Introduction

California now enforces two separate packaging laws that apply directly to food and beverage producers. SB 54 requires producers to register, report packaging data, and reduce single-use plastic packaging and food service ware over time, while SB 343 restricts when a product can carry a recyclability claim or the chasing arrows symbol. The two laws are connected, since SB 54 borrows SB 343’s criteria to judge category-level recyclability, but they still require separate compliance work at the individual product level.

Key Takeaways

• SB 54 already bans the sale of EPS food service ware in California because producers did not meet the required 25 percent recycling rate by January 1, 2025.
• SB 54’s federal preemption exclusion for food and agricultural packaging producers was tightened in the final regulations, now requiring a direct conflict with a mandatory USDA or FDA rule.
• SB 343 permits a recyclability claim if a product clears the 60/60 collection-and-sortation test, or alternatively if it has a demonstrated in-state recycling rate of at least 75 percent, both effective October 4, 2026.
• SB 343 applies based on manufacture date rather than sale date, so products manufactured before October 4, 2026 fall outside the restriction regardless of when they sell through.
• Both laws face active litigation. The SB 343 challenge, now backed by 21 trade associations, had its preliminary injunction hearing on June 3, 2026, and a ruling is still pending. Compliance obligations under both laws remain in effect while the cases proceed.

What Are SB 54 and SB 343, and Do They Both Apply to Food and Beverage Companies?

Both statutes reach food and beverage packaging, but they answer different questions.

• SB 54 (Plastic Pollution Prevention and Packaging Producer Responsibility Act): an extended producer responsibility program covering single-use packaging and food service ware. Covered material explicitly includes food and beverage packaging, cups, lids, and utensils.
• SB 343 (Truth in Recycling): governs whether a specific product or package can carry the chasing arrows symbol or a recyclability claim at all.
• The connection: SB 54 requires CalRecycle to apply SB 343’s criteria when scoring covered material categories as recyclable for SB 54 purposes. That category-level score does not, by itself, clear a specific product to use a recyclability claim under SB 343. A brand can be fully compliant on SB 54 reporting while still carrying a noncompliant recyclability claim under SB 343.

Covered Materials and the Producer Definition for F&B Brands

SB 54’s producer definition reaches most participants in a food and beverage supply chain, not only the name on the front label.

• Producer includes the brand owner, the manufacturer when it owns the brand, and the importer or distributor when the brand owner has no California presence.
• For co-packed products, the obligation to register and report typically follows the brand owner, not the facility that fills the package.
• For private label lines, the retailer that owns the brand is generally the responsible party, not the co-packer. Confirm this allocation directly with co-packers rather than assuming it.

Which Food and Beverage Packaging Is Exempt, and From Which Law?

Exemptions differ by statute, and a few categories are exempt from both.

• Exempt from SB 54: beverage containers under California’s bottle deposit program (CRV), infant formula, and certain medical nutrition products.
• Exempt from SB 343 as well: CRV-covered beverage containers are exempt from SB 343’s labeling restrictions too, so this is one of the few categories cleared on both fronts.
• Not exempt from either: standard food and beverage packaging, food service ware, and consumer product packaging outside these carved-out categories.
• Small producer exemption: available under $1 million in annual California gross sales, but registration with CalRecycle is still required to claim it, and the 2032 recyclability/compostability requirement still applies.

The Federal Preemption Carve-Out for Food and Agricultural Packaging Under SB 54

The final SB 54 regulations narrowed the federal preemption safe harbor for this sector specifically.

• Producers seeking a preemption-based exclusion must show an actual conflict between SB 54 and a mandatory rule, regulation, or guideline from USDA or FDA.
• A general assertion that food packaging is federally regulated is not sufficient on its own.
• This is worth flagging because food and beverage producers are more likely than most other packaged goods categories to have assumed a broad federal exemption applied.

What Are the Current SB 54 Compliance Deadlines for Producers?

The SB 54 calendar has moved from planning to active deadlines.

• May 1, 2026: permanent regulations took effect.
• June 1, 2026: deadline to register with the Circular Action Alliance, register independently with CalRecycle, or register and apply for the small producer exemption; CAA participants also owed 2023 baseline supply data.
• July 1, 2026: California baseline producer report due to CalRecycle.
• August 1, 2026 (expected): individual source reduction plans due.
• For co-packed products, confirm in writing which party has completed each step. A missed registration exposes the brand owner regardless of who filled the package.

