Congress bans six common food dyes, overriding FDA approval without new safety review

What it does

This bill declares six common food color additives (Red No. 40, Yellow No. 5, Yellow No. 6, Green No. 3, Blue No. 1, Blue No. 2) and two others (Citrus Red No. 2, Orange B) unsafe and makes foods containing them illegal to sell, effective in two phases: December 31, 2025 for two additives and December 31, 2026 for the six major ones. The bill overrides the FDA's current approval of these additives, which are widely used in processed foods, beverages, and candies.

Why we flagged it

The bill functionally overrides FDA regulatory authority by legislatively deeming approved additives unsafe, bypassing the agency's scientific review process. This is a legislative override of executive regulatory judgment, not a new safety standard developed through FDA channels.

What the text implies

• The bill's 'substantially similar' language in definitions (1)(B) and (2)(B) creates regulatory uncertainty: manufacturers cannot know which future color additives will be deemed unsafe, potentially chilling innovation in food coloring.
• No transition period or compliance timeline is specified beyond the effective dates; manufacturers have ~18 months (for phase 1) and ~24 months (for phase 2) to reformulate products already in supply chains, risking shortages.
• The bill does not address imported foods or foods manufactured abroad; enforcement against foreign manufacturers may be difficult, creating competitive disadvantage for U.S. producers.
• No appropriation or funding mechanism is specified for FDA enforcement of the new adulteration standard; compliance monitoring and market surveillance costs fall on the agency without new resources.

Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.

Who it affects

Citizens may benefit from reduced synthetic dye consumption if health risks materialize, but face immediate disruption: reformulated foods may taste or look different, prices may rise during transition, and some products may disappear entirely. The bill imposes this change unilaterally without FDA re-evaluation or phase-in period for industry compliance, creating supply-chain shock.

Who stands to gain

• natural food colorant manufacturers (plant-based dyes, anthocyanins, spirulina)
• organic and clean-label food brands
• food reformulation consultants and ingredient suppliers

Named in the bill

FDA (Food and Drug Administration), Red No. 40, Yellow No. 5, Yellow No. 6, Green No. 3, Blue No. 1, Blue No. 2, Citrus Red No. 2, Orange B, Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, Section 721 (color additive certification), Section 402(c) (food adulteration)

Where it stands

4 cosponsors: 3 Republicans, 1 Democrats.

• Jun 4, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
• Jun 4, 2025 — Referred to House Committee on Energy and Commerce · Congress.gov: “Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce”

Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.

Money around this bill

2 lobbying clients named this bill on 2 disclosure filings across 1 quarter, Jun 2026 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $229,750 in lobbying spend. A filing names 24 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.

More lobbying clients named this bill than 41% of bills with at least one filing.

Anna Luna, the sponsor, reported $137,030 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.

• Consumer Healthcare Products Association — $199,750 on 1 filing
• Mondelez International, Inc. — $30,000 on 1 filing

Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 20, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.