Requires manufacturers of kratom products within the state to have a warning label that the product has not been approved by the federal food and drug administration and the products' side effects; prohibits labeling of kratom products as all natural.
Summary
This bill would add a new section to the General Business Law regulating the labeling of kratom products sold or delivered in New York. Beginning one year after enactment, manufacturers would be required to place a conspicuous warning on each package stating that the product has not been approved by the FDA and listing specified side effects, including nausea, agitation, hallucinations, difficulty breathing, liver damage, and death. The warning must be at least 12-point type and printed in a color that contrasts with the package.
The bill also prohibits kratom products from being advertised or packaged in a way that suggests they are "all natural." It defines kratom for purposes of the law as Mitragyna speciosa and products derived from its leaves marketed as herbal supplements. Manufacturers that violate the section would face civil penalties of up to $500 for a first violation and up to $1,000 for subsequent violations.
Impact
The bill would create a new consumer-protection labeling requirement for kratom manufacturers operating in New York and would add enforcement authority through civil penalties under the General Business Law. It would affect product packaging, advertising, and marketing claims for kratom products, and would likely require manufacturers, distributors, and retailers to revise labels and promotional materials to comply with the warning and anti-misbranding provisions.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and available context, the measure appears to be framed as a public-health and consumer-warning bill rather than a prohibition on kratom sales. There are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, so no formal legislative debate or vote-based sentiment can be identified. The overall tone of the bill is precautionary, emphasizing FDA non-approval and potential health risks.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely to be whether kratom should be treated as a product warranting strong warning labels versus a lawful herbal supplement that some consumers use for pain relief or other self-treatment purposes. The prohibition on describing kratom as "all natural" may also be disputed by manufacturers or advocates who view that language as accurate marketing. Any debate would likely center on consumer protection and public health concerns on one side, and concerns about overwarning, stigmatizing the product, or restricting commercial speech on the other.
Same As
Requires manufacturers of kratom products within the state to have a warning label that the product has not been approved by the federal food and drug administration and the products' side effects; prohibits labeling of kratom products as all natural.
Requires manufacturers of kratom products within the state to have a warning label that the product has not been approved by the federal food and drug administration and the products' side effects; prohibits labeling of kratom products as all natural.
Requires certain kratom products to include a warning label with disclosures including, but not limited to, that kratom may be addictive and to keep it out of reach of children.
Requires certain kratom products to include a warning label with disclosures including, but not limited to, that kratom may be addictive and to keep it out of reach of children.