On 25 November 2024, the European Court of Auditors published a critical report on food labels in the EU. Consumers can get lost in the maze of labels’. Following, the analysis of the state of the art and the recommendations transmitted to the European Commission. (1)
1) Food labels in the EU, the Court of Auditors report
Food labels are essential to allow consumers to understand the characteristics of the products and make informed choices.
European Court of Auditors (ECA) performed an audit to verify:
it status quo of EU rules on food labelling;
-the level of implementation of the acts delegated to the European Commission;
-monitoring consumers’ understanding of labels;
-the effectiveness of official controls and the sanctions applied by Member States.
2) Consumer rights
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) provides that ‘In order to promote the interests of consumers and ensure a high level of consumer protection, the Union shall contribute to
-protect the health, security and economic interests of consumers as well as
-promote their right to information, education and to organize themselves for the safeguard of their interests ‘ (TFEU, Article 169).
3) Food labelling, EU rules
General Food Law introduced a general criterion for the protection of consumer interests and the non-deceptive nature of the information accompanying food, including during presentation and advertising. (2)
Food Information Regulation (EU) 1169/11 consolidated the rules already established in the Food Labelling Directive 2000/13/EC and subsequent amendments, with some new features regarding nutritional labelling and allergens. (3)
EU rules of a general nature – i.e. Nutrition and Health Claims Regulation (EC) 1924/06, quality schemes (i.e. DOP, organic) – also apply in partial derogation from the FIR. Like the regulations relating to individual products.
Finally, national technical standards can be applied to specific aspects that still lack EU rules, such as the warnings established in France, Germany and Ireland on alcoholic beverages (4,5).
4) Pending rules
The European Commission has received a wide range of delegations from the EU legislators for the implementation of various rules on food labelling. However, most of these delegations (7 out of 11, according to the European Court of Auditors) are still awaiting implementation, as also highlighted by the Strasbourg Assembly. (6) In the following paragraphs, a brief review of the pending rules.
4.1) Origin and provenance of ingredients
Customers, Europeans have repeatedly expressed the desire to know the origin and provenance of the primary ingredients of foods. (7) The European Commission, however, as has been seen:
– introduced incomplete provisions on the origin of meat (EU regulation 1337/2013) and on the origin and provenance of primary ingredients (EU regulation 2018/775); (8)
-has abandoned its commitment, stated in the Farm to Fork strategy, to adopt further proposals on food origin labelling; (9)
– did not propose to introduce mandatory information on the origin and provenance of primary ingredients in fruit juices, jams, and Protected Geographical Indications (PGI). (8)
Seven Member States of the EU – Greece, Spain, France, Italy, Lithuania, Portugal and Finland – have in the meantime adopted national regulations for some food products. (10) ‘This leads, according to the ECA, to ‘unequal access for consumers to certain food information across the EU‘.’.
4.2) Alcoholic drinks, labelling
The origin labeling of alcoholic beverages is also devoid of harmonised and satisfactory rules, given that:
-the co-legislators have limited themselves to providing an e-label for the communication of energy value and a list of ingredients of wines and wine products; (11)
-in the framework of the Beating Cancer Plan (BECA), the Commission announced a proposal for mandatory labelling of alcoholic beverages, but did not follow up on it. (12)
‘In the absence of harmonised rules at the EU level, some Member States have started to implement their own alcohol labelling initiatives‘, (4) ‘which hinders consumers’ equal access to certain food information across the EU’. (1)
4.3) Readability, vegetarians and vegans
Guidelines to ensure the readability of food labels, production standards for foods presented as suitable for vegetarians and vegans, ‘Reference Intakes’ for specific population groups have also been delegated to the European Commission. Which – even in these cases, as we have seen (12) – has not provided for them.
‘This limits consumers‘ ability to make informed choices,‘ notes the European Court of Auditors, ‘and causes inequalities in consumers’ access to some food information in the EU‘. (1)
4.4) Nutrition & health claims
Nutrition & Health Claims Regulation (EC) 1924/06 itself remains unimplemented in two essential parts:
–nutritional profiles. By 13 January 2009, the Commission should have defined the nutritional characteristics that foods must possess in order to be able to display ‘health claims’ on the label. EFSA has published two scientific opinions on this matter, in 2008 and 2022, but the Commission has not yet done so; (13)
–botanicals. The Commission has stopped the scientific evaluation of the 2.078 health claims relating to herbal substances, which is still pending. The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has already offered an official interpretation of the rules to be followed while waiting for the Commission to take action. (14)
The European Parliament urged the Commission to adopt the above measures, as seen, in 2023. (6) Member States have among other things adopted different approaches in the interpretation of general concepts and this ‘may further increase consumer confusion‘. (15)
4.5) ‘Front-of-Pack Nutrition Labelling’
‘A relationship Commission’s 2020 report shows that front-of-pack nutrition labelling can help consumers identify healthier food options and potentially help prevent diet-related diseases‘. (16)
European Commission and Parliament had therefore agreed, in the Farm to Fork strategy, to introduce a ‘Front-of-Pack Nutrition Labelling‘ (FOPNL) system which however has not been followed up to date. (17)
4.5.1) Nutri-Score
The Court of Auditors European Union limits itself to considering the existence of different nutritional labelling systems on the label front, neglecting however to note how the Nutri-Score differs from the others in several aspects:
-solid scientific literature confirming the correctness and effectiveness of the approach, in the definition of nutritional profiles and communication;
-extraordinary diffusion in Belgium, Germany, Switzerland, Spain, Holland and Luxembourg, now also in Romania. Also thanks to specific apps; (18)
-recognition by OECD, WHO and lastly also in a report by the European Parliament as the most effective FOPNL system; (19)
-full support from EUPHA, BEUC and Foodwatch, the most representative associations of health professionals and consumers in the European Union (20,21).
