California Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed legislation creating a first-in-the-nation label for non-ultraprocessed foods, adding a new tool for consumers seeking clearer information about food products.
The voluntary certification program, established under AB 2244, is designed to make qualifying foods easier to identify through front-of-package labeling and strategic in-store placement.
The legislation is part of a broader package of health measures signed Sept. 28, including new sugar warnings on restaurant menus, nutrition standards for children’s meals at chain restaurants and restrictions on certain weight-loss and muscle-building supplements sold to minors.
The initiative builds on California’s previous efforts to define ultra-processed foods and phase them out of schools, extending the state’s focus on food transparency and access to healthier options.
As we previously reported in early September 2026, California’s AB 2244, "Non-Ultraprocessed Certified food standard," could give the flavor industry a reason to pay closer attention to how flavoring ingredients are treated under the state’s emerging framework for “non-ultraprocessed” foods. The legislation establishes a voluntary “Non-Ultraprocessed Certified” designation for foods that meet specified criteria, with eligibility tied in part to California’s existing statutory definition of an ultraprocessed food (UPF).
Before diving into the specifics, it's important to acknowledge that defining UPFs is challenging primarily because the current classification framework—most notably the widely used NOVA system—relies heavily on industrial processing methods and additive content rather than a precise, universally agreed-upon nutritional threshold. Because NOVA categorizes foods based on industrial formulation rather than strict chemical or nutrient profiles, it creates a gray area where nutrient-dense options like fortified whole-grain breads, plant-based milk alternatives and mass-produced yogurts are lumped into the same category as sodas, candy and hot dogs.
This broad brush confuses both consumers and policymakers: it penalizes minor functional processing (like adding emulsifiers, vitamins or flavor materials to healthy foods) and ignores that not all industrial processing is inherently bad.
Furthermore, isolated biological mechanisms, such as whether the harm stems from hyper-palatability, altered gut microbiomes or specific additives, remain difficult to decouple from overall diet quality in observational studies, making a clean, objective regulatory definition elusive.
For flavor companies, the key issue in the California legislation is the treatment of flavoring agents, adjuvants and flavor enhancers under the state's definition. These substances can contribute to a food being classified as ultraprocessed when they are present alongside specified nutritional or compositional characteristics, including thresholds for saturated fat, sodium or added sugar, or the presence of certain other listed substances. Importantly, the presence of a flavoring ingredient alone does not automatically make a food ultraprocessed.
The legislation also contains an important distinction for natural flavors. California’s UPF definition excludes spices and other natural seasonings and flavorings covered by the specified federal regulation, meaning that not all flavor ingredients will be treated equally under the framework.
AB 2244 therefore does not constitute a ban on flavors or flavor enhancers for Non-Ultraprocessed Certified products. Instead, it creates a potential market and formulation consideration for flavor suppliers and food manufacturers seeking the new certification. Products pursuing the designation will undergo review of their ingredient lists, making the classification and regulatory status of individual flavor ingredients increasingly relevant to product developers.
As consumers, retailers and policymakers increasingly scrutinize ultraprocessed foods, the way regulations distinguish between flavoring agents, flavor enhancers and natural flavorings could influence formulation decisions and the positioning of finished foods. AB 2244 offers an early indication of how flavor technology could become part of the broader conversation around what constitutes a “processed” or “non-ultraprocessed” food.
