A state rewrites the language of freshness
In California, the familiar “sell by” date that many shoppers treat as a hard cutoff is being pushed off the front of the package. Under a law known as Assembly Bill 660, food items manufactured on or after July 1, 2026, and sold for human consumption in the state must use a small set of standardized phrases when they show date information to consumers.
For products that display a quality date, the law requires wording like “Best if Used by” or “Best if Used or Frozen by.” Safety dates, meant to indicate when food should no longer be eaten, must use “Use by” or “Use by or Freeze by.” The phrase “sell by”—originally meant for internal stock rotation—is banned from consumer-facing labels, although coded versions that shoppers can’t easily interpret can still be used behind the scenes.
The idea is straightforward: when shoppers walk into a California grocery, the dates they see should either tell them about peak quality or safety, not store logistics.
How date confusion became a waste engine
For decades, people have used whatever date appears on packaging as a universal signal: once it passes, the food is assumed to be unsafe, even if the label was never meant to say that. Research cited by federal agencies and food policy groups suggests that confusion over date labels accounts for roughly one-fifth of consumer food waste, with households discarding perfectly edible items because they misunderstand what “best by” or “sell by” actually mean.
Think of a family refrigerator: a jug of milk tossed immediately after a “sell by” date, sealed yogurt discarded the day it hits “best if used by,” or canned goods cleared out simply because the printed month has changed. In many cases, those dates mark the point when flavor and texture begin to decline, not when safety suddenly collapses. The mismatch between intention and interpretation turns packaging into a waste trigger.
AB 660 responds by stripping away the ambiguous language. By limiting date phrases to “Best if Used by” for quality and “Use by” for safety, the law tries to make it obvious which dates are about taste and which are about actual risk.
What AB 660 actually requires
AB 660 does not force every food to display a date. It governs how dates are written when manufacturers, processors, or retailers choose to put them on packaging—or when another law requires them to. For food manufactured on or after July 1, 2026 and sold in California, the rules are:
Any consumer-facing quality date must use approved wording such as “Best if Used by” or “Best if Used or Frozen by.”
Any consumer-facing safety date must use phrasing like “Use by” or “Use by or Freeze by.”
Consumer-facing “sell by” labels are prohibited on those items.
Eggs and infant formula have separate federal frameworks, but most packaged foods on shelves in California supermarkets and specialty shops fall under this structure. Older inventory, produced before the cutoff, can continue to be sold as stores work through existing stock, so shoppers will see a mix of old and new formats until the pipeline catches up.
For companies, this isn’t just a wording tweak. It requires label redesigns, regulatory reviews, and logistics updates, especially for brands selling into California from other states or countries. Inventory codes used to manage stock—dates or symbols not meant for consumers—can remain, but they must be structured so that ordinary shoppers don’t treat them as safety guidance.
Luxury groceries, branding, and trust
The law hits every shelf, but it has a particular resonance in the world of premium groceries and specialty food branding. High-end stores and producers in places like San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Napa often sell a story of precision: cheeses at peak ripeness, limited-batch condiments, seasonal pastries timed to perfection. Date labels are part of that narrative, helping reinforce the idea that customers are buying a product at exactly the right moment.
AB 660 forces a clearer distinction between story and threshold. A “Best if Used by” date is now explicitly about quality—it signals when the product is expected to taste or perform best. A “Use by” date tells consumers when the maker believes the food should no longer be eaten.
This separation can change behavior:
Shoppers with expensive pantry goods may feel less pressure to throw items out the minute they pass a “best if used by” date, especially if appearance, smell, and texture still seem fine.
Brands may need to align their marketing with clearer definitions, making it harder to imply that quality dates are hard safety cutoffs.
Stores that take time to explain the new labels—to staff and customers—can build additional trust, especially among people who care about waste, sustainability, and value per dollar.
For restaurants, hotels, and caterers, standardized wording also simplifies training and food safety documentation, helping teams distinguish between quality-oriented rotation and hard safety deadlines.
What a reader might do with this knowledge
For someone reading this, the change is both practical and philosophical.
On the practical side, it suggests using sense plus label instead of label alone. When you encounter a “Best if Used by” date in a California kitchen, you can treat it as a quality guide: look, smell, and taste within reason before deciding whether to throw something away. When you see a “Use by” date, you can treat it as a safety line and respect it more strictly.
On the philosophical side, AB 660 is a reminder that waste and policy are connected. How governments define something as simple as a date stamp can influence how much perfectly good food ends up in landfills or incinerators. If you care about that, you can:
Pay attention to how labels change in your local stores, and ask grocers how they’re explaining the new language.
Support retailers and brands that invest in clear labeling and education, rather than leaning on vague or fear-driven messaging.
Apply the same mindset elsewhere, recognizing that not every printed date is a hard safety cutoff and that thoughtful reading can reduce how much food you throw away.
The law doesn’t tell anyone exactly how to shop. But it does change the grammar of freshness in America’s largest state—giving consumers a slightly better chance to understand what they’re seeing before they decide what stays on the shelf and what goes in the trash.
