New York Takes Aim at Self-GRAS: Mandatory Disclosure Law Poised to Reshape Food Ingredient Oversight

On April 21, 2026, the New York Assembly passed the Food Safety and Chemical Disclosure Act legislation that would establish a first-of-its-kind reporting regime for substances deemed “generally recognized as safe” (GRAS). While state laws have long prohibited the sale of adulterated or misbranded food, they have not required companies to submit GRAS determinations or otherwise disclose the basis for those conclusions at the state level. Although the bill still awaits action by the New York Governor, its passage by the Senate and Assembly signals a potential inflection point in food regulation and a broader shift toward increased transparency in food ingredient safety.

Specifically, the legislation would expand New York’s current regulatory framework by making it unlawful to sell or use a GRAS substance in food in the state unless a detailed report has been submitted to the New York Department of Agriculture and made publicly available. The required report would include extensive information regarding the ingredient, including its identity and method of manufacture, intended conditions of use, dietary exposure estimates, and a comprehensive safety narrative supporting the GRAS conclusion, as well as a discussion of any contrary or inconsistent data and supporting documentation. The legislation would take effect approximately 180 days after enactment, with phased implementation for certain provisions. Specifically, the GRAS reporting requirements are tied to the development and implementation of a public, state-maintained database and associated rulemaking. If enacted, New York would be the first state to require manufacturers to publicly disclose the scientific basis underlying GRAS determinations, rather than relying on the longstanding self-affirmation framework.

Currently, no state independently regulates GRAS determinations. Instead, GRAS is governed by the federal framework established under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Under that framework, companies may self-determine that a substance is GRAS without notifying the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or publicly disclosing the underlying data. FDA also administers a voluntary GRAS notification program, under which companies may submit a GRAS notice for review, though participation in that program is not required. While companies self-determine their GRAS status, FDA does still issue guidance describing best practices for supporting GRAS conclusions, including recommendations regarding the scientific data and information that should be evaluated and the qualifications and independence of experts involved in the review process.

Alongside New York’s proposed legislation, activity at both the federal and state levels suggests increasing scrutiny of the GRAS framework, although no effort to date has matched the scope of New York’s proposal. At the federal level, FDA has indicated that it is considering reforms to the GRAS program. In 2026, FDA announced plans to pursue rulemaking that would significantly revise the current framework. The proposed rule would amend the GRAS regulations in 21 C.F.R. Parts 170 and 570 to require the mandatory submission of GRAS notices for substances intended for use in human and animal food. It would also clarify that FDA will maintain and update a public-facing inventory of GRAS notices for substances subject to the requirement. To date, however, these efforts remain under consideration and have not been implemented.

At the state level, most activity has focused on banning or restricting specific food additives rather than regulating the GRAS determination process itself. A smaller number of states have begun to explore more direct oversight of GRAS. For example, proposed legislation in New Jersey would require limited reporting of certain GRAS determinations to state regulators, while proposals in California would restrict reliance on self-affirmed GRAS determinations that have not been submitted to FDA. These efforts, however, remain more limited in scope. New York’s bill would go further by establishing a comprehensive reporting and public disclosure regime, representing the most direct state-level intervention into the GRAS process to date.

New York’s proposed legislation raises significant considerations for entities across the food industry. It signals a shift toward transparency that has not historically been required in the development and use of food ingredients. Companies should be prepared to adapt to a regime in which GRAS determinations, and the data supporting them, may be subject to public disclosure and regulatory scrutiny. In anticipation of potential enactment, entities may wish to consider the following:

• Ingredient Manufacturers: Ingredient manufacturers should ensure that GRAS determinations are supported by robust, well-documented analyses, particularly for novel ingredients. Companies should also evaluate whether existing documentation is suitable for public disclosure, given that supporting data may be accessible to regulators, competitors, and consumers.
• Food Manufacturers: Food manufacturers should enhance supply chain diligence and confirm that GRAS substances used in their products are supported by appropriate documentation from suppliers. Companies should also assess whether ingredients are likely to be reported or exempt under the proposed framework and consider potential reformulation strategies for products sold in New York.
• Distributors and Retailers: Entities further downstream in the supply chain should be aware that the legislation applies broadly to the sale of food products in New York and may require additional assurances from suppliers regarding the compliance status of ingredients used in products offered for sale.

We recommend that companies continue to closely monitor developments related to the New York legislation, as well as evolving federal and state activity in this area. Companies should also consider evaluating their current GRAS inventories, supporting documentation, and regulatory strategies in anticipation of potential changes. As scrutiny of food ingredient safety continues to increase, proactive planning may help mitigate compliance risks and position companies to respond effectively to a shifting regulatory landscape.

© Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP 2026 All Rights Reserved. This Advisory is intended to be a general summary of the law and does not constitute legal advice. You should consult with counsel to determine applicable legal requirements in a specific fact situation.