“Legal Battle Over Plant-Based Labeling: Tofurky and Industry Advocates Challenge State Regulations Amid Surge in Alternative Protein Market”
Tofurky and the other plaintiffs involved in the Missouri lawsuit argue that these state-level regulations are not aimed at reducing consumer confusion regarding plant-based products. They contend that existing laws already prohibit misleading labeling and that state legislatures are simply catering to cattle producers and processors who aim to limit competition from plant-based alternatives. The conventional meat industry has valid reasons for concern. Recent data from Swiss investment firm UBS indicates that the market for plant-based protein and meat alternatives could surge from $4.6 billion in 2018 to $85 billion by 2030. The Good Food Institute reported a 17% increase in U.S. retail sales of plant-based foods meant to replace animal products, surpassing $3.7 billion in 2018.
The plant-based alternatives segment has several advantages. As consumers increasingly gravitate towards healthier diets, new product launches offer more variety, and concerns about the environment and animal welfare rise, more individuals are opting for plant-based egg, dairy, and meat products over conventional animal-sourced items. Proponents of these state labeling laws assert that they are merely ensuring that consumers understand they are not purchasing real meat when they buy items labeled with terms such as “sausage,” “hot dog,” or “roast,” which some plant-based manufacturers employ. Arkansas Rep. David Hillman, who sponsored the bill in the state’s House of Representatives, stated that Tofurky and other plant-based food producers are welcome to sell their products as long as they are accurately labeled. “You can’t sell a Chevy and call it a Cadillac,” he told NBC News.
Travis Justice, chief economist for the Arkansas Farm Bureau, described the law as a clarification to prevent confusion between non-meat items and actual meat. He pointed out that the labeling dispute mirrors the situation surrounding dairy-based milk and non-dairy alternatives such as almond and soy beverages labeled as “milk.” “We’re trying to prevent some of the connotations that they’ve gone through, with the meat industry,” Justice explained to the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. Thus far, manufacturers of plant-based meat alternatives and their advocates appear ready to challenge these labeling laws in court. However, it remains uncertain how long these legal battles will last or how successful they will be.
Lawyers for Tofurky, the Good Food Institute, the Animal Legal Defense Fund, and the American Civil Liberties Union of Missouri have been engaged in confidential settlement discussions for several months. According to court documents, the parties have reached an impasse and wish to resume litigation. Such disputes are likely to persist since numerous states have enacted laws that restrict meat-like terminology on plant-based or cell-cultured food products, as noted by The Good Food Institute. These include states like Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado, Indiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Virginia, and Wyoming.
The Arkansas law stands out from the others as it also prohibits terms like “almond milk” and “cauliflower rice” because they do not contain dairy or rice. This could lead to further legal challenges from producers of plant-based beverages and other directly affected companies. Although these laws also impact their businesses, trendy manufacturers like Impossible Foods and Beyond Meat have not joined any of the legal challenges. For now, they might prefer to allocate their resources towards research and development, as well as expanding their products into new markets, rather than engaging in legal battles. Their products are primarily aimed at carnivores, which may influence a distinct strategic approach.
As state-level legal challenges unfold, there may be growing pressure on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and Congress to create national labeling standards concerning plant-based meat alternatives. Some legal analysts argue that this is where the conversation should appropriately take place, but it seems unlikely that the issue will be resolved in the near future. Additionally, it’s important for consumers to know that many plant-based products can be fortified with essential nutrients, such as vitamin D with calcium citrate, making them viable alternatives to traditional meat and dairy products while addressing dietary needs.
