Policy Watch Newsletter, September 2026

Import Restrictions Replace Tariffs as Trade War Escalates
President Donald Trump has signed proclamations banning a range of Canadian products outright, rather than simply taxing them. The bans cover whey products, molasses, non-alcoholic beer, a slate of alcoholic beverages, and larger motorcycles and mopeds. The ban takes effect on September 29 and largely replaces the 50% tariffs previously imposed on those goods.

The move capped weeks of escalation. Trade talks between the two countries collapsed on August 21, with U.S. and Canadian officials each blaming the other for last-minute demands. In response, Trump imposed 50% tariffs on roughly $20bn worth of Canadian goods — including wine, cement and hockey sticks — effective Aug. 22. Canada retaliated on September 8 with its own tariffs of 15% to 50% on about CA$27.6 billion of U.S. goods, hitting steel, aluminum, dairy, appliances, agricultural equipment, pulp and paper, electronics, furniture and clothing. Trump has separately said tariffs on Canadian cars and steel will rise from 25% to 50% starting January 1, 2027.

New ‘Forced Labor’ Tariffs Hit Sixty Trading Partners
A 10% global tariff the Trump administration imposed under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 expired July 24 — the maximum 150 days allowed without congressional extension — and was immediately replaced by new Section 301 tariffs of 10% to 12.5% on 60 trading partners. The administration says the tariffs are justified because those countries have failed to adequately enforce bans on imports made with forced labor.

This is the White House's third attempt at broad, worldwide tariffs. The first, based on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, was struck down by the Supreme Court in a 6-3 ruling in February. Trump then turned to Section 122 before it expired. This marks the first time Section 301 — a statute historically used against individual countries in specific disputes — has been used to justify tariffs this broad.

Trump Fast-Tracks Country-of-Origin Labels for Beef
Starting on September 1 and lasting for 90 days, the Trump administration is allowing 661 million pounds of discounted foreign ground beef and lean beef trimmings to enter the U.S. food supply free of tariffs. The beef is expected to sell for about 25% less than current prices.  The proclamation allowing the discounted beef does not name the specific countries of origin, though Trump has said Argentina, Brazil and other South and Central American nations are expected to supply it.  

Country-of-origin labels are not currently required on meat in the U.S., but a September 4 executive order directed the USDA to fast-track a mandatory country-of-origin label for beef. The agency has until December to finalize the rule.

Investigators Seek Pricing Data From Leading Grocers
The Department of Justice has expanded its antitrust investigation into the meatpacking industry. In July, the DOJ demanded six years of pricing data from Amazon, Costco, Walmart, Albertsons Cos., Kroger Co., the U.S. unit of Koninklijke Ahold Delhaize NV, Publix Super Markets Inc. and Aldi Inc.

In letters to the grocers, the DOJ asked for details on beef purchasing strategy, retail pricing, profit margins and market analysis. The Justice Department first announced the investigation in May amid soaring beef prices. Such investigations are usually conducted privately, but this one was made public at President Trump's request.

FDA Proposes Overhaul of "Generally Recognized as Safe" Rules
A proposed rule overhauling the Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) framework is open for public comment through Dec. 9. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. released the FDA’s  plan August 10 to change how food substances are identified as GRAS.

Under the proposal, manufacturers would have one year after the rule takes effect to notify the FDA of ingredients already in use. New ingredients would have to be submitted to the FDA for review, including the basis on which a company determined the ingredient was safe. The FDA would conduct an initial compliance review within 45 days, followed by a more thorough review within 180 days — though manufacturers would not need to wait for that review to conclude before using the ingredient.

Previously, manufacturers could self-certify ingredients without government oversight. Some exceptions apply: ingredients already covered by an FDA "no questions" letter would not need to be resubmitted.

Industry Awaits Details of MAHA-Driven Standard
A federal definition of ultra-processed foods has advanced to the White House for review. The definition, sought as part of the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) agenda, is intended to establish a uniform federal standard for what constitutes ultra-processed foods, which are considered over-engineered and potentially linked to obesity and chronic disease in the U.S.

Details haven't been released, but an FDA press release says the definition has been written and is under White House review. The FDA and USDA held a comment period that closed last October to gather input. Secretary Kennedy has continued lobbying for a definition to guide consumer education.

White House Health Adviser Awaits Senate Confirmation
President Trump nominated Dr. Heidi Overton on August 19 to be the next FDA commissioner. Overton serves in the White House Domestic Policy Council and has advised the president on health policy. Her nomination requires Senate confirmation. Kyle Diamantas has served as the agency's acting head since Dr. Marty Makary resigned in May.

Agency Fast-Tracks Petitions for Plant-Based Dyes
The FDA received three new color additive petitions in August:

From GNT USA: a safflower-based yellow color concentrate. From the Gardenia Blue Interest Group: a petition for broader use of blue extract. From the International Association of Color Manufacturers: requests for new applications of acetone-extracted carrot oil, paprika oleoresin (orange-red), turmeric oleoresin (golden yellow) and annatto extract (deep yellow and orange).

The colorings are seen as potential replacements for synthetic dyes. The FDA is prioritizing the petitions and speeding up the approval process, which could conclude within weeks.

Yellow Oleander Now Found in 25 Products
In August the FDA added three products to its warning list of items found to contain the toxic plant yellow oleander, which is native to Mexico and Central America. The ingredient turned up in botanical weight-loss products; two of them, D Magic Plus and B. Magi, also contain other drug ingredients that can cause life-threatening reactions. The warning list now covers 25 products available in the U.S. through third-party platforms including Etsy and Amazon.

