In today's dynamic regulatory environment, food labeling remains central to consumer trust, industry innovation, and public health. Labeling communicates essential information about ingredients, nutritional value, and production methods—serving both as a compliance requirement and a marketing asset. Recent years have seen shifts in regulatory priorities, with some changes perceived as easing unnecessary burdens on the food industry and others seen as efforts to enhance transparency and safety.

This article examines these developments—distinguishing between areas where regulatory standards are being relaxed and where they are being recovered or strengthened—with particular attention to the evolving "clean" label movement and how food companies are responding.

The Role of Labeling

Food labeling operates at the intersection of public policy and private enterprise. On the one hand, it fulfills regulatory obligations; on the other, it influences purchasing decisions. Clear and accurate labeling, and the internal management systems necessary to support clear and accurate labeling, support:

• Consumer safety: Identifying allergens, additives, and nutritional content
• Operational integrity: Helping food businesses comply with regulatory standards and manage recalls
• Market trust: Enhancing brand perception through transparency and simplicity.

Where Standards are Being Relaxed

Standards are being relaxed in several areas:

1. Inspection frequencies and risk-based oversight. Federal oversight by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has steadily moved toward risk-based inspection models, focusing regulatory resources on higher-risk operations instead of applying uniform scrutiny across all facilities. This approach was formalized in the enactment of the Food Safety Modernization Act but has continued as state/federal partnerships have been forced to navigate budget constraints and prioritize efforts. While some critics interpret this as deregulation, many in the food sector see it as a necessary and long-overdue modernization effort—using data analytics, hazard profiling, and predictive tools to allocate resources more efficiently without compromising safety.
2. Labeling information via QR codes. FDA has embraced QR codes as part of its push for food traceability and transparency. Under the Food Traceability Final Rule, QR codes can help track high-risk foods (like leafy greens or deli salads) across the supply chain, which allows access to data such as harvest dates, packaging sites, and transportation conditions—details that would overwhelm a traditional label. This allows for more information to be provided to consumers and, because QR codes are dynamic, companies can update linked content without reprinting packaging (although only to the extent allowed by FDA packaging and labeling requirements). However, note that a 2022 court decision held that QR-only disclosures are insufficient for USDA's bioengineered food labeling requirements.
3. Organic livestock rule adjustments. Proposals to tighten animal welfare criteria under the organic label have seen modifications to better reflect operational feasibility, especially for small and mid-sized producers. By phasing in changes and offering practical timelines, USDA has shown responsiveness to industry concerns about cost, supply chain disruptions, and implementation logistics, aiming to preserve organic program integrity while reducing regulatory overreach.

Where Standards are Being Recovered or Strengthened

Standards are being recovered or strengthened in several areas:

1. Updated Nutrition Facts label. FDA's modernized Nutrition Facts label, now required on most packaged foods, places emphasis on added sugars and realistic serving sizes. Although implementation was delayed, the changes reflect updated nutrition science and are designed to enhance consumer understanding. Many manufacturers have used the transition as an opportunity to reformulate products or align with evolving health trends, turning compliance into a competitive advantage.
2. Allergen transparency expansions. The addition of sesame as the ninth major allergen under the Food Allergy Safety, Treatment, Education, and Research (FASTER) Act marks the most recent expansion of mandatory allergen disclosures. This change reflects increasing awareness of emerging food allergies and supports improved public health outcomes. Food companies have largely adapted with updated labeling systems and ingredient tracking. In January 2025, FDA released the 5th edition of its Food Allergen Q&A Guidance with updated definitions for milk, egg, and tree nuts. The additions provide guidance on how manufacturers can clearly identify the source of allergens in both the ingredient list and the "Contains" statement. For example, the guidance narrows the term "tree nuts" to 12 specific types, excluding coconut, chestnut, and others. This guidance is intended to give manufacturers clearer guidance regarding allergen labeling while providing more specific information to consumers.
3. Stricter recall requirements and traceability. Enhanced traceability—supported by technologies like blockchain and smart packaging—is becoming the norm. Recent FDA rulemaking is intended to strengthen the food industry's ability to act quickly and transparently during recalls. FDA's Food Traceability Final Rule establishes additional traceability recordkeeping requirements for persons who manufacture, process, pack, or hold foods included on the Food Traceability List, including keeping records containing Key Data Elements associated with specific Critical Tracking Events. With the compliance date for this rule recently extended to mid-2027, there is additional opportunity for supply chain partners to coordinate on the data being provided and to consider more streamlined options. These reforms reflect a policy trend toward accountability, with clearer communication protocols, improved lot tracking, and real-time data expectations.

