Breaking down the regulations impacting the EU and US bakery and snacks sectors in 2024

“The current regulatory environment – both in the EU and in the UK – is ‘complex’ and rapidly changing,” Andrew Curtis​​, director general of Scientific and Regulatory Affairs for the UK Snack, Nut and Crisp Manufacturers Association (SNACMA), told Bakery&Snacks.

Food is one of the most regulated areas within the US, the EU and, by extension, the UK. However, in Curtis’ view, Europe has just come through an incredibly busy period for legislative developments.

“Possibly reflecting the transition from old parliaments to the new, and off the back of a series of major global events such as Brexit, COVID, the war in Ukraine, recession, and the increasingly visible impact of climate change,” he said.

In the North American legal landscape, various regulations are also emerging and potentially growing in number by becoming state-specific.

“The US regulatory landscape for commercial baking manufacturing is continuing to evolve,” Rasma Zvaners, VP of government relations for the American Bakers Association (ABA), told this site.

Core legislation in bakery and snacks

Ingredient and additive regulations require manufacturers to ensure their products are free from stipulated content. Specific legislation exists within the European snack industry, such as regulating maximum levels for DON (deoxynivalenol, one of the most common mycotoxins in cereals worldwide), Ergot (a fungus that grows on rye and less commonly on other grasses such as wheat), T-2 (a trichothecene mycotoxin) and HT-2 (a major metabolite of T-2 toxin), which affect cereal-based snacks.

Removing the authorization of certain smoke flavorings has now emerged in Europe. Following research, ‘smoked’ and ‘burnt’ have gone from flavor trends pushing the snacking industry forward in 2017 to the European Commission (EC) ruling to remove eight Smoke Flavor Primary Products (SPFFs) over the next two years. The European food sector has also seen the consolidation of the regulations on contaminants and many new or adjusted maximum levels for contaminants.

Allergen and nutritional labeling and health claims also form part of these emerging laws, relating to food safety and overall consumer health. Food safety regulations relating to hygiene, such as HACCP and FSMA, are prominent, too.

The status of the UK’s Bread and Flour Regulations – which were due to be amended to include folic acid fortification – is also under the spotlight. However, the statutory instruments were not passed before the dissolution of the previous parliament.

“It is up to the new Labour government to take it forward, but it’s unlikely to be implemented this year,” said Curtis.

Many European laws affect the whole food industry.

“We are all equally affected by some of the broader pieces of legislation, such as food labeling, packaging, deforestation​​ and other items under the Green Deal,” he added.

Packaging regulations relating to ingredient lists, expiration dates and sustainable packaging are developing as are environmental laws that seek to protect the planet.

At EU level, some major regulatory initiatives put forward by the EC under the Green Deal ​​have taken place during the past few years. Certain plant protection products have been removed from authorisation, which has seen an increase in certain plant diseases “perhaps as an indirect result,” said Curtis.

Efforts to reduce food waste and emissions, removal of authorisations for specific packaging components, additives and flavourings, and proposals on labeling, trade and deforestation have steered the regulatory landscape for bakeries and snacks. Additionally, the region has seen new activity on new genomic techniques and proposals to reform the agricultural subsidy systems.

Risks from rapid regulatory response

“One major concern here is the speed at which these proposals have been arriving and the ability of the food industry, as a whole, to assess the impact and adjust accordingly,” Curtis told us.

Industry insiders may consider these proposals an indication of ‘business as usual’, yet the reality is they aren’t as simple.

“Every one of them – even those that don’t make it into law – will have an impact on the industry as we’ve had to take time to assess how practical they are and what bearing they will have on businesses and global supply,” he added.

Another concern is that many proposals were announced by a single Directorate General (DG) focused on consumers. In fact, Curtis believes many were put forward without adequate consultation with other DGs and the industry or with consideration of the impact and conflicting legislation elsewhere.

