FEDERAL COURT
Many Happy Returns?
Costco Joins Retailers Who Want Tariff Fees Returned if Supreme Court Rules Against President Trump
In November, the Supreme Court heard arguments challenging the legality of tariffs collected under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Should the Court strike down the tariffs, the justices could order the tariff fees to be refunded. In case that might happen, several companies, as well as lawmakers on
behalf of small businesses, have initiated lawsuits seeking to protect their
rights to have tariffs refunded.
On December 1, If the tariffs are ruled unlawful, the justices may, or may not, address the ...
availability of refunds. Notably, after December 15, some of the tariffs collected will move from an estimated import fee to a final actual fee, which
classifies those fees as “liquidated”. The Costco lawsuit mentions that liquidated fees could then be ineligible for refund even if the tariffs are
ultimately found to be unlawful.
More than 75 plaintiffs, now including Costco, have consolidated their cases against the IEEPA tariffs. The plaintiffs are asking the high court to preserve their refund rights despite the liquidation of fees paid.
WHITE HOUSE
SNAP Benefits Under Continued Pressure
White House Threatens Funding if States Withhold Data
The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is once again a source of political controversy. Reinstituted after the recent federal
government shutdown, SNAP is now facing criticism from the Secretary of Agriculture, Brooke Rollins, who is proposing Americans reapply for food assistance in an effort to eliminate fraud. On December 2, the administration said it may withhold SNAP funding from Democratic-controlled states who fail to provide the names of those people receiving assistance. Those states have ... sued to keep from providing the information which was originally requested in February.
A federal judge has ruled in their favor and, for now, barred the administration from collecting the information. Rollins claims information obtained from Republican-led states has uncovered hundreds of thousands of deceased people still receiving benefits and that a half a million people are getting duplicative benefits.
The continuing resolution to fund the federal government ends on January 30, 2026. SNAP funding will not be impacted if there is another government shutdown as Congress has passed funding to cover the program through September 2026.
AMERICANS FOR INGREDIENT TRANSPARENCY
Food Lobby Demands a New National Standard
Introducing the Americans for Ingredient Transparency
In October 2025, a new player emerged in the controversy over food ingredient policy. Americans For Ingredient Transparency (AFIT) group officially began lobbying for a national ban to pre-empt state laws regarding food standards. The organization is a 501(c)(4) non-profit which allows political activity and lobbying on behalf of a social welfare agenda and allows donors to remain anonymous. AFIT has the support of several major food companies as well as major industry trade groups.
The goal of AFIT is to create a national standard for ingredients and to nullify bans that have been created in individual states including West Virginia, Texas, and California. AFIT argues that the patchwork of varying state regulations is costly and confusing to consumers and small businesses.
The Food and Drug Administration currently sets a national standard but changes, particularly those in the ... Make America Healthy Again agenda, have been slow to be imposed. The FDA is currently considering changes to front of pack labeling, developing ultra-processed food definitions, and updating the Generally Recognized as Safe policies. Federal policy traditionally takes considerably longer to enact than regulatory changes enacted at the state level.
Several bills have been introduced in Congress addressing ingredient regulations. The Food Security and Farm Protection Act (S. 1326) would prohibit states from imposing food production standards on products from other states if they go beyond federal law and the laws of the originating state.
Other proposed bills on this issue include the Ban Harmful Food Dyes Act (H.R. 5027), and BAN OPs From Our Food Act (H.R. 5554) and the Ensuring Safe and Toxic-Free Foods Act of 2023 (S. 3387). These bills represent ongoing debates over food safety, additives, and states' rights in regulating food.
Critics, including the Environmental Working Group, claim that AFIT is a front group for large corporations seeking to block regulations under a grassroots-consumer image. Consumer advocates claim that AFIT is attempting to block new state food safety laws in favor of a weaker federal standard.
AFIT has engaged a lobbying firm, established a social media presence, and spent a six-figure sum on a TV ad in the Washington DC market.
ULTRA-PROCESSED FOOD
Ultra Processed Food Makers Heading to Court
Lawsuit Seeks to End Deceptive Marketing and Penalize Companies
San Francisco's attorney filed a lawsuit on December 2 accusing 11 of the country's largest food companies of intentionally creating and marketing harmful products. The case focuses on the addictiveness of UPFs and claims that the companies created a public health crisis. Food manufacturers argue that not all ultra-processed foods are unhealthy and to say a food is unhealthy because it is processed misleads consumers. The lawsuit is the latest action focusing attention on foods potentially considered “ultra-processed.”
The FDA has been seeking input to define ultra-processed foods (UPFs) while Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy ...has blamed UPFs for obesity and disease prevalence in the United States.
The FDA has not yet issued a definition, but several states have taken up the cause.