A state rewrites the language of freshness
In California, the familiar “sell by” date that many shoppers treat as a hard cutoff is being pushed off the front of the package. Under a law known as Assembly Bill 660, food items manufactured on or after July 1, 2026, and sold for human consumption in the state must use a small set of standardized phrases when they show date information to consumers.
For products that display a quality date, the law requires wording like “Best if Used by” or “Best if Used or Frozen by.” Safety dates, meant to indicate when food should no longer be eaten, must use “Use by” or “Use by or Freeze by.” The phrase “sell by”—originally meant for internal stock rotation—is banned from consumer-facing labels, although coded versions that shoppers can’t easily interpret can still be used behind the scenes.
The idea is straightforward: when shoppers walk into a California grocery, the dates they see should either tell them about peak quality or safety, not store logistics.
How date confusion became a waste engine
For decades, people have used whatever date appears on packaging as a universal signal: once it passes, the food is assumed to be unsafe, even if the label was never meant to say that. Research cited by federal agencies and food policy groups suggests that confusion over date labels accounts for roughly one-fifth of consumer food waste, with households discarding perfectly edible items because they misunderstand what “best by” or “sell by” actually mean.
Think of a family refrigerator: a jug of milk tossed immediately after a “sell by” date, sealed yogurt discarded the day it hits “best if used by,” or canned goods cleared out simply because the printed month has changed. In many cases, those dates mark the point when flavor and texture begin to decline, not when safety suddenly collapses. The mismatch between intention and interpretation turns packaging into a waste trigger.
AB 660 responds by stripping away the ambiguous language. By limiting date phrases to “Best if Used by” for quality and “Use by” for safety, the law tries to make it obvious which dates are about taste and which are about actual risk.
What AB 660 actually requires
AB 660 does not force every food to display a date. It governs how dates are written when manufacturers, processors, or retailers choose to put them on packaging—or when another law requires them to. For food manufactured on or after July 1, 2026 and sold in California, the rules are:
Any consumer-facing quality date must use approved wording such as “Best if Used by” or “Best if Used or Frozen by.”
Any consumer-facing safety date must use phrasing like “Use by” or “Use by or Freeze by.”
Consumer-facing “sell by” labels are prohibited on those items.
Eggs and infant formula have separate federal frameworks, but most packaged foods on shelves in California supermarkets and specialty shops fall under this structure. Older inventory, produced before the cutoff, can continue to be sold as stores work through existing stock, so shoppers will see a mix of old and new formats until the pipeline catches up.
For companies, this isn’t just a wording tweak. It requires label redesigns, regulatory reviews, and logistics updates, especially for brands selling into California from other states or countries. Inventory codes used to manage stock—dates or symbols not meant for consumers—can remain, but they must be structured so that ordinary shoppers don’t treat them as safety guidance.
Luxury groceries, branding, and trust
The law hits every shelf, but it has a particular resonance in the world of premium groceries and specialty food branding. High-end stores and producers in places like San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Napa often sell a story of precision: cheeses at peak ripeness, limited-batch condiments, seasonal pastries timed to perfection. Date labels are part of that narrative, helping reinforce the idea that customers are buying a product at exactly the right moment.
AB 660 forces a clearer distinction between story and threshold. A “Best if Used by” date is now explicitly about quality—it signals when the product is expected to taste or perform best. A “Use by” date tells consumers when the maker believes the food should no longer be eaten.
This separation can change behavior:
Shoppers with expensive pantry goods may feel less pressure to throw items out the minute they pass a “best if used by” date, especially if appearance, smell, and texture still seem fine.
Brands may need to align their marketing with clearer definitions, making it harder to imply that quality dates are hard safety cutoffs.
Stores that take time to explain the new labels—to staff and customers—can build additional trust, especially among people who care about waste, sustainability, and value per dollar.
For restaurants, hotels, and caterers, standardized wording also simplifies training and food safety documentation, helping teams distinguish between quality-oriented rotation and hard safety deadlines.
What a reader might do with this knowledge
For someone reading this, the change is both practical and philosophical.
On the practical side, it suggests using sense plus label instead of label alone. When you encounter a “Best if Used by” date in a California kitchen, you can treat it as a quality guide: look, smell, and taste within reason before deciding whether to throw something away. When you see a “Use by” date, you can treat it as a safety line and respect it more strictly.
On the philosophical side, AB 660 is a reminder that waste and policy are connected. How governments define something as simple as a date stamp can influence how much perfectly good food ends up in landfills or incinerators. If you care about that, you can:
Pay attention to how labels change in your local stores, and ask grocers how they’re explaining the new language.
Support retailers and brands that invest in clear labeling and education, rather than leaning on vague or fear-driven messaging.
Apply the same mindset elsewhere, recognizing that not every printed date is a hard safety cutoff and that thoughtful reading can reduce how much food you throw away.
The law doesn’t tell anyone exactly how to shop. But it does change the grammar of freshness in America’s largest state—giving consumers a slightly better chance to understand what they’re seeing before they decide what stays on the shelf and what goes in the trash.
STAY IN THE KNOW
The stories shaping culture, delivered straight to your inbox.
Get exclusive editorial coverage on the events, brands, and trends that matter most. No spam, just substance.
