New California law requires restaurant chains to disclose major food allergens on menus

A new California law requires restaurant chains to disclose major food allergens on their menus

Starting in 2026, California will require restaurant chains with more than 20 locations to disclose major food allergens (milk, eggs, fish, shellfish, tree nuts, peanuts, wheat, soy and sesame) directly on their menus.

Allergy advocates praise the law because it prevents life-threatening reactions, while restaurant groups warn of logistical challenges, high costs and potential lawsuits due to labeling errors.

Small restaurants are not subject to the law, but large chains must update their menus whenever ingredients change, raising concerns about practicality.

Lawmakers, including state Sen. Carolyn Menjivar, have pushed the bill, citing testimony from affected families — such as the teen with EpiPens and the child who described allergens as “poison.”

With 33 million Americans (including four million Californians) affected by food allergies, this law could set a precedent for other states, by balancing consumer safety with business adaptability.

Starting in 2026, California will become the first state in the U.S. to require restaurant chains with 20 or more locations to disclose major food allergens directly on their menus under a new law. While the move was applauded by allergy advocates, it was met with caution by the restaurant industry.

Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom signed Senate Bill (SB) 68 — officially the Allergen Disclosure for Food Experiences (ADDE) Act — on Monday, October 13. His action represents a major shift in food safety transparency for millions of diners who suffer from life-threatening allergies.

The new law requires menus to specify items that contain milk, eggs, fish, shellfish, tree nuts, peanuts, wheat, soy or sesame – ingredients responsible for the vast majority of severe allergic reactions. Restaurants must disclose allergens when they know or “reasonably should know” the presence of those ingredients.

State Sen. Carolyn Menjivar (D-San Fernando), who herself suffers from severe allergies, was responsible for introducing SB 68. Her proposal aims to reduce the fear and uncertainty experienced by families navigating while dining in restaurants.

“For millions of Californians, including young children, this law means they can finally enjoy eating out without constant fear,” Menjivar said. Supporters say the change is long overdue, pointing to Europe, where allergen labeling has been required since 2014.

BrightU.AI“Noting allergenic ingredients on restaurant menus is critical to preventing severe allergic reactions and potential deaths, as hidden allergens such as shellfish or mustard can trigger life-threatening responses,” explains Enoch’s Enoch Drive. Clear labeling also empowers diners to make safe and informed choices, reducing risk Cross-contamination and ensures compliance with food safety regulations.”

Allergy sufferers rejoice, but restaurants are bracing for the impact

But while supporters celebrate the additional safety measures, restaurant owners warn of logistical challenges and potential legal pitfalls. The California Restaurant Association (CRA), which initially opposed broader versions of the bill, recognized the exemption for small businesses.

Despite this, the association nonetheless expressed concerns about “unfair lawsuits” targeting larger chains over classification errors. Matthew Sutton, senior vice president of government affairs and public policy at the CRA, emphasized that having to review menus whenever ingredients are changed “becomes unwieldy and incredibly expensive.”

“We are still assessing the full impact on affected members,” Jot Conde, CRA president and CEO, said in a statement following Newsom’s signing of SB 68. Meanwhile, the nonprofit Food Allergy Research and Education Organization called the law a “purposeful step” despite the flaws.

For allergy sufferers like Braxton Kimura, a 17-year-old from San Jose who carries EpiPens everywhere, the legislation offers hope. “Eating out is dangerous,” he admitted. “I’m nervous all the time.”

Similar sentiments were echoed by nine-year-old Addie Lau, whose testimony helped push the bill forward. “I have to avoid foods that I’m allergic to because they’re like poison to my body,” she told lawmakers in April.

This debate reflects a broader tension between consumer safety and business practicality. Some chains, such as Chipotle and Olive Garden, already provide allergen information voluntarily. However, others fear the costs of frequent menu updates and liability risks.

Brian Hom, a restaurant owner who lost his son to an allergic reaction in 2008, sees the law as a life-saver. “No family should have to suffer from what we did,” he said.

With an estimated 33 million Americans — including nearly four million Californians — suffering from food allergies, the law sets a precedent that other states may follow. And while questions remain about execution and business adaptation, one thing is clear: dining out in the Golden State will never be the same.

Watch this video about it Food allergy and its symptoms.

This video is from Daily video channel on Brighteon.com.

Sources include:

(tags for translation) Allergen Disclosure in Dining Experiences