California Assembly Bill AB1148

California 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/20/25
• Refer: 3/10/25
• Report Pass: 3/28/25
• Refer: 4/1/25
• Report Pass: 4/9/25
• Refer: 4/9/25
• Report Pass: 4/22/25
• Refer: 4/24/25
• Refer: 5/7/25
• Report Pass: 5/23/25
• Engrossed: 6/2/25
• Refer: 6/3/25
• Refer: 6/11/25
• Report Pass: 6/17/25
• Refer: 6/17/25

Caption

An act to add Article 3 (commencing with Section 109015) to Chapter 15 of Part 3 of Division 104 of the Health and Safety Code, relating to product safety.

Impact

The legislation is expected to have a considerable impact on state laws surrounding product safety and consumer protection. By prohibiting certain chemicals, the bill aligns California's food packaging regulations with growing public health awareness regarding hazardous substances. This move is seen as proactive in protecting consumers from the risks associated with chemical exposure in food supplies. Enforcing these regulations will require cooperation among manufacturers, retailers, and enforcement agencies, suggesting an evolution in how business practices around food packaging are conducted statewide.

Summary

AB 1148, known as the Safer Food Packing Act of 2025, proposes significant restrictions on the use of hazardous chemicals in food packaging. Specifically, the bill mandates that starting January 1, 2027, no food packaging may be manufactured, distributed, sold, or offered for sale in California if it contains intentionally added bisphenols or ortho-phthalates. The bill further empowers the Department of Toxic Substances Control to establish regulations setting thresholds for these substances in food packaging that is not intentionally added. This legislative action aims to improve public health and safety by limiting exposure to potentially harmful chemicals found in everyday food packaging products.

Sentiment

The general sentiment around AB 1148 is largely positive among public health advocates and environmental groups, who view the bill as a necessary step to curb harmful chemicals in consumer products. Conversely, some industry representatives express concern over the potential financial implications and challenges of compliance with new regulations. The discourse surrounding the bill has highlighted a critical intersection between health safety and economic performance, reflecting broader societal concerns regarding chemical use in consumer goods.

Contention

Notable points of contention include debates over the economic impact on the food packaging industry and the practicalities of enforcing compliance with the new standards. Opponents argue that the legislation could lead to higher costs for manufacturers and ultimately increased prices for consumers. Supporters counter that the long-term health benefits and potential reduction in healthcare costs due to lower chemical exposures far outweigh these concerns. The differing opinions underscore the complexity of balancing public health initiatives with economic sustainability in the marketplace.