Guiding through ‘the maze of food labelling’ – The most recent European Court of Auditors’ special report

When it comes to food labelling, the information must be clear and concise, providing the consumer with mandatory information about the contents and characteristics of the food product at a glance. We discuss the recent report from The European Court of Auditors (“ECA”), the European Union’s external auditor, to the European Commission. In this report, the shortcomings on European food labelling practices are highlighted and recommendations are provided.[1]According to the ECA, with a growing interest in food information on the one hand, and with the EU legal framework being incomplete on the other hand, there is room for improvement to help consumers understand food labelling better. This report provides companies active in the Food & Beverages industry interesting insights in the functioning of the current legal framework and possible focus points of the European Commission in the future.  

Food labelling has become increasingly important. First of all, food labelling has to provide the consumers with the necessary information regarding the food products. However, labelling is also used to provide information to satisfy the growing interest of consumers in health and sustainability. Furthermore, the broadened scope of food products for offer, and intensifying marketing practices have affected labelling practices. In the current market, with many different products on offer, it is important that consumers can rely on correct labelling for making well-informed decisions. The ECA examined whether food labelling according to the EU legal framework supports this, and assessed how consumers understand labels, and looked at control systems.

Observations ECA

In their report, the ECA provides the following observations to the European Commission. Most importantly, the ECA identifies several gaps in the current legal framework. Secondly, the ECA concludes that the understanding of consumers of labels could be improved. Lastly, the ECA discusses the shortcomings of the current control systems of the Member States. 

Gaps in legal framework

Following the ECA, although the EU legal framework overall provides sound basis for ensuring that consumers make informed decisions, there is certainly room for improvement. With the implementation of the FIC Regulation in 2014 (Regulation (EU) No. 1169/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on the provision of food information to consumers) and the Claim Regulation in 2007 (Regulation (EC) No. 1924/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on nutrition and health claims), the Commission could not sit back. To the contrary, both regulations required the Commission to take action on 11 defined topics for food labelling by publishing reports, implementing legal acts or making legislative proposals.[2]

According to the ECA, by September 2024, the Commission has only succeeded to fulfil work on 4 of these topics, namely trans fats, presence of gluten, country of origin and alcoholic beverages. For some topics, the Commission commenced actions, but this is still ongoing (health claims, nutrient profiles, front-of-pack nutrition labelling, precautionary allergen labelling), whilst for other topics no action has been undertaken at all (legibility, food for vegetarians or vegans, reference intakes for specific population groups). 

Because the absence of legislation on these 7 out of 11 topics, there are gaps in the legal framework regarding food labelling. This results in consumers being limited in making informed decisions. Furthermore, since the EU legal framework is incomplete, some national legislators try to fill in the gaps. The ECA explains that this leads to inequity across the European Union in consumer access to certain information.[3]

Unclear labels and insufficient understanding by consumers

The ECA came across certain practices of food & beverage companies that may be in violation of Article 7 FIC Regulation, which sets out the obligation to provide information on the food labelling that is accurate and easy to understand, and not misleading, ambiguous or confusing. These practices, related to food labelling, include uncertified qualities (e.g. ‘fresh’ or ‘natural’), misleading product names (using ‘meaty’ to describe meat products), or omitting relevant information (products being defrosted). Confronted with this information on the label (or missing from the label), consumers are unable to make an informed decision because their understanding of the label is incorrect.

What is more, the ECA concluded that consumers are exposed to a growing number of logos, certification marks, schemes and claims. The ECA refers to a 2013 study of the Commission[4], which showed that (even back then) there were 901 voluntary food labelling schemes, with a third of the surveyed consumers finding these labels confusing and another third finding them misleading. 

Another example of a topic that is widely misunderstood by consumers, is the date marking. The FIC Regulation provides two options: either a ‘use by’ date, or a ‘best before’ date. According to a 2018 study of the Commission,[5] the issues with date marking are poor legibility, unclarity on how dates are determined by food companies, and consumers simply not understanding how to interpret the different date markings. 

Shortcoming in national control systems

The ECA also assessed the current national supervision and enforcement (referred to as control systems in the report) in the Member States. The current legal framework requires Member States to supervise and enforce on food labelling. Furthermore, Member States must also report to the Commission, so that the Commission has oversight.

In practice, the ECA found out all 27 Member States have control systems and that these systems are functioning in accordance with annual (so-called) control plans. However, the ECA was also confronted with shortcomings, such as a backlog in updating annual control plans in certain Member States, control systems that are too complex and involve multiple authorities, or even Member States that had not appointed an authority yet. Also with regard to the mandatory reporting to the Commission, the ECA observed deficiencies.

Moreover, the focus varied between Member States, as for example some focused on origin labelling, whilst other Member States focused more on health and nutrition claims. The ECA also noted that, although mandatory information is supervised well by the Member States, the oversight on voluntary information is often not sufficient. 

Recommendations from the ECA 

Overall, the ECA concludes that although the current European legal framework provides an essential basis for food labelling requirements, it is still incomplete and sometimes insufficiently incorporated. This restricts the ability of consumers to make better-informed decisions. 

In order to solve this, the ECA comes up with 5 recommendations for the Commission to implement by 2027. These recommendations are:

1. Address the current gaps in the European legal framework for food labelling;
2. Step up efforts to analyse labelling practices;
3. Monitor consumer expectations and take action to improve their understanding of food labelling;
4. Strengthen Member States’ checks on voluntary labels and online retail;
5. Improve reporting on food labelling.

For companies active in the Food & Beverage industry, this report may provide an indication of the focus points of the Commission with regard to labelling for the next couple of years. It can be expected that both national supervision and enforcement will increase, and that the interest in compliant food labelling will only increase.

[1] European Court of Auditors, ‘Special report – Food labelling in the EU, Consumers can get lost in the maze of labels’, 2024. 

[2] These topics are: i) trans fats, ii) presence of gluten, iii) country of origin, iv) alcoholic beverages, v) health claims, vi) nutrient profiles, vii) front-of-pack nutrition labelling, viii) precautionary allergen labelling, 
ix) legibility, x) food for vegetarians or vegans, xi) reference intake for specific population groups. 

[3] See paragraphs 26 – 45 of the report. 

[4] European Commission, ‘Consumer market Study on the functioning of voluntary food labelling schemes for consumers in the European Union’, December 2013. 

[5] European Commission, ‘Market study on date marking and other information provided on food labels and food waste prevention’, January 2018.