Restriction on single use food service items.
HB 1302 would prohibit restaurants and third-party food delivery services from automatically providing plastic single-use food service items to customers. Covered items include plastic cutlery, beverage stirrers, splash sticks, and certain plastic-wrapped napkins or containers; condiment packets are treated separately. Under the bill, these items could only be provided when a customer explicitly requests them, and restaurants and delivery platforms would have to make that request option available through phone, internet, and mobile-app ordering. The bill also bars employees from asking why the customer wants the item.
The bill further directs the Indiana State Department to create a public education program, publish compliance requirements, and operate a public complaint website. It establishes the citizens education and complaint fund to pay for education, complaint processing, and enforcement, with civil penalties deposited into the fund. Enforcement authority includes injunctive relief, compliance orders, and civil penalties for knowing or intentional violations, with a temporary warning-only period for violations occurring before July 1, 2026. The bill is effective July 1, 2025, and includes a transition period allowing existing plastic supplies to be used up before the ban fully applies.
HB 1302 would add a new chapter to Indiana Code governing restaurant and food-delivery packaging practices and would amend definitional provisions in Title 16 to support that chapter. It would create new compliance obligations for restaurants and third-party food delivery services, restrict the routine distribution of plastic single-use food service items, and require customer opt-in for certain disposable items. It also gives the State Department new administrative and enforcement responsibilities and creates a dedicated fund supported by civil penalties, with a continuing appropriation for implementation and enforcement.
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes in the provided materials, the bill appears to be framed as a public-health and waste-reduction measure rather than a punitive one, with an emphasis on consumer choice and education. The structure of the bill suggests an effort to ease implementation through a delayed penalty period, warning notices, and a phaseout of existing inventory. No direct sentiment from legislators or stakeholders is available in the provided record, so there is no documented support or opposition to characterize beyond the bill’s policy design.
The main points of contention likely concern environmental and operational burdens on restaurants and delivery services versus the bill’s goals of reducing plastic waste and unnecessary disposable items. Businesses may object to the cost of compliance, menu/order-system changes, staff training, and the prohibition on bundled utensils or unsolicited items. Supporters would likely emphasize litter reduction, sustainability, and limiting unnecessary plastic use. The bill also raises potential enforcement concerns, including the complaint website, civil penalties, and the role of the State Department in monitoring compliance.