European consumers baffled by food labelling spaghetti

Delays to an update of the EU food labelling framework have contributed to a proliferation of voluntary schemes and claims that confuse rather than inform consumers, the European Court of Auditors (ECA) found in a report published on Monday.

While food labelling has the potential to empower consumers to make healthier and more informed decisions, the ECA report pointed to "notable gaps" in the current regulatory framework.

To fill these gaps, various voluntary initiatives like Nutri-Score, the NutrInform Battery, and Keyhole have emerged. However, rather than aiding consumers, these competing schemes have added to the food label chaos.

“Consumers are simply lost,” said ECA member Keit Pentus-Rosimannus. She noted that the coexistence of multiple labelling systems—each with distinct meanings and purposes—undermines their intended role of guiding choices.

The lack of clarity extends beyond nutritional labels to include environmental claims, slogans, and undefined terms like “fresh”, “natural”, and “antibiotic-free”, many of which risk misleading consumers.

“The EU rules are full of holes that leave consumers vulnerable, and food companies can and of course are happy to use this legal vacuum,” Pentus-Rosimannus warned, adding that food companies present products as healthier or more eco-friendly than they truly are.

Rules stagnation

While some updates have been made through other regulations—such as the General Food Law and Claims regulation—key aspects like nutrition labelling, green claims, animal welfare standards, and origin labelling remain fragmented, often handled at the national level.

The EU’s main food labelling framework, the Food Information to Consumers Regulation, has not been updated since its introduction in 2011.

Despite discussions during the previous legislative mandate, efforts to modernise these rules stalled, partly due to political sensitivities and opposition from certain member states over Nutri-score, the main nutritional labelling in the running to get the nod from the EU.

ECA member Pentus-Rosimannus acknowledged the complexity of achieving consensus across the EU, given diverse national traditions and perspectives.

“But this cannot be an excuse for allowing the status quo to continue indefinitely,” she said.

Consumer advocacy groups like BEUC are also urging swift action to address these shortcomings with its senior policy officer Emma Calvert pointing out the urgent need for a unified front-of-pack nutritional label.

“The lack of the promised EU front-of-pack nutritional label deprives consumers of an essential tool to make healthier choices at a time when obesity and overweight rates are alarmingly high,” she said.

The European Commission responded to the ECA report, acknowledging the need for stricter rules to protect consumers from misleading claims.

However, the EU executive did not specify plans to update the Food Information to Consumers Regulation - which remains a sensitive issue - instead referencing upcoming rules on environmental claims.

In his successful hearing as EU agriculture and food commissioner, Christophe Hansen admitted the need for greater coherence in labelling. “We have so many voluntary labels that are not harmonised,” he said, calling for a “streamlining exercise” to enhance both consumer trust and the functioning of the internal market.