A bill introduced in the Georgia House of Representatives aims to impose new labeling requirements on plant-based and cell-cultured meat products in the state’s food service industry. House Bill 163, sponsored by Republican Representative Jordan Ridley, would require restaurants and other food vendors to disclose whether their food contains cell-cultured meat, plant-based alternatives, or both.
The proposed law would amend Article 13 of Chapter 2 of Title 26 of the Georgia Code, which regulates food service establishments. If passed, the bill would legally define “conventional meat” as any food product “made wholly or in part from the carcass of any animal, including, but not limited to, cattle, swine, sheep, goats, fish, shellfish, and poultry.” Products containing plant-based or cell-cultured ingredients would be required to be labeled separately and would not be classified as conventional meat.
Definitions and labeling requirements
The bill introduces definitions that differentiate between conventional and alternative protein sources. It defines “cell-cultured meat” as any food product that is:
(A) Artificially grown from cell cultures of animal muscle or organ tissues; and
(B) Designed to share sensory characteristics with conventional meat products.
“Plant-based meat alternatives” are defined as any food product that is:
(A) Produce or derived from one or more plants, or parts of plants; and
(B) Designed to share sensory characteristics with conventional meat products.
The legislation would require clear disclosure for such products in food service establishments, aligning Georgia with other states that have enacted similar regulations.
Industry implications
Supporters of the bill argue that it promotes transparency for consumers by ensuring they are fully informed about the contents of the food they purchase. However, critics, particularly from the alternative protein industry, warn that such measures could place additional regulatory burdens on plant-based and cultivated meat producers, potentially discouraging market entry.
Georgia joins a growing number of states taking action on meat labeling. South Dakota and South Carolina have passed similar laws, while Florida, Alabama, Nebraska, and Ohio have implemented outright bans on cultivated meat.
Legislative status
HB 163 has undergone two readings in the Georgia House of Representatives and has been favorably reported by a full committee review. However, it has not yet been brought to a vote. The bill states that it would “repeal conflicting laws,” suggesting that it would override any existing state regulations on food labeling if enacted.
