but there must be an alternative method with the added sugar information for customers unable to access the digital format.

Chain restaurants must be in compliance with this law by January 1, 2029.

SB 977

California also enacted a bill related to chain restaurants’ offerings of children’s meals. SB 977 requires that a chain restaurant with a children’s meal offered must also offer at least one children’s meal that meets particular nutrition standards. For example, if a chain restaurant offers chicken nuggets and fries as a children’s meal, then it must also offer a meal that meets the listed standards. SB 977 includes the following as nutritional standards:

• It may not contain more than any of the following – 1) five hundred fifty calories; 2) seven hundred milligrams of sodium; 3) ten percent of calories from saturated fat; 4) fifteen grams of added sugars; 5) zero grams of trans fat
• It must contain at least two of the following servings – 1) a serving of at least one-half cup of fruit (includes 100 percent fruit juice); 2) a serving of at least one-half cup of vegetables; 3) a serving of at least one-half cup of nonfat or low-fat dairy; 4) a serving of meat or a meat alternative; 5) a serving of eight or more grams of whole grains with at least 50 percent of whole grain ingredients or where whole grains are the most predominant ingredient.

These standards are based on the latest Dietary Guidelines for Americans and the National Restaurant Association’s 2021 Kids LiveWell 2.0 standards. The law requires that by July 1, 2027 qualifying chain restaurants must include information on how to comply with these requirements during employee trainings.

Conclusion

With the end of 2026 nearing, most states are gearing up for next year’s legislative session. California, however, just concluded its 2025-2026 session, during which it continued its almost yearly tradition of passing landmark, food-related laws. As the new year approaches, other states might follow California by proposing their own iterations of the bills discussed above. To stay up to date on the latest state food law proposals, click here to subscribe to NALC’s bi-weekly newsletter, “The Feed.”