Compliance Statement Checker
Three kinds of statement where the law specifies wording and sellers write something close. "Close" is exactly how the safe harbour is lost — so this checks element by element and shows you what is missing, in the words it should be in.
🔒 Your data never leaves your browser.
How certain each of these is, and why that changes the wording
Proposition 65 has verbatim text. The regulation — 27 CCR §25603 — sets out the safe-harbour warning almost word for word: a signal word, a named chemical, the harm it is listed for, and the state's website. So this page checks all four separately and tells you which one is missing, because dropping the URL and dropping the chemical name are different mistakes with different fixes.
The allergen list is statutory; the judgement is not. US law names 9 major food allergens. Whether your product must declare one depends on the formulation, which no text checker can see. So this checks the declaration's form — and catches the statement most likely to be quietly out of date.
A marking is not a text problem at all. CE, UKCA and the FCC marks are declarations that a conformity assessment was completed and a technical file exists. There is no wording you can add to a listing that creates one. All this page can usefully do is ask for the directive, standard or FCC ID that makes the claim checkable by anyone else.
Sesame is the ninth allergen, and old templates do not have it
Sesame became a major allergen in the US after most label templates were written, and those templates are still circulating. A "Contains" statement that names milk, soy and wheat and stops there was correct once. It is the single most common way an otherwise careful allergen declaration is now wrong.
Where the Prop 65 wording comes from
From the regulation text itself. California's own warning site returns an empty JavaScript shell to any automated request — HTTP 200 with no content — so it cannot be cited as a source that a reader could check. The regulation as published by Cornell's Legal Information Institute can be, and that is what every Prop 65 rule here links to.
This is not legal advice
It checks wording against a published requirement. It cannot tell you whether a statement is required for your product, whether your chemical is on the list, or whether your assessment was adequate. Those need someone who can see the product.
Proposition 65 checks (6 rules)
P65-W01 Missing the signal word
The safe-harbour warning begins with "WARNING:", "CA WARNING:" or "CALIFORNIA WARNING:" in capitals and bold. Without it the text is not the safe-harbour warning, whatever else it says.
Fix: Begin with WARNING: in capitals.
Source: Cal. Code Regs. Tit. 27, § 25603 — Consumer Product Exposure Warnings: Content (Cornell LII)
P65-C01 No chemical is named
The warning must name at least one listed chemical — "chemicals including [name]". A warning that says a product can expose you to unspecified chemicals is not the safe-harbour warning, and naming the chemical is the part that makes the warning informative rather than decorative.
Fix: Name at least one listed chemical the product exposes people to.
Source: Cal. Code Regs. Tit. 27, § 25603 — Consumer Product Exposure Warnings: Content (Cornell LII)
P65-U01 Missing www.P65Warnings.ca.gov
The regulation requires the warning to direct people to the state’s website. This is the element most often dropped when a warning is retyped or shortened to fit a label.
Fix: Add "For more information go to www.P65Warnings.ca.gov".
Source: Cal. Code Regs. Tit. 27, § 25603 — Consumer Product Exposure Warnings: Content (Cornell LII)
P65-H01 Missing the harm the chemical is listed for
The wording differs by what the chemical is listed for — cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm, or both. Using the wrong one, or leaving it out, changes the meaning of the warning.
Fix: State that the chemical is known to the State of California to cause cancer, or birth defects or other reproductive harm, as applicable.
Source: Cal. Code Regs. Tit. 27, § 25603 — Consumer Product Exposure Warnings: Content (Cornell LII)
P65-S01 The warning symbol is a graphic, not text
The regulation requires a black exclamation mark in a yellow equilateral triangle, placed to the left of the text and no smaller than the word WARNING. A text-only listing field cannot carry it, so it must be on the label or in the image — a checker of text can only remind you.
Source: Cal. Code Regs. Tit. 27, § 25603 — Consumer Product Exposure Warnings: Content (Cornell LII)
P65-V01 Carries every text element of the safe-harbour warning
Signal word, a named chemical, the type of harm and the state website are all present. The graphic symbol is a separate requirement this page cannot see.
