Grocery shoppers in California will no longer encounter the confusing mix of “sell by,” “best by,” and “use by” stamps that have long led people to throw out perfectly good food. Starting July 1, 2026, AB 660 requires every packaged food product sold in the state to carry one of two standardized date phrases: a quality indicator reading “BEST if Used by” or a safety indicator reading “USE by.” The law also bans consumer-facing “sell by” dates entirely. State data shows that 2.5 billion meals’ worth of still-fresh, unsold food ends up in California landfills each year, and the labeling overhaul is designed to cut into that waste directly.
How AB 660 changes what shoppers and stores see on packages
The core mechanism is simple: replace a dozen informal phrases with two clear ones. Under the AB 660 statute, quality dates must now read “BEST if Used by” or “BEST if Used or Frozen by,” with the abbreviation “BB” permitted. Safety dates must read “USE by” or “USE by or Freeze by,” abbreviated as “UB.” Any other consumer-facing date language, including the familiar “sell by” stamp, is prohibited once the law takes effect.
Retailers still need internal tools for stock rotation. The law addresses this by allowing coded sell-by dates that are not legible to consumers, according to the state agriculture department. That distinction matters for testing whether early adoption changes store behavior. If a retailer switches to the new labels ahead of the deadline, staff can still use coded dates to manage inventory, but shoppers will no longer pull items off shelves based on a misunderstood “sell by” stamp. The hypothesis that early adopters would see fewer premature shelf pulls is plausible on its face, though no primary-source data on current pull-from-shelf rates exists in state records to confirm or deny it yet.
Federal surveys and state waste data behind the label fix
The scale of consumer confusion is well documented at the federal level. An FDA communication cited a 2007 consumer survey finding that fewer than half of respondents could correctly distinguish among “Sell By,” “Use By,” and “Best If Used By.” That confusion has real consequences: people discard food that is safe to eat because they treat a quality suggestion as a safety deadline.
California’s own waste numbers add urgency. State recycling officials estimate that 2.5 billion meals’ worth of still-fresh, unsold food reaches the state’s landfills every year. Organic material, which includes discarded food, accounts for 48% by weight of California landfill waste, according to CalRecycle’s broader organics data. That organic mass generates methane as it decomposes, tying food waste directly to the state’s climate targets under SB 1383.
California’s approach also aligns with federal guidance. The FDA has encouraged voluntary use of a single “Best if Used By” phrase for quality-related dates to reduce confusion and food waste. AB 660 takes that concept further by making standardized wording mandatory statewide and by drawing a bright line between quality and safety dates. In practice, that means a carton of yogurt that is still safe but past peak texture would carry a quality date, while a ready-to-eat deli salad that could become unsafe after a certain point would carry a safety date.
What the new labels mean for households and donations
For households, the practical shift is interpretive. A “BEST if Used by” date tells shoppers when a product is likely to taste and perform best, not when it suddenly becomes dangerous. Consumers can use their senses and normal food-handling practices to decide whether to keep or discard an item after that date. By contrast, a “USE by” date on a perishable, ready-to-eat product signals a safety boundary; food recovery organizations and consumers are expected to treat that date as a hard stop for serving the item without further processing.
The distinction is especially important for food banks and pantries, which routinely receive surplus items close to their dates. Clear quality wording can reassure donors that they may safely contribute products that are near-or even slightly past-a “BEST if Used by” date, as long as the food has been properly handled. That, in turn, could divert more of the 2.5 billion meals’ worth of surplus food away from disposal and into recovery streams, supporting SB 1383’s mandate to rescue edible food that would otherwise be landfilled.
Implementation challenges and what comes next
Implementing AB 660 will require coordination across manufacturers, distributors, and retailers. Companies that sell into multiple states may need separate packaging for California or may choose to standardize nationally around the new phrases to avoid complexity. Smaller producers will have to update packaging artwork and possibly adjust production systems that currently print a variety of date phrases.
Enforcement will likely focus first on education and technical assistance, helping businesses understand which products require quality versus safety dates and how to format them. Over time, state agencies will be watching for measurable changes in disposal patterns. If standardized labels reduce premature discards and make it easier to donate safe surplus food, they could become a model for broader regional or national rules.
For now, California shoppers can expect a gradual transition as manufacturers phase in new packaging ahead of the 2026 deadline. When the change is fully in place, the jumble of date labels that once drove unnecessary food waste should give way to a simpler, clearer system designed to keep more edible food on plates and out of landfills.
