In June 2025, Texas and Louisiana each enacted legislation mandating new label disclosures for foods containing a number of food and color additives, raising federal preemption and First Amendment questions. Both states have additionally restricted various ingredients from school meals. These developments follow broader national and global trends restricting usage of various ingredients and broadly aligns with the objectives of the president’s Make America Healthy Again Initiative. Generally, these new requirements create a more complex labeling reality for food manufacturers, importers, and retailers nationwide.
Texas SB 25’s Mandatory Warning Label
Signed into law on June 18, 2025, Texas’s SB 25 represents the nation’s first ingredient disclosure law enacted at the state level. SB 25 requires all foods sold in Texas to bear the following warning label if the food contains one or more of 44 enumerated ingredients: “WARNING: This product contains an ingredient that is not recommended for human consumption by the appropriate authority in Australia, Canada, the European Union, or the United Kingdom.”
Notable Ingredients Triggering SB 25’s Warning Label Include:
- Artificial dyes: Red 3, 4, and 40; Yellow 5 and 6; Blue 1 and 2; and Green 3;
- Preservatives: butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA), butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT), and potassium bromate;
- Additives: titanium dioxide and propylparaben; and
- Others: diacetyl, bleached flour, and partially hydrogenated oil (PHO).
Scope and Enforcement of SB 25:
- Applies to all food product labels “developed or copyrighted on or after January 1, 2027”;
- Does not apply to food labeled, prepared, served, or sold in a restaurant or retail; establishment; food regulated by USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service; or dietary supplements;
- Noncompliance may trigger enforcement by the Texas Attorney General; and
- Includes an express federal preemption provision providing that no warning disclosure is needed for ingredients enumerated in SB 25 if there is an FDA or USDA regulation that:
- (a) Prohibits use of the ingredient,
- (b) Imposes conditions on the use of the ingredient, including a condition requiring a warning or disclosure statement,
- (c) Determines the ingredient or class of ingredients is safe for human consumption, or
- (d) Mandates a labeling statement relating to ultra-processed or processed foods.
Louisiana’s SB 14 Disclosure Requirements
Signed into law on June 27, 2025, Louisiana’s SB 14 mandates product-level disclosures for any food sold in the state that contains one or more of approximately 40 restricted additives—many of which overlap with those listed in Texas’s SB 25. While the law does not prohibit the use of these ingredients, it requires that product packaging include a QR code linked to a web page under the control of the manufacturer directing consumers to a warning about the ingredient. The required disclosure must include the following statement: “NOTICE: This product contains [ingredient]. For more information about this ingredient, including FDA approvals, click HERE.” SB 14 takes effect on January 1, 2028.
Notable Ingredients Triggering SB 14’s Disclosure Requirements Include:
- Color additives such as Red 3, 4, and 40; Yellow 5 and 6; Blue 1 and 2; and Green 3;
- Artificial sweeteners, such as aspartame, sucralose, and acesulfame potassium; and
- Preservatives such as BHA, BHT, and propylparaben.
School Meal Ingredient Prohibitions Under SB 14:
Effective August 1, 2027, the law prohibits the use of more than 15 specified ingredients in foods provided through Louisiana’s public school meal programs. This includes commonly used synthetic color additives, sweeteners, and emulsifiers that have all been restricted or banned in the EU or other jurisdictions. The restriction applies to all meals served in public K–12 schools, including those provided under the National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program.
Implications for the Food Industry:
- Food companies distributing in Texas or Louisiana must review formulations and packaging now;
- Reformulation may be necessary for brands seeking to avoid warning labels or disclosures; and
- Increased regulatory divergence across states may pose challenges for national compliance strategies.
It remains to be seen whether the food industry will seek to challenge these new laws on preemption grounds, particularly as a patchwork of similar laws are increasingly likely to be enacted across states.
Recommended Actions
- Review ingredient lists to identify any substances covered under SB 25 in Texas and SB 14 in Louisiana;
- Examine current labeling and packaging to ensure compliance with Texas warning label requirements;
- Assess disclosure mechanisms for Louisiana, including QR code functionality and the content of linked web pages; and
- Coordinate with legal or regulatory teams to monitor state rulemaking and interpretive guidance.
[View source.]
