Iowa lawmakers recently approved a bill requiring precise labeling on plant-based and lab-grown meat and egg alternatives. The bill awaits Governor Kim Reynolds’ final signature.  

Understanding Senate File 2391: The Meat Integrity Act

Senate File 2391, known as the “Meat Integrity Act,” states that all labels on meat or egg alternatives in Iowa stores must display qualifying phrases such as “meatless” or “imitation.” The bill aims to ensure transparency and protect Iowa farmers from unfair competition from the plant-based industry. Senator Dawn Driscoll (R-Williamsburg) stated, “It is my utmost priority to advance this bill for Iowa’s livestock producers.” 

Legislative Debate and Concerns

The bill initially passed unanimously but only passed 33-12 the second time. The 12 voters who switched did so because lawmakers added language that could limit choices for schools and universities looking to purchase meat and egg alternatives for their students. Schools would not be allowed to buy products “deemed to be mislabeled.”

Senator Herman Quirmbach (D-Ames) said, “The original concept of the bill was a fine one. If we could’ve kept it a clean bill, I’d have been happy to see that go into law. I can’t support this version.” This updated version could not only limit which plant-based meat and egg alternatives schools and universities can offer their students. It could also limit options for consumers who are reliant on SNAP benefits.  

The Fair and Accurate Ingredient Representation on Labels Act 

Iowa is not the only state to consider laws requiring qualifying phrases on plant-based meat, egg alternatives, or cell-based/lab-grown alternatives. The Fair and Accurate Ingredient Representation (FAIR) on Labels Act of 2024 also focuses on labeling requirements for plant-based or cell-cultured meat alternatives.  

Introduced by Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan) and Rep. Mark Alford (R-Mo.), this bill, like others, requires specific terms to appear on alternative meat and egg products. Phrases such as “imitation,” “cell cultured,” “imitation meat,” “imitation poultry,” or “lab grown” must be used on all plant-based and lab-cultured foods. Labels also require a disclaimer stating that the product does not contain meat or poultry.  

Though transparency in food labeling is said to be the goal, specifically on products that resemble meat and poultry, many see this as one more attempt to sidetrack competition for the meat industry.  

Case Study: Louisiana’s Plant-Based Labeling Laws and Tofurky 

Another instance of proposed bills to restrict or control labeling on plant-based or cell-cultured foods occurred in Louisiana. Louisiana passed a law in October 2020 banning the use of words like “burger” or “sausage” on plant-based products, even if they attached qualifiers like “meatless” or “vegan.” This attempt to curb competition from the plant-based sector suggests that consumers get confused by terms like “plant-based burger” and “meatless sausage.”

The truth is that consumers are intelligent enough to see the difference between plant-based and meat-based products. Laura Braden of The Good Food Institute stated, “Louisiana consumers deserve better than being patronized by lawmakers who want to control what they buy. Consumers are not confusing veggie burgers for beef burgers when labels already indicate the products are plant-based, meatless, vegetarian, or vegan, and it insults their intelligence to suggest otherwise.”  

Tofurky’s Legal Battle: A Victory for Plant-Based Labeling

Tofurky, Animal Legal Defense Fund (ALDF), and The Good Food Institute (GFI) responded to the new legislation with a lawsuit stating the bill infringed on First Amendment rights. After a lengthy legal process, courts ruled in Tofurky’s favor and stopped enforcing the law in March 2022. President and CEO of Tofurky, Jaime Athos, noted, “The law was an obvious attempt to give an unfair advantage to animal agriculture interests by stifling the growth of plant-based food sales, and this ruling serves as a warning to other state legislatures who may forget that they are elected to serve the needs of their constituents, not those of corporate special interests.”  

The Importance of Transparency in Food Labeling

Transparency in labeling is important for consumers when making informed choices about the food they purchase. Many laws are in place to protect consumers from false claims or advertising on food products and more. However, most plant-based brands already have proper packaging terminology, so these new laws are not strictly necessary. It is reasonable to create guidelines concerning newly developed food products.

Still, advocates of plant-based foods feel that such restrictive bills are solely in place to limit competition for the meat industry.

Missouri State Senator, Sandy Crawford, seems to confirm this point with her statement, “We wanted to protect our cattlemen in Missouri and protect our beef brand.” 

Corporate and Consumer Interests in Plant-Based Labeling

Numerous laws already prohibit companies from trying to pass their food items off as something they are not. The same holds for drugs and cosmetics. However, using these laws against companies producing plant-based products has not been necessary because the consumer confusion suggested by these laws does not exist. Amanda Howell, senior staff attorney for the Animal Legal Defense Fund, stated, “If consumers were actually confused, we would have seen that in the decades these products have been on the shelves.”  

Future of Plant-Based Food Labeling Laws

Many people point out that it is not in any plant-based company’s interest to attempt to pass off their plant-based products as meat or dairy-based. These companies aim to provide alternatives for those who do not wish to consume meat or dairy products.

“Products like ours have required people to seek them out. They generally pay a little bit more because plant-based proteins are not subsidized the way animal proteins are,” says Tofurky CEO Jaime Athos. “People seek out plant-based and so we’re proud to say plant-based on our products.”

In addition, Howell speculates that replacing words like “burger,” “butter,” or “hot dog” could potentially lead to even greater confusion. Words like “veggie disks” or “cultured soy spread” are not exactly a clear representation of what is contained in the packaging.  

The Path Forward for Plant-Based Labeling

Advocacy groups continue to challenge the laws in many states even though most do not enforce them. Enforcing these laws could be costly for plant-based companies to comply with these strict requirements. We can only wait and watch in hopes that the efforts of advocate groups will curtail these unfair laws.

Howell said, “We have this situation where consumers are trying to do better. Instead of supporting that and supporting products that have a smaller carbon footprint and are healthier for people, instead of doing that for the citizens of these states, they’re instead throwing wrenches and trying to hamstring these producers at the behest of the animal ag industry.”