The message from the EU Court of Auditors is clear: “Food labeling in the EU is often misleading.” It should help people to make the right decisions when shopping. However, European consumers are being confronted with more and more promises, logos, slogans, quality seals, and ratings that are not only confusing, but can be downright misleading, according to a 65-page special report by the EU Court of Auditors.
According to the auditors, the EU regulations did ensure that the labels contained basic information for consumers, which is a good starting point. However, they also found a “number of worrying gaps in the legislation” as well as problems with controls and sanctions.
“Creativity” with Claims on Packaging
“Rather than providing clarity, food labels often lead to confusion; there are hundreds of different labeling systems, logos, and advertising claims that shoppers have to decipher,” explains EU auditor Keit Pentus-Rosimannus. Companies are “very creative when it comes to the information on packaging.”
According to the auditors, certain forms of labeling even put some consumers at a disadvantage. The criticism is that food allergy sufferers sometimes have to deal with vague statements such as “may contain ... .” In practice, this restricts their choices. According to the Court of Auditors, the use of labels such as “vegan” or “vegetarian” is also not regulated. There is no EU-wide definition for such products.
The auditors are also critical of the fact that systems for labeling the nutritional value on the front of packaging such as Nutri-Score, NutrInform, and Keyhole are not used in all member states. However, standardized regulations could help consumers to get guidance. Instead, the coexistence of different systems in the EU countries, each with a different message, has the exact opposite effect.
Too Many Labels and Logos
Countless voluntary labels, logos, and information intended to entice consumers to buy products was reinforcing this. So-called “clean labels” about the absence of certain ingredients, such as “antibiotic-free”, should also be viewed critically. Non-certified properties such as “fresh” or “natural” are also mentioned, as well as a wide range of environmental claims that amount to greenwashing.
The EU Court of Auditors does not consider consumer education to be a high priority. The Court of Auditors is also not satisfied with the official controls. Food companies could take advantage of the “weak controls and sanctions”, it says. In the case of mandatory information, monitoring generally works well. However, voluntary, nutritional or health claims, or the online sale of food are rarely – if ever – checked. In addition, the fines imposed for infringements are too low in the opinion of the inspectors.
The Chair of the Consumer Protection Committee in the EU Parliament, Anna Cavazzini (Greens), understands the criticism. The EU legal framework is complex and the control system for claims is often a national or even state matter. She points out that the EU recently introduced stricter requirements for labels with environmental claims in the fight against greenwashing. These new rules must now be consistently implemented and applied.
Peter Loosen, Managing Director of the German Food Association, explaines that the fact that some issues are still not regulated – “for example the ‘may contain’ labeling of allergens or the requirements for vegetarian and vegan products” – is causing problems for the industry.
The EU defines “labels” as “any inscriptions, trademarks, or marks, pictorial or other descriptive matter written, printed, embossed, marked, engraved, or stamped on or attached to the packaging or container of the foodstuff”.
According to this special report, it is, therefore, not the packaging manufacturers but the manufacturers of the respective foodstuff that are the focus of criticism. For the packaging industry, stricter guidelines against greenwashing mean, among other things, that new labels have to be designed.
By Anna Ntemiris, editor
