Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 25, 2014
Synthetic Abuse and Labeling of Toxic Substances Act of 2014 or the SALTS Act - Amends the Controlled Substances Act to provide that, in determining whether a controlled substance analogue was intended for human consumption, the following factors may be considered: (1) the marketing, advertising, and labeling of the substance; (2) the known efficacy or usefulness of the substance for the marketed, advertised, or labeled purpose; (3) the difference between the price at which the substance is sold and the price at which the substance it is purported to be or advertised as is normally sold; (4) the diversion of the substance from legitimate channels and the clandestine importation, manufacture, or distribution of the substance; and (5) whether the defendant knew or should have known that the substance was intended to be consumed by injection, inhalation, ingestion, or any other immediate means.
Declares that evidence that a substance was not marketed, advertised, or labeled for human consumption shall not by itself be sufficient to establish that the substance was not intended for human consumption.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Bill text & related measures
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.4975 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.4975 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.4975 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.4975 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.