In April, Arizona was the first state to enact a definition of UPFs and to prohibit foods meeting that description in school meals as early as next Sept. In October, California passed a law to gradually phase out all UPFs from public school meals, with a total ban by 2035. Several other states including New York, New Jersey, North Carolina, South Carolina, Pennsylvania, Utah, Florida, Alabama, Illinois, Kentucky and Missouri have proposed legislation aimed at UPF's and specific chemicals in school meals. West Virginia has enacted a statewide ban on two chemicals and seven artificial dyes.
CONGRESS
Weeding Out THC Beverages
Congress Moves to Restrict Hemp-Derived Drinks
The spending bill which re-opened the federal government also set a deadline to close a loophole which led to the boom in THC beverages.
The Farm Bill of 2018 allows the nationwide sale of products derived from hemp, even in states where cannabis is illegal. Hemp and cannabis come from the same plant but if the levels of THC are low, the product is considered Hemp. Above those levels, products are considered cannabis and classified as a class one drug nationwide. This hemp definition gave rise to the THC beverage markets.
At the urging of several State Attorneys General, Congress has set new restrictions which take effect in November 2026. The government must publish new guidance by Feb. 10, 2026. Changes are expected to make nearly all current THC beverages illegal federally. State-licensed marijuana programs would not be impacted.
LABELING
Labeling Compliance Dates Ahead
Two Years out, Food Industry Hopes for FDA Guidance Soon
There’s one year down and one to go on new food labeling changes. The FDA has set January 1, 2028 as the uniform compliance date for implementing new label laws which are finalized during 2025 and 2026.
Rules finalized from 2023-2024 take effect this Jan. 1. That does not include final guidance published Dec 2024 on which food can carry the label “healthy.” The healthy label policy went into effect on April 28, 2025.
The USDA and FDA are using the same compliance date this year so January 1, 2028 is also the deadline for new labeling rules finalized by the USDA during 2025 and 2026.
This January 1, the voluntary rule allowing meat, poultry, and egg products to use the label ...“product of the USA” takes effect. Previously, that label could have applied to foreign born animal products which were only processed in the U.S.
The FDA’s recently released Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions, referred to as the Unified Agenda, provided insight into the top regulatory priorities and clues as to which policies are likely to be finalized in 2026.
These prioritize nine different issues including front-of-package nutrition labeling and changes to the GRAS, or “generally recognized as safe” policy.
The other seven policies mentioned pertain to use of ultra-filtered milk in cheese, the definition of a new dietary supplement, use of salt substitutes, food additive petitions, color additive petitions, standards of identity for tuna, and a modernization of the standard of identity for maple syrup.
STATE NEWS
Dollars vs Credit
Another State Demands Cash be Acceptable
Ohio is poised to be the next state to enact a law requiring business and governmental offices to accept cash payments. House bill 554, known as the CASH bill for Currency Access to Spend Here, would mandate cash payments made in person up to the amount of $500 be accepted at major retailers and government offices. Twelve other states and Washington DC already have similar regulations. Exceptions are made for certain locations such as airports and small vendors. There is no federal law addressing this issue but several bills, including the Payment Choice Act, have been proposed.
FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
‘Orang’-You Glad’ There’s a New Statement of Identity?t
The Standards for Orange Juice May be Lowereds
The comment period has closed on the FDA’s proposed change to the Statement of Identity for orange juice. The new identity would make 10% Brix the new standard for pasteurized orange juice. Brix measures the soluble solids content, generally sugar, in juice. The change was sought in August 2025 by the Florida Citrus Processors Association Inc. and Florida Citrus Mutual Inc. They seek the change in response to Citrus Greening Disease which has lowered the natural sugar content of oranges. Proponents insist a lower standard would match agricultural realities. The comment period closed on November 4.
Time to Raise Rice Standards?
USDA Asks What You Think About Current Criteria
The USDA is open for comments about rice standards. The comment period opened on November 18 and closes January 20, 2026. Four questions are posted revolving around whether current guidelines and criteria are in need of review. The last time rice standards were updated was in 2015.
Allergen Changes:
Coconut Out, Sesame In
In January 2025, the FDA published a revised edition of its Guidance on food allergens. A significant change was the addition of sesame to the list of major food allergens and the removal of coconut and several other nuts from the category of tree nut allergens. Coconut and other tree nuts will still be listed as ingredients but are no longer considered part of the tree nuts category which mandates bold print on the bottom of the ingredient list.
POLICIES WE ARE WATCHING
At the time of publication, the following items have not been updated. For more information please check previous editions of Policy Watch.
PLMA continues to monitor these topics:
• Front of Package Labeling
• Court Case on IEEPA Tariffs
• Extended Producer Responsibility Laws
• Court cases:
Mondelez vs Aldi
J.M. Smucker Company vs Trader Joes Company
Lulu Lemon Athletica Canada Inc v Costco Wholesale Corp.
Have feedback or policy you would like us to write about?
Please email our editor, Maureen Donoghue at MDonoghue@PLMA.com
Editor: Maureen Donoghue
MDonoghue@plma.com