Relating To Coffee Labeling.
HB48 amends Hawaii’s coffee-labeling law to clarify how roasted coffee, instant coffee, and ready-to-drink coffee beverages may be labeled or advertised when they contain Hawaii-grown and Hawaii-processed green coffee beans. The bill revises the existing statute to replace references to “Hawaii-processed” with “-processed” in key places, and it tightens the required identity statement on packaging for products made entirely or partly from Hawaii-grown and processed coffee. It also specifies how blends must disclose the percentage and origin of coffee components, including the option to use the term “Foreign-grown Coffee” for non-Hawaii coffee in a blend.
The measure further defines several terms used in the labeling rules, including “geographic origin,” “regional origin,” “per cent coffee by weight,” and “ready-to-drink coffee beverage.” In doing so, it distinguishes Hawaii coffee origins from coffee grown and processed in other world regions, and it clarifies that made-to-order beverages are not covered by the ready-to-drink definition. The bill is framed as a consumer-protection and industry-support measure intended to reduce confusion about foreign-grown coffee processed in Hawaii and to support Hawaii coffee growers.
If enacted, the bill would amend Section 486-120.6 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes, which governs labeling and advertising requirements for Hawaii-grown and processed coffee products. It would affect coffee producers, processors, packagers, and advertisers by requiring more specific front-panel identity statements and origin disclosures, while also preserving the ability to market products using Hawaii-related origin language when the coffee meets the statutory criteria. The bill’s effective date is delayed until July 1, 2050.
The overall sentiment reflected in the available voting history is favorable and noncontroversial. The bill passed the Senate Agriculture and Environment Committee 5-0 with amendments and then passed the Senate Commerce and Consumer Protection Committee 3-0 without further amendment. No committee transcripts were provided, but the unanimous votes suggest broad support for the bill’s clarification of labeling rules and its consumer-information goals.
The main point of contention addressed by the bill is the distinction between coffee that is grown and processed in Hawaii and coffee that is foreign-grown but processed in the state. The legislation appears designed to prevent misleading or confusing labels, especially in blends, by requiring clearer origin statements and by defining “regional origin” separately from Hawaii’s “geographic origin.” Any concern would likely come from how these labeling changes affect marketing flexibility for processors and importers, but the available record shows no recorded opposition.
HB48 would amend Hawaii Revised Statutes section 486-120.6 to revise coffee labeling and advertising requirements for roasted coffee, instant coffee, and ready-to-drink coffee beverages. It changes statutory terminology, adds and clarifies definitions, and requires more detailed disclosure of coffee origins and percentages on labels, including for blends containing both Hawaii-grown/processed and non-Hawaii coffee. The bill would directly affect coffee growers, processors, distributors, and retailers by imposing specific packaging and identity-statement rules for products sold in Hawaii.
The bill appears to have broad support and little visible opposition in committee. It passed both Senate committees unanimously, first with amendments and then unamended, indicating a generally positive reception to the bill’s consumer-protection and Hawaii coffee industry objectives. The available record suggests lawmakers viewed the measure as a clarification rather than a major policy shift.
The central issue underlying HB48 is how to label coffee that is foreign-grown but processed in Hawaii, and how to distinguish that from coffee that is both grown and processed in the state. Supporters appear to favor clearer origin disclosures to reduce consumer confusion and protect Hawaii-grown coffee branding. Potentially affected parties include coffee importers, processors, and marketers who may need to adjust packaging and advertising practices, but no explicit opposition or major dispute is reflected in the provided committee history.