Kimberley Kausen stands in her Irvine kitchen eyeing a jug of milk whose “sell by” date has come and gone. Her daughter sees trash. Her husband sees a few more safe days. Kausen, a chef and cooking instructor, sniffs and touches. She thinks.
That simple scene repeats in millions of California homes. And on July 1 it began to change. A new state law now bans consumer-facing “sell by” dates on most packaged foods sold here. Manufacturers must pick from just two phrases if they choose to date their products at all. “Best if Used By” signals peak quality. “Use By” flags safety. Nothing else.
The measure, Assembly Bill 660, makes California the first state to impose such strict uniformity. Signed in 2024 by Gov. Gavin Newsom, it took full effect this week for items manufactured on or after that date. Older stock can still move. But the shift is real. And its backers hope the change travels far beyond state lines.
Shoppers have faced a dizzying array of terms for decades. “Sell by,” “best by,” “use by,” “expires on,” “freshest before.” A 2022 University of Maryland report counted more than 50 variations on store shelves. Most carry no federal rules. Only infant formula faces strict national date labeling. The result? Widespread confusion.
“Consumers get confused and they just default to assuming that whatever date is on the package means ‘don’t eat it and throw it away,’” said Kumar Chandran, policy director at ReFED, in reporting by AP News.
That default wastes food at staggering scale. The Food and Drug Administration estimates nearly 20 percent of the nation’s food supply ends up discarded. In California the figure reaches about 6 million tons of still-edible product each year, according to multiple recent accounts including Fortune. The methane from organic waste in landfills adds to the state’s climate burden. Households lose money too. A Harris Poll cited in Newsweek reporting suggested Americans toss food over label confusion at a national cost of roughly $7 billion annually.
Nick Lapis, director of advocacy at Californians Against Waste, which co-sponsored the bill, put the fix in plain terms. “We don’t need to build some kind of huge infrastructure and invest tons of money to solve this. We just need companies to use the same words across brands,” he told AP News.
The law allows abbreviations on small packages. “BB” or “Best if Frozen By” for quality. “UB” or “Use or Freeze By” for safety. Retailers may keep internal coded “sell by” dates for stock rotation. “Packed on” dates remain acceptable when paired with one of the approved phrases. Exemptions cover infant formula, eggs, beer and malt beverages. The statute does not forbid selling food after any date. It simply standardizes the language.
Assemblymember Jacqui Irwin, the Democrat from Thousand Oaks who authored AB 660, described the everyday frustration the bill targets. “Having to wonder whether our food is still good is an issue that we all have struggled with,” she said in coverage by Newsweek. “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.”
Industry reaction has stayed largely positive. Nate Rose, spokesperson for the California Grocers Association, called the change “a win-win where we can reduce food waste and consumers will find these decisions a little bit simpler.” He noted that older labeled products will linger on shelves for months during the sell-through period, as reported in both Fortune and AP News.
Some grocers adjusted labeling systems ahead of the deadline. Compliance carries potential fines up to $1,000 per violation, though enforcement details are still emerging. The California Department of Food and Agriculture will oversee aspects, particularly for milk and cream which must carry a quality date under separate provisions detailed by the National Agricultural Law Center.
This is not an isolated move. New York lawmakers recently passed similar legislation now awaiting Gov. Kathy Hochul’s signature. Bills have surfaced in Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey and South Carolina. A bipartisan proposal sits in Congress. The U.S. Department of Agriculture recommended “Best if Used By” language a decade ago. California’s law adds concrete momentum.
Advocates see broader supply-chain effects. Food banks have long struggled with donations rejected over misunderstood “sell by” dates. Clearer labels could boost donations and cut landfill volume. For manufacturers the measure may eventually simplify national production if other states follow. Dual labeling systems cost money. Uniformity could lower those expenses over time.
Yet challenges remain. Not every product requires a date label. The law only governs wording when one appears. Shoppers must still learn the difference between quality and safety dates. “Best if Used By” does not mean unsafe after that point. “Use By” does signal a firmer cutoff. Old habits die hard. Kausen’s family debate will not vanish overnight.
Recent coverage underscores the timing. With grocery prices elevated after years of inflation, every dollar saved on wasted food matters. A FOX 11 Los Angeles report from late June highlighted the law’s consumer-protection framing. Articles in U.S. News & World Report and The Washington Times this week noted the immediate shelf changes and lingering old packaging.
The statute reflects years of advocacy. ReFED, Californians Against Waste and other groups pushed for alignment with voluntary federal guidance. They argued that consumer confusion drives unnecessary waste at every level. Data backs them. The Environmental Protection Agency has estimated a family of four loses nearly $2,900 yearly to food thrown away, much of it perfectly edible.
Implementation will test the law’s reach. Large national brands must update packaging lines for California-specific versions or adopt the new standard nationwide. Smaller producers face tighter compliance windows. Retailers must train staff to explain the labels to customers who ask why their favorite yogurt suddenly reads differently.
Still, the core logic holds. Clearer communication costs little. The payoff could prove substantial. Less waste in landfills. Lower methane emissions. More money in household budgets. And fewer debates in kitchens like Kausen’s over whether that milk really belongs in the trash.
California has bet that standard words on labels can deliver those gains without heavy new infrastructure or regulation. Early reactions suggest the wager may pay off. Other states are watching closely. So are food companies that sell across the country. The quiet change on grocery shelves this week may echo for years.
WebProNews is an iEntry Publication