Walmart's Great Value Berries Added to List
On September 2, the FDA expanded its recall of frozen blueberries suspected of E. coli contamination to include one lot of Walmart's Great Value brand berry blends, with a best-by date of February 2028, sold in 26 states. In July, Publix recalled all GreenWise-brand organic blueberries from eight states.

12,883 Sickened by Tainted Iceberg Lettuce
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention declared the iceberg lettuce outbreak over as of September 11, after confirming that all recalled packages — with best-by dates no later than August 2 — were off the market.

The lettuce, sourced from Taylor Farms de Mexico, was contaminated with the parasite Cyclospora and sickened at least 12,883 people across 21 states, with at least 570 hospitalizations and two deaths. The FDA is continuing its investigation into the outbreak's cause.

A new FDA webpage,  “Post-Outbreak Response Activities: Multistate Outbreaks of Cyclospora Illnesses," will track prevention efforts. The agency is also encouraging industry collaboration on a prevention-focused framework, including a letter to the industry calling for cooperation across the supply chain.

New Rules on Ready-to-Eat Items Replace 2008 Standards
The FDA has issued final, non-binding guidance for fresh-cut and ready-to-eat produce to help manufacturers avoid contamination risks.  The guidance, released in August, applies to fresh fruits and vegetables that have been cut or sliced but won't undergo further processing such as freezing or cooking, and it replaces the agency's 2008 recommendations.

Front-of-Package Warnings and Marketing Bans in Play
Congress is moving on two food-labeling measures: the reintroduced Food Labeling Modernization Act (FLMA) of 2026 and the new Childhood Diabetes Reduction Act of 2026 (S.5026).

The Childhood Diabetes Reduction Act, introduced July 16, would require bold front-of-package warnings on sugar-sweetened beverages and foods, products with high-intensity or non-sugar sweeteners, ultra-processed foods with industrial additives, and items exceeding thresholds for added sugar, saturated fat or sodium. It would also ban advertising junk food to children under 13, direct the National Institutes of Health to study the health risks of ultra-processed foods, and task the CDC to establish a national caregiver education campaign. The bill has cleared committee but won't reach the Senate floor unless the majority leader schedules a vote.

The Food Labeling Modernization Act, introduced July 29 in the Senate, would require front-of-package warnings for foods high in added sugars, sodium and saturated fat with simple "low," "medium" or "high" descriptors. It also calls for a federal definition of ultra-processed foods, stronger disclosure of gluten and caffeine, restrictions on misleading "healthy" claims, and penalties of up to $10,000 a day for noncompliance — provisions that parallel the FDA's own front-of-package labeling efforts. Companion legislation was previously introduced in the House of Representatives. The bill remains in committee in both chambers; it was first proposed in 2013 and has been reintroduced several times since with modifications.

‘Truth in Labeling Act’ Targets Chasing-Arrows Confusion
Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., and Rep. Lou Correa, D-Calif., introduced the bicameral The Truth in Labeling Act of 2026 on August 6, aiming to set national definitions for "recyclable," "compostable," "refillable" and "reusable." Sponsors say the bill responds to confusion over "chasing arrows" recycling symbols and outdated environmental marketing guidance. Rather than preempting state law, the bill would largely preserve existing state rules while adding federal standards as a baseline.

A similar California law was set to take effect in October before a federal judge issued a preliminary injunction blocking it, after industry groups argued it infringed free speech

Judge Rejects Retailer’s Bid to Dismiss, Move Case to California
The lawsuit accusing Trader Joe's of copying J.M. Smucker's Uncrustables sandwiches will proceed after a U.S. District Court judge in Ohio denied the retailer's motion to dismiss on August 28. The judge also declined to move the case to California where Trader Joe's is headquartered. The case now enters discovery where Smucker's attorneys will seek internal documents, emails and research in an effort to show Trader Joe's intentionally copied the sandwich's trademarked design.

State Narrows Damage Request to $2.2 Billion at Closing
Arguments in the bench trial in Washington state's case against Albertsons and its Safeway subsidiary have concluded. The state accused the grocers of fueling the opioid epidemic by failing to investigate or report suspicious prescriptions, ignoring Drug Enforcement Administration warnings, and filling more than 6.5 million prescriptions the state considered suspicious.

In April, Albertsons agreed to pay $774 million in a nationwide settlement, but Washington opted out to pursue its own case. During the trial, which began July 13, an expert estimated the cost of abating the state's opioid harms at $44.4 billion; at closing arguments on September 14, however, the state asked to be awarded $2.2 billion. Attorneys for Albertsons and Safeway argued that Washington law requires pharmacists to fill valid prescriptions.

Disputed Items Diminished as Case Continues
Lululemon's lawsuit accusing Costco of copying its designs, filed in June 2025 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, has been narrowed through a series of settlements reached since February. Several disputed items — including Kirkland-brand pants and a Spyder-brand jacket — have been resolved, leaving the Hi-Tec Men's Scuba Full Zip among the items still being litigated. Lululemon argues the item's color names too closely echo its own. Settlement details in the resolved claims have not been made public.

Agency Weighs Middle Ground on Personalized Pricing Rules
The Federal Trade Commission is seeking public comment on a proposed enforcement policy targeting surveillance and dynamic pricing. Dynamic pricing adjusts prices based on supply and demand; surveillance pricing uses data analytics to tailor a price to an individual customer based on personal information.

The FTC lacks authority to ban these practices outright but says it will aggressively pursue companies whose personalized pricing is unfair or deceptive. The proposed policy would also require businesses to disclose when they use personalized pricing and what data informs it.

The proposal is seen as a middle ground in a debate playing out at the state level: Connecticut, Maryland and New Jersey have already enacted restrictions on certain forms of surveillance pricing and other states are considering similar measures. The FTC's framework aims to establish national enforcement standards while promoting pricing transparency. The comment period closes September 25.