4.6) Precautionary Allergen Labeling
Allergic consumers – but also celiacs and lactose intolerant people – are still waiting for EU guidelines on indications of the type ‘it may contain [name of the allergen]‘.
The European executive has been delegated to clarify these aspects which are also essential, as we have seen, to the analysis and management of the risk of involuntary contamination of foods with allergens. (22)
5) Incomprehensible and/or misleading labels
Voluntary information provided on food labels – as also highlighted in a study by the European consumers’ association BEUC (23) – are often misleading, due to the absence of harmonised guidelines.
‘Natural‘ and ‘whole” (24,25), ‘crafts‘ and ‘traditional‘, ‘planet, sustainable packaging‘ are just some of the many examples of news that are often devoid of objective references or even self-referential.
ACE (European Court of Auditors) also recalls examples of representations, on food labels, of ingredients not contained in the products. Where the products contain only flavourings of the ingredients recalled.
Empowering Consumers for the Green Claims Directive (EU) 2024/825 should at least mitigate misleading labels and advertising in the relevant areas. (26) Lower expectations instead come from the proposal of Green Claims Directive, as seen. (27)
5.1) Monitoring
A previous study commissioned by the European Commission (2013) identified 901 voluntary information schemes on food labels. Where a third of the related information was incomprehensible or misleading for consumers. (28)
A recent report of the Joint Research Center of the European Commission (JRC, 2024) has in turn highlighted the growing diffusion of ‘claims’ linked to socio-environmental sustainability, detected on 20% of the labels of new food products launched in 2021. (29)
A monitoring of the level of understanding of information in labels and advertising by consumers is therefore recommended by the European Court of Auditors. This activity should be carried out by the Member States, as well as by the Commission, in a systematic manner.
6) Protection of vulnerable consumers
The resolution of the European Parliament on a strategy to strengthen the rights of vulnerable consumers (2012):
– ‘stresses that children and young people, who increasingly suffer the consequences of a sedentary lifestyle and obesity, are more sensitive to advertising for foods high in fat, salt and sugar’;
-‘invites all interested parties to educate and inform effectively educate children and young people and their carers on the importance of a balanced diet and an active and healthy lifestyle’;
-‘urges the Commission to include child protection among the main priorities of the Consumer Agenda, with particular attention to aggressive or misleading television and online advertising‘. (30).
6.1) Aggressive marketing towards minors
Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AMSD), as we have seen, has instead failed in its objective of protecting minors from the aggressive marketing of nutritionally unbalanced foods. (31)
The above-mentioned measures requested by the European Parliament in the resolution referred to in the previous paragraph have not been followed up and self-regulation has proven to be completely ineffective.
EUPHA extension (EU Public Health Professionals Association), with the support of 20 non-profit associations and research bodies, had therefore proposed to the Commission the adoption of urgent measures which were also lacking in evidence.
7) Weak controls, ineffective sanctions
Official Controls Regulation (EU) 2017/625 assigns to Member States the responsibilities of:
-organize effective systems for the verification of food labels on the physical and electronic market;
– foresee and apply sanctions appropriate to the seriousness of the violations found;
-update the Commission annually on the outcome of official controls.
The audits carried out by the Commission and the additional data collected by ECA show, however, the overall weakness of controls in this area, also due to the fragmentation of competences among different authorities within the Member States (e.g. Italy). (3,32)
8) Provisional conclusions
The scenery described by the European Court of Auditors is undoubtedly problematic and responds to a series of critical issues reported by various parties over the years, including on this site. The European Commission, in its response to the Court of Auditors, has therefore adhered without reservation to all its recommendations.
La grande sfida for the European Commission today is to effectively implement the ‘pending’ rules (see above, paragraph 4) and to launch the necessary initiatives to guarantee consumer protection. Whose rights must always precede the private interests of the lobbies that have prevailed in the last two decades.