“Common 'clean label' claims such as 'natural' and 'minimally processed' are not precisely defined by regulators and generally do not generate significant levels of proactive enforcement activity.”

The Rise of the "Clean" Label

While not legally defined, the term "clean label" is a concept that resonates with consumers. Generally, consumers tend to think products with a "clean label" have simpler, more familiar ingredients, and may exclude artificial preservatives, synthetic colors, or certain additives. Consumer demand for clean labels is growing, driven by perceptions of healthfulness, naturalness, and trust.

Many companies, especially leading food brands, have taken a proactive approach, investing in R&D and reformulating products to meet clean label expectations. Common strategies include:

• Simplifying ingredient lists
• Substituting artificial additives with natural alternatives
• Highlighting production methods (e.g., non-GMO, no antibiotics, minimal processing).

These efforts reflect both consumer alignment and competitive positioning. Clean-label strategies have the potential to result in greater brand loyalty and improved shelf appeal.

Regulatory Monitoring of "Clean" and "Natural" Claims

The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) establishes a baseline obligation that labeling (including claims) be truthful and non-misleading. Beyond that baseline obligation, common "clean label" claims such as "natural" and "minimally processed" are not precisely defined by regulators and generally do not generate significant levels of proactive enforcement activity.

Consumer litigation and monitoring by competitors often fills the void. Recent years have brought an uptick in plaintiff's litigation filed under state consumer protection statutes challenging a broad swath of claims. For example, a large cereal manufacturer settled a long, drawn-out class action case for millions over its use of "All Natural" and "100% Natural" claims on packaging. Plaintiffs alleged that the cereals at issue contained synthetic and genetically modified ingredients like pyridoxine hydrochloride and hexane-processed soy oil. As part of the settlement, the manufacturer agreed to remove these claims from its packaging and advertising.

Consider another recent example filed in New York federal court alleging that a brand of juice drinks deceptively labeled the product as containing "All Natural Ingredients" when the drinks contained synthetic citric acid. Consumers claimed they were misled into believing they were buying a product free from artificial additives. The case highlights growing scrutiny over ingredients that sound natural but are industrially produced.

Careful review of claim language and substantiation are key to managing risk. The level of substantiation required will vary based on the type of claim and language used. While many lawsuits on this topic are not ultimately successful, defending such claims is still costly, time-consuming, and could be detrimental to consumer perception and brand value.

Legal review should also be completed to ensure that claims are permissible. Certain types of claims—for example, nutrient content claims (such as "high in" or "good source of") and health claims—are tightly regulated by FDA.

Although the term "clean" has no formal regulatory definition, a review of recent consumer legal actions may serve as informative guideposts to manufacturers and food brands. Further FDA rulemaking, on topics like "healthy" and others, are also relevant and should be considered in labeling decisions.

Labeling in Food Safety Practice

Labeling is central to effective recall management. Detailed, accurate labels facilitate quick identification of affected products, allergens, or contamination sources. From the Biden to Trump Administrations, FDA's focus on faster public notification and digital recordkeeping has raised industry expectations in this area.

“Scrutiny of sodium, sugars, and synthetic additives continues, with many manufacturers voluntarily adopting cleaner formulations and clearer disclosures.”

Despite improved practices, undeclared allergens remain a top cause of recalls. Proper labeling—combined with robust supply chain monitoring and change control—is critical. The industry's investment in automated label verification systems is reducing these risks.

Ingredient transparency and reformulation are also of concern. Scrutiny of sodium, sugars, and synthetic additives continues, with many manufacturers voluntarily adopting cleaner formulations and clearer disclosures. These shifts support public health goals while meeting evolving consumer expectations.