“While it’s great to announce new initiatives and publish new laws, it’s another thing to be able to deliver them,” he said, noting the problem is the responsibility to deliver often falls upon food businesses and many SMEs. These are usually the same companies warning of potential disproportionate impacts and unintended consequences.

Navigating a regulatory minefield

Europe

Impact assessments are designed to be key instruments of the ‘Better Regulation’ program to ensure that proportionality is respected.

“However, there does seem to have been a lack of coherent or codified rules on good administration applicable across the Union for how these impact assessments are carried out,” said Curtis.

Although the previous European Parliament noted this in November 2023, he noted that “consultations do sometimes occur, but not for every piece of legislation.”

Plus, where they are carried out, they are often perceived externally as tick-box exercises, and it’s very difficult for businesses, particularly SMEs, to make their voices heard, he contended.

As a result, the regulatory system within the EU risks becoming bloated and impacting Europe’s competitiveness.

“The ‘one in-one out’ approach seems to have been forgotten in this area, and if I were an SME just starting, I would find it so difficult to know where to start and how to grow a business in this environment. It’s a regulatory minefield.”

The SNACMA lead is, obviously very interested in seeing how the new Commission and European Parliament will take this forward. The sector has already seen farmers fight back on one or two of these issues and be successful, however, it required them to physically protest and drive tractors into the center of major European capital cities to get the regulators to understand the strength of feeling and the potential impacts upon their livelihoods.

Bakery and snack manufacturers – even those employing thousands and contributing billions to the EU economy – cannot lobby in the same way.

The worry is that as producers operate in an increasingly anticorporate global environment, “some will perhaps find themselves further marginalized,” said Curtis, even though their concerns may be equally legitimate.

The US

Since 2011, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has implemented all but one regulation stemming from the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA), with the implementation of FSMA Rule 204 nearing its compliance date of January 2026. The primary goal of FSMA Rule 204 is to accelerate the identification and removal of contaminated food from the supply chain.

“Baking manufacturers should be aware that the rule requires companies that manufacture, process, pack or hold foods included in the FDA’s Food Traceability List to keep additional records beyond current regulations,” Zvaners told us.

There has been more activity in the workforce regulatory arena with the US Department of Labor and Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s rules. In July 2024, OSHA proposed its Heat Injury and Illness Prevention Programs Rule, which, if implemented, would require private and public sector employers to develop programs and implement controls to protect employees from heat hazards in outdoor and indoor work environments. US employment and labor laws risk further complications with state-specific rulings.

So far, summer 2024 has been active on the regulatory front in the US. ABA and seven other organizations filed an amicus brief with the US District Court for the Western District of Texas in a case challenging OSHA’s final ‘walkaround’ rule. The rule alters the worker walkaround representative designation process, allowing unions and other third parties to participate in workplace safety and health inspections conducted by OSHA.

The baking sector is awaiting the FDA’s final rule on using ‘healthy’ claims. Additionally, ABA is monitoring the FDA’s plans to release its second round of voluntary sodium reduction guidelines for the food sector.

“We expect the agency to propose a ‘front of pack’ labeling scheme before the end of the year,” said Zvaners.

Challenges exist in the US commercial baking sector, particularly on a state level, with new laws and policy developments demanding more resources. In April, Bakery&Snacks highlighted the patchwork of additive bans in the US,​​ which have prompted concerns that manufacturers will need to create new formulations for every state.

State initiative laws are also pushing manufacturers to investigate their formulations closely. Producers must ensure their products are free from banned ingredients to enable them to market their goods or risk a $10,000 fine per violation.

“ABA significantly enhanced its state affairs portfolio with increased resources and dedicated staff in response to the rising state legislative and regulatory challenges for commercial baking,” said Zvaners, adding the Association will focus on regulations “where a lack of consistency continues to be a growing challenge for industry businesses.

As such, the state-focused advocacy program is also addressing issues such as the implementation of the Extended Producer Responsibility laws.