'No Artificial Colors' Claims Get More Colorful As FDA Announces Shift Away from Petroleum-Based Food Dyes

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently announced that brands may label their products as without “artificial colors” as long as the colors are not petroleum-based. Although this may provide limited comfort from an enforcement standpoint, brands should carefully consider the risk of consumer actions before racing to modify their labels.

Historically, US food products have relied heavily on petroleum-derived synthetic dyes for color. But a loud chorus of public health questions about the potential risks of these dyes caused FDA to revisit use of these colors. Under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act), color additives—except for coal tar hair dyes—require FDA approval before use in food, drugs, cosmetics, or medical devices.

In April 2025, the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and FDA announced a new series of measures to remove these dyes from the food supply as part of the broader “Make America Healthy Again” initiative. The agency is also partnering with the National Institutes of Health to conduct comprehensive research into the potential health and developmental impacts of food additives on children.

Prior to April 2025, companies could claim “no artificial colors” only if their products contained no added colors at all—regardless of whether those colors were naturally derived or synthetic. The FDA is now establishing a national standard and timeline for the food industry’s transition from petrochemical-based dyes to natural alternatives.

The US administration has initiated the process to revoke authorization for Citrus Red No. 2 and Orange B, with plans to eliminate six additional synthetic dyes—FD&C Green No. 3, FD&C Red No. 40, FD&C Yellow No. 5, FD&C Yellow No. 6, FD&C Blue No. 1, and FD&C Blue No. 2—by the end of 2026. The FDA is also asking food companies to remove FD&C Red No. 3 ahead of the previously required 2027–2028 deadline. Recognizing the need for substitute color additives, the FDA is fast-tracking the review and approval of new natural color additives, including beetroot red and expanded use of spirulina extract for blues and greens.

On February 5, the FDA sent letters to food manufacturers advising them that the FDA intends to “exercise enforcement discretion” as to Section 403(a)(1) of FD&C Act (21 USC § 343(a)(1)). The FDA announced that the “[c]ompanies will now have flexibility to claim on labels that products contain ‘no artificial colors’ when the products do not contain petroleum-based colors. In the past, companies were generally only able to make such claims when their products had no added color whatsoever—whether derived from natural sources or otherwise.”

For brands, the FDA’s new enforcement discretion regarding “no artificial colors” claims presents opportunities to reposition products and respond to consumer demands. Brands are already advertising plant-based dyes—like beetroot and watermelon extracts—on their packages with phrases like “sourced from plants.”

However, companies must be diligent in ensuring that substitute color additives—while derived from natural sources—continue to meet all FDA safety and purity standards, including with respect to heavy metals and other contaminants. The agency has issued a letter highlighting available resources to assist manufacturers in maintaining compliance for authorized color additives.

Food makers also need to think beyond governmental enforcement actions. Consumer-brought lawsuits for misleading labeling and marketing continue to boom, and the landscape on FD&C Act preemption continues to shift. The FDA announcement of enforcement discretion does not estop a consumer from initiating a putative class action for misleading marketing. Neither does it change state laws identifying all added colors as “artificial.” In the last five years, over 20 lawsuits have been filed alleging that statements about artificial colors are false or misleading, and as manufacturers take advantage of a potentially more flexible regulatory landscape, consumers are looking to escalate litigation.