EPS Food Service Ware Ban: An Already-Enforceable SB 54 Requirement

This is the one SB 54 obligation that is active law today, not a future milestone.

• EPS food service ware producers did not meet the required 25 percent recycling rate by January 1, 2025.
• As a result, selling, distributing, or importing EPS food service ware, including foam cups and takeout containers, into California is currently prohibited.
• Directly relevant to restaurant chains and quick-service brands still using foam service ware.

SB 343’s October 4, 2026 Deadline: What Recyclability Claims Are Still Allowed?

A recyclability claim is permitted through either of two paths, and both require documentation.

Path 1: the four-criteria test, all four required at once

• Collection and sortation: material collected by programs serving at least 60 percent of California’s population, sorted by facilities serving at least 60 percent of statewide programs.
• Basel Convention reclamation: sorted material must reach a reclaiming facility consistent with Basel Convention requirements. CalRecycle does not verify this itself, leaving companies to substantiate it with their own supply chain data.
• Design and performance: no coatings, laminates, adhesives, or attached components that would disqualify the material, evaluated at the SKU level against standards such as the APR Design Guide.
• Chemical restrictions: below specified thresholds for heavy metals and intentionally added PFAS.

Path 2: the 75 percent alternative

• A product or packaging with a demonstrated in-state recycling rate of at least 75 percent qualifies as recyclable regardless of the 60/60 collection and sortation test.

Either way

• Written records supporting the claim must be maintained under California’s recordkeeping statute, and that requirement is not challenged in the pending litigation, so it applies regardless of the case’s outcome.
• SB 343 applies by manufacture date, not sale date. Correctly dated inventory made before October 4, 2026 is not subject to the restriction even if it sells through afterward.

The SB 343 Litigation: Where the Case Actually Stands

This is a live case, and the status matters for how urgently to act.

• A coalition of 18 trade associations filed suit in March 2026 (California League of Food Producers, et al. v. Bonta, S.D. Cal.) on First Amendment and vagueness grounds. An amended complaint filed April 7, 2026 added three more associations, bringing the coalition to 21.
• Plaintiffs moved for a preliminary injunction in April 2026. The hearing was held June 3, 2026 before Judge William Q. Hayes.
• As of the most recent update available, no written ruling has been issued.
• Under the Supreme Court’s 2025 decision in Trump v. CASA, Inc., any relief is expected to protect only the plaintiff associations and their members, which makes trade association membership relevant to weighing options.
• The litigation does not pause the October 4, 2026 effective date. More than thirty private lawsuits have already cited SB 343’s standards under California’s Unfair Competition Law, False Advertising Law, and Consumers Legal Remedies Act.

Building a Combined SB 54 and SB 343 Compliance Roadmap for F&B Portfolios

Both laws draw on the same underlying packaging data, so one data foundation can support both.

• Build a SKU-level packaging inventory (material type, weight, covered material category) for every product sold into California, the same dataset SB 54 requires.
• Cross-reference that inventory against current packaging artwork, marketing materials, and websites to flag every existing recyclability claim ahead of the SB 343 deadline.
• For private label and co-packed lines, confirm in writing who holds SB 54 registration responsibility and who holds SB 343 claim substantiation responsibility. These do not always sit with the same party.
• For beverage brands, remember that CRV exemption from SB 54 does not automatically extend to non-CRV packaging in the same portfolio under SB 343.
• Review supplier and co-manufacturer agreements to assign documentation obligations and indemnification before either deadline passes.

Getting Ahead of Both Deadlines

SB 54 and SB 343 both come down to the same question for food and beverage producers: does the company have verified, SKU-level packaging and supply chain data it can stand behind. Producers that have not yet consolidated this data across co-packers, private label partners, and internal packaging teams should begin that work now, ahead of SB 54’s ongoing reporting deadlines and SB 343’s October 4, 2026 effective date. ASUENE’s carbon accounting and supplier data collection platform gives food and beverage companies one structured way to gather and verify this data, supporting SB 54 compliance and SB 343 claim substantiation from a single source of truth. Companies ready to start should begin a packaging and supplier data readiness assessment now.

Why Work with ASUENE Inc.?

ASUENE is a key player in carbon accounting, offering a comprehensive platform that measures, reduces, and reports emissions, including Scope 1-3. ASUENE serves over 50,000 clients worldwide, providing an all-in-one solution that integrates GHG accounting, ESG supply chain management, a Carbon Credit exchange platform, and third-party verification.

ASUENE supports companies in achieving net-zero goals through advanced technology, consulting services, and an extensive network.