Chemical Additives in Food Products:
HB 595 would create a new section of Florida Statutes prohibiting food establishments, beginning January 1, 2028, from manufacturing, selling, or distributing food containing certain chemical additives. The listed additives include brominated vegetable oil, potassium bromate, propylparaben, Red Dye 3, Blue Dye 1, Yellow Dye 5, benzidine, butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA), and butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT). The bill is framed as a food-safety and consumer-protection measure aimed at removing specified additives from the food supply.
The bill also establishes enforcement penalties for violations. A first violation would be subject to a Class II administrative fine under existing Florida law, and second or subsequent violations would be subject to a Class III administrative fine. The act would take effect July 1, 2025, even though the substantive prohibition would not begin until 2028, giving affected businesses a transition period to reformulate products or change sourcing practices.
HB 595 would add a new statutory restriction in chapter 500, Florida Statutes, governing food establishments and the ingredients they may use in products sold or distributed in Florida. It would create compliance obligations for manufacturers, sellers, and distributors of food products, and it would authorize administrative penalties under s. 570.971 for violations. The bill would likely affect food manufacturers, retailers, distributors, and suppliers that use the listed additives in products sold in Florida.
The available context suggests limited formal debate in the record provided, but the bill’s subject matter indicates a generally consumer-protection-oriented approach focused on restricting certain additives in food. There were no recorded votes or committee transcripts included, and the bill ultimately died in the Industries & Professional Activities Subcommittee on June 16, 2025. That outcome suggests the measure did not advance, but the provided materials do not show explicit support or opposition statements from legislators.
The main point of contention is likely the scope and practicality of banning a defined list of additives in food products sold in Florida. Potential concerns would include compliance costs, reformulation timelines, supply-chain impacts, and whether the state should regulate ingredients already permitted in other markets or under federal oversight. Supporters would likely emphasize consumer health and ingredient safety, while opponents would likely focus on regulatory burden and implementation challenges. No specific named opponents or supporters are identified in the provided record.