Source: Cal. Code Regs. Tit. 27, § 25603 — Consumer Product Exposure Warnings: Content (Cornell LII)
Allergen declaration checks (5 rules)
ALG-L01 Not one of the nine major allergens
US law names nine major food allergens: milk, eggs, fish, Crustacean shellfish, tree nuts, peanuts, wheat, soybeans and sesame. A "Contains" statement listing something else is not wrong to include, but it is not the statutory declaration and may confuse rather than inform.
Source: FDA — Food Allergies
ALG-S01 Sesame is missing from the list you are using
Sesame became the ninth major allergen in the US. Label templates written before that change omit it, and those templates are still circulating — this is the single most common way an otherwise correct allergen statement is now out of date.
Fix: Check whether the product contains sesame, and declare it if so.
Source: FDA — Food Allergies
ALG-T01 Tree nuts and fish should name the species
The declaration for tree nuts, fish and Crustacean shellfish is expected to name the specific type — almond, cod, shrimp — not just the category. Someone allergic to cashews needs to know which nut it is.
Fix: Name the specific nut, fish or shellfish.
Source: FDA — Food Allergies
ALG-M01 "May contain" is not the statutory declaration
Advisory statements about cross-contact are voluntary and separate from the required "Contains" declaration. Using an advisory in place of the declaration does not satisfy the requirement, and using it as a catch-all reduces its usefulness to people who rely on it.
Source: FDA — Food Allergies
ALG-V01 Reads as a statutory Contains declaration
The statement uses the Contains form and names only recognised major allergens.
Source: FDA — Food Allergies
Marking claim checks (5 rules)
MRK-D01 A marking is a declaration, not a description
CE, UKCA and the FCC marks are not adjectives you may apply to a product. Affixing one is a legal statement that the conformity assessment for that product has been completed and the technical file exists. No wording change on a listing can create that, and claiming a marking the product does not hold is an offence in every one of these jurisdictions.
Fix: If the product genuinely holds the marking, cite the declaration of conformity or FCC ID. If not, remove the claim.
Source: European Commission — CE marking
MRK-C01 "CE" here means "China Export" as often as it means anything
There is a widely circulated claim that a narrower-spaced CE logo means "China Export". The European Commission does not recognise any such marking — but the belief means listings routinely carry a CE claim that nobody has assessed. If you cannot name the directive and produce the declaration of conformity, the product does not carry CE marking.
Fix: Name the EU legislation the product is declared to conform with.
Source: European Commission — CE marking
MRK-U01 UKCA and CE are separate and not interchangeable
A CE marking does not make a product UKCA marked, or the reverse. They rest on different legislation and, for some product groups, different assessment bodies. Listings that treat them as synonyms are making a claim about the wrong jurisdiction.
Source: GOV.UK — Using the UKCA marking
MRK-F01 An FCC claim should carry the FCC ID
Equipment authorised under the FCC rules carries an identifier. A listing that says "FCC approved" without one is not verifiable by a buyer or by a marketplace, and marketplaces increasingly ask for it.
Fix: Quote the FCC ID from the device label.
Source: The FCC equipment authorisation pages block automated requests (HTTP 403 on 2026-08-23), so this rule is stated from the general requirement that authorised equipment carries an identifier rather than quoted from a page this project could retrieve.
MRK-V01 Marking claim carries a reference
The claim names a directive, standard or identifier rather than standing alone.
Source: European Commission — CE marking
Scope
STM-M01 Wording only — not whether you need the statement
Whether a warning or declaration is required at all depends on what is in the product and how it is used, which no text checker can see. This page checks that a statement you have decided to make is worded the way the rule requires. Nothing here is legal advice.
Source: Scope statement for this tool.
Wording only. Whether a statement is required for your product depends on the formulation and the jurisdiction, and nothing here is legal advice.