Isn't the some kind of Government Agency that buys random stuff from supermarkets/suppliers, tests the food and inspects the label?
The same for restaurant inspections? Its not that expensive and it sends a clear message to these people.
For 40,000-some Florida restaurants, 191 inspectors from the state’s Department of Business and Professional Regulation oversee them all for safety, sanitation and — occasionally — lies. By comparison, Georgia, with about half the population, has 300 inspectors. Ohio has 637 for about 22,000 restaurants.
In the past two years, Florida inspectors found roughly 750 food misrepresentation violations. Of them, 123 restaurants were fined, with an average fine for first-time offenders between $150 and $300.
The state could beef up the number of inspectors and the fines. Should they? I'm not sure. Certainly I don't support lying to consumers, but it isn't exactly the crime of the century. I'd be much more concerned about safety and sanitation, though some mislabeling has safety implications (e.g. whether nuts are used).
There's a concept in false advertising law called "puffery" under which obviously exaggerated representations are not considered false advertising. Think "best chicken in the world". This isn't exactly that, but you really should know that your $11 Caesar salad with shrimp isn't using local, sustainable caught shrimp that goes for around ~$1/shrimp wholesale.
Even just from an economic standpoint, I think such fines should be far higher. Sometimes it takes lab tests to determine fakes from real foods.
Also, I disagree - consumers shouldn't have to know the market. One could argue that they should, but they should not have to.
I don't believe anybody does that, let alone the government. Restaurant inspections check to make sure the restaurants are hygienic and safe, not that the food matches the label.