Dario Dongo
Footnotes
(1) European Court of Auditors (ECA). Food labeling in the EU. Consumers can get lost in the maze of labels. Special Report 23/2024 https://tinyurl.com/ykt2c3s5
(2) Regulation (EC) 178/02, Articles 8,16,17
(3) See ebook ‘1169 Penalties. EU Reg. 1169/11. Food news, controls and sanctions‘
(4) See paragraph 2.1 (National initiatives) in the previous article by Dario Dongo. ‘Responsible drinking’ in labeling and advertising. FT (Food Times). August 20, 2024
(5) National rules may also insist on categories of products without harmonised rules. One above all, beer.
(6) Alessandra Mei. Nutrition and Health Claims Regulation, the eternal unfinished. FT (Food Times). February 16, 2024
(7) Thøgersen, J. and Nohlen, H., Consumer understanding of origin labeling on food packaging and its impact on consumer product evaluation and choices: A systematic literature review., Ciriolo, E. editor(s), EUR 31208 EN, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2022, ISBN 978-92-76-56613-7, doi:10.2760/336778, JRC126893
(8) Dario Dongo. Origin of raw materials on the label, the unsolved problem. GIFT (Great Italian Food Trade). 5.3.24
(9) Dario Dongo. Origin labeling, not a priority for the European Commission. GIFT (Great Italian Food Trade).
(10) The European Commission, DG Grow, has in turn failed to open the necessary infringement procedures against Italy for the defects in the notification of the regulations containing the obligations to indicate the location of the establishment and the origin or provenance of the raw materials in some food products. See Dario Dongo. Decrees of origin for pasta, rice, milk, tomato, pork. Theoretical extension to 31.12.22. GIFT (Great Italian Food Trade). 5.11.21
(11) Dario Dongo, Alessandra Mei. New EU rules on wine labelling, guidelines from the European Commission. GIFT (Great Italian Food Trade).
(12) Dario Dongo. Beating Cancer Plan. On the index pesticides, toxic chemicals, alcohol, junk-food. FT (Food Times). February 6, 2022
(13) Dario Dongo, Andrea Adelmo Della Penna. Improving diet and public health with useful label news. EFSA opinion on nutrient profiles. FT (Food Times). April 23, 2022
(14) Dario Dongo. Health claims on botanicals, the Court of Justice provides clarity. FT (Food Times). October 13, 2020
(15) Dario Dongo, Andrea Piccoli. Food supplements, the BelFrIt list of allowed botanicals. FARE (Food and Agriculture Requirements). 24.7.17
(16) Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council regarding the use of additional forms of expression and presentation of the nutrition declaration. COM(2020) 207 final https://tinyurl.com/5n6upj5y
(17) Dario Dongo. Farm to Fork, Nutri-Score and product reformulation. FT (Food Times). October 25, 2021
(18) Marta Strinati. Yuka stimulates food reformulation and works on eco-score. FT (Food Times). August 16, 2022
(19) Dario Dongo. Obesity, challenges and opportunities. EU report. FT (Food Times). October 21, 2024
(20) Marta Strinati. EU public health, EUPHA, points to NutriScore as best option for FoPNL. FT (Food Times). March 20, 2023
(21) Foodwatch Demands Transparency on Nutri-Score Regulation Failures. 10.9.24 https://tinyurl.com/3r8tv8sr
(22) Dario Dongo, Andrea Adelmo Della Penna. EU, food allergens guidelines are needed. Position papers. FT (Food Times). November 1, 2024
(23) BEUC (2018). Food Labels: Tricks of the Trade https://tinyurl.com/jz3jtzpm
(24) Dario Dongo, Andrea Adelmo Della Penna. ‘Natural’ foods and ingredients, the viral deception. FT (Food Times). November 25, 2022
(25) Dario Dongo. Integral false, lost virtues and possible contraindications. GIFT (Great Italian Food Trade).
(26) Dario Dongo, Alessandra Mei. Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition, green light from the EU Parliament. FT (Food Times). February 19, 2024
(27) Dario Dongo. Green Claims Directive, Brussels’ weak proposal against greenwashing. FT (Food Times). March 23, 2023
(28) Ipsos, London Economics (2013). Consumer market Study on the functioning of voluntary food labeling schemes for consumers in the European Union https://tinyurl.com/5n7z8vfm
(29) Iudita Sampalean. Sustainability in labelling, JRC report. FT (Food Times). September 3, 2024
(30) European Parliament resolution of 22 May 2012 on a strategy for strengthening the rights of vulnerable consumers. 2011/2272(INI) https://tinyurl.com/4xu728y9. See point 24
(31) Dario Dongo, Andrea Adelmo Della Penna. ‘Audiovisual Media Services Directive’ and protection of minors from junk food marketing. GIFT (Great Italian Food Trade).
(32) Dario Dongo. Controls, the role of the health administration. GIFT (Great Italian Food Trade).
Dario Dongo, lawyer and journalist, PhD in international food law, founder of WIISE (FARE - GIFT - Food Times) and Égalité.
