Packaging Compliance
SB 343 Truth In Labeling
A recycling symbol tells a customer to act. California SB 343 asks whether that message is justified by real collection and processing, with an important current enforcement update.
Explore the guide ↓
A material’s ability to be melted or pulped does not, on its own, justify telling the public that the finished item is recyclable.
- Assess the actual material and format, not a resin name alone.
- Read the current enforcement update with the statutory criteria.
- Review the symbol, wording and named component as one message.
On this page
A recycling claim should describe an available systemUnderstand what the collection and sorting tests askCurrent status: the law and enforcement are different questionsReview the complete visual messageKeep recycled-content evidence separateUse a version-controlled artwork decision01 / 06
A recycling claim should describe an available system
Imagine a flexible pouch made with several bonded polymers. A specialist might develop a process for it, but that does not mean household collections sort and sell that pouch into a working market. When a familiar symbol implies an easy recovery route, the customer may put it in a stream that cannot use it.
SB 343 connects recycling claims to criteria about the item’s material type and form and the recovery system. This is a truth-in-labeling question. It is separate from how much recycled material was used to make the pouch.
02 / 06
Understand what the collection and sorting tests ask
The statutory framework considers collection access and whether relevant facilities sort the material into defined streams. The commonly referenced 60% criteria concern these different parts of the system; they do not mean that 60% of an item contains recycled input. Other conditions and pathways also matter.
Material type and form are important. A rigid container and a flexible film can share a polymer family but behave differently in collection and sorting. Compare the actual construction with the current findings rather than borrowing a conclusion from a different format.
| Question | What it examines |
|---|---|
| Is this material and form collected? | Access to the relevant recycling service |
| Is it sorted into a suitable stream? | Handling by the recovery infrastructure |
| Do additions affect compatibility? | The final construction, including problematic components |
| Is a special claim pathway being used? | Whether its distinct statutory conditions are satisfied |
03 / 06
Current status: the law and enforcement are different questions
The manufacture-date threshold and the ability of authorities to enforce the challenged provisions should be read separately. A court order blocking enforcement does not turn every recycling claim into an accurate statement. General rules against misleading claims also remain relevant.
This section is dated so a reader can distinguish a legal development from a permanent material property. Before releasing new California artwork, revisit the official update and the legal position applicable to the claim.
04 / 06
Review the complete visual message
A prominent chasing-arrow symbol can communicate a disposal claim even when a designer thinks of it as decoration. Text placed beside it may narrow or broaden the message. A tiny qualifier should not be used to rescue a large misleading impression.
Review the component named, symbol, words, placement and geography together. A resin-identification code answers which polymer family is involved; it should not be treated as proof of an available household recycling route.
A stronger label review starts with the object
If only the outer carton has a supported recovery route, an instruction should identify the carton. A large symbol on the assembled set can appear to cover the inner film, pouch and closures too.
05 / 06
Keep recycled-content evidence separate
An invoice and traceability record can help support the recovered input in a package. They do not show that the next user can recycle it. Likewise, a recycling assessment does not prove that any recovered input was used.
This separation makes a claim understandable. State the verified content percentage with its material and scope, then assess any disposal instruction independently. Avoid turning a content claim into a promise about the whole pack’s next life.
| Statement | Evidence needed |
|---|---|
| Contains a stated percentage of PCR | Composition, scope and supply-chain records |
| Recyclable in a stated market | Applicable collection, sorting, compatibility and labeling analysis |
| Certified sourcing | The relevant certification and permitted claim |
| Made with less material | A comparable baseline and quantity calculation |
06 / 06
Use a version-controlled artwork decision
Keep the construction specification, evidence, reviewed jurisdiction and approved artwork together. A switch from uncoated board to a permanently laminated board can affect the earlier conclusion. A change in official findings can also require review without a physical change to the package.
The useful output is a reasoned decision for a particular item and market, with an owner and review date. Stowliva can coordinate the material and artwork information for that discussion; an icon added to a proof should never become the only evidence behind the claim.
Official and first-party resources · reviewed October 7, 2026
Put the learning into your next pack.
Share your product, material questions and destination with Stowliva.