New Tools: Technology and Label Compliance

A host of digital tools and computing technologies are evolving to support transparency and compliance in food labeling:

1. Digital labeling platforms. QR codes, smart labels, and mobile-linked content allow consumers to access a deeper layer of product information—from sourcing and sustainability to certifications and allergens. Digital labeling also helps companies streamline updates and reduce printing constraints. However, innovative labeling approaches may not be consistent with regulatory requirements, so advance due diligence is recommended.
2. Blockchain and end-to-end traceability. Blockchain tools now enable some food companies to trace products from origin to shelf, enhancing recall speed and audit readiness. This level of transparency builds brand trust and satisfies global retailer demands.
3. AI for Label Verification. AI-powered software is increasingly used to review packaging for compliance across changing domestic and international regulations. These systems reduce manual errors and support cross-market consistency.

As U.S. food products compete globally, companies must reconcile domestic labeling policies with international expectations. The EU, for example, maintains stricter standards around GMO labeling and food additive disclosures. Participation in Codex Alimentarius discussions and evolving trade negotiations continues to influence harmonization efforts that reduce trade friction while maintaining safety and quality benchmarks.

Navigating Regulatory Change: A Practical Outlook

The current era of regulatory change reflects two distinct—but not opposing—directions:

• Relaxation efforts are enabling operational flexibility, particularly where data-driven oversight improves efficiency
• Recovery measures are reinforcing public health and consumer clarity, often in response to evolving science or market pressure.

For food safety professionals, the key takeaway is adaptability. Industry teams should continue to:

• Strengthen traceability and digital systems to manage recalls and allergen risks
• Stay current on changing definitions, labeling laws, and disclosure requirements
• Leverage clean-label demand as a path to reformulation, innovation, and brand strength.

Takeaway

Food labeling continues to evolve in response to both regulatory realignments and consumer expectations. While some policies may be relaxed to reduce unnecessary burdens and encourage innovation, others may strengthen the supply chain to reflect health priorities and safety concerns.

References

1. Code of Federal Regulations. 21 C.F.R. § 117. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-21/chapter-I/subchapter-B/part-117.
2. Qian, C., S.I. Murphy, R.H. Orsi, and M. Weidmann. "How Can AI Help Improve Food Safety?" Annual Review of Food Science and Technology 14 (March 2023): 517–538. https://www.annualreviews.org/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-food-060721-013815.
3. Egbosimba, I. "Change the Future of Food with Automation and AI." Tyson Foods. https://thefeed.blog/2023/11/14/future-of-food-ai-artificial-intelligence-food-industry/.
4. IBM. "Blockchain for Supply Chain Solutions." 2025. https://www.ibm.com/blockchain-supply-chain.
5. United States Code. 21 U.S.C. § 321(s). https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=(title:21%20section:321%20edition:prelim).
6. United States Code. 21 U.S.C. § 348(a). https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section348&num=0&edition=prelim.
7. Code of Federal Regulations. 21 C.F.R. § 170.3.
8. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). "Regulatory Framework for Substances Intended for Use in Human Food or Animal Food on the Basis of the Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) Provision of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act: Guidance for Industry." November 2017. https://www.fda.gov/media/109117/download.
9. LaMotte, S. "RFK Jr. Wants to Eliminate FDA's Controversial Food Additive Program. Here's Why That Matters." CNN. March 12, 2025. https://www.cnn.com/2025/03/11/health/gras-reform-kennedy-wellness/index.html.
10. Buss, D. "How AI is Revolutionizing Product Development." Institute of Food Technologists (IFT). October 4, 2024. https://www.ift.org/news-and-publications/food-technology-magazine/issues/2024/october/features/how-ai-is-revolutionizing-product-development.
11. FDA. "Considerations for the Use of Artificial Intelligence to Support Regulatory Decision-Making for Drug and Biological Products." Draft Guidance. January 2025. https://www.fda.gov/media/184830/download.
12. FDA. "Marketing Submission Recommendations for a Predetermined Change Control Plan for Artificial Intelligence-Enabled Device Software Functions." December 4, 2024. https://www.fda.gov/media/166704/download.
13. FDA. "Predetermined Change Control Plans for Machine Learning-Enabled Medical Devices: Guiding Principles." Content current as of December 3, 2024. https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/software-medical-device-samd/predetermined-change-control-plans-machine-learning-enabled-medical-devices-guiding-principles.