EU GMO Labeling Rules

The US system is a single federal disclosure standard that runs separately from product approval, and it is looser than the EU's on most points. It is USDA's National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard (7 CFR Part 66). Labelling depends on whether modified genetic material can be detected in the final food, not on whether the food was produced from a GMO. The tolