Mandatory 'High In' Labels Coming to Food Fronts: New Rules Target Sugar, Salt, and Artificial Sweeteners

If you’ve ever felt like you need a nutrition degree just to decipher a food label, Congress might be throwing you a lifeline. The Transparency, Readability, Understandability, Truth, and Helpfulness in Labeling Act—or the TRUTH in Labeling Act—is designed to cut through the noise and put clear, simple warnings right on the front of most food packages.

The 'High In' Alert: What’s Changing at the Grocery Store

This bill essentially mandates a major overhaul of how nutritional warnings are displayed. Within 180 days of this law passing, the Secretary of Health and Human Services must finalize a rule requiring specific labels on the main display panel of most food products. If a product crosses a certain threshold for added sugars, sodium, or saturated fat, it must carry a clear warning that says “High in” followed by a noticeable exclamation point icon. Think of it as a quick, unmistakable stop sign for ingredients that public health experts agree Americans are eating too much of. The goal here is simple: make it easier for busy people—the parent rushing through the store, the worker grabbing a quick lunch—to make healthier choices without having to flip the package over and do math on the fly.

Targeting Sweeteners, Especially for Kids

One of the most interesting parts of the TRUTH Act focuses on non-nutritive sweeteners, often called artificial sweeteners. The bill notes that when companies try to lower sugar counts, they often just swap in artificial sweeteners instead. To counter this, if a food contains these sweeteners, the front label must also include a statement that they are not recommended for children. This warning is particularly strict for foods marketed to infants up to 12 months and children aged 1 through 4 years (Section 3). This provision directly addresses a finding that when both high sugar and artificial sweetener disclosure are required, companies tend to reduce both, leading to genuinely healthier products.

The Real-World Impact: Who Pays and Who Benefits?

For consumers, the benefit is immediate clarity. You won't have to hunt for hidden salt or sugar; the warning will be right there. This is a huge win for those managing conditions like high blood pressure or diabetes, or simply trying to cut down on processed foods. However, this change is a massive undertaking for food manufacturers and distributors. They are the ones who must comply with the new labeling requirements and the tight 180-day deadline. This means potentially redesigning thousands of product labels, which could lead to increased operational costs. While the bill’s proponents argue the public health benefits outweigh these costs, it’s fair to expect that some of these compliance expenses might eventually trickle down to consumers in the form of slightly higher prices.

The Policy Fine Print: Setting the Standards

To make these warnings accurate, the Secretary has to set the specific “high in” thresholds based on recommended Daily Values for different groups: general adults, and separate values for kids 1 to 3 years old, and infants up to 12 months (Section 3). This ensures that a product considered high in sugar for a toddler is judged by a different standard than one for an adult. The bill also gives the Secretary the green light to update the rules for making a “low sodium” claim, potentially lowering the limit to 115 milligrams, keeping these marketing claims aligned with current nutrition science. The challenge here is administrative: the agency has to move fast to finalize these rules and define those specific Daily Values, and the bill allows them to issue the rule even if the infant/toddler values aren't finalized yet, which might mean a brief period where the standards for the youngest consumers are less precise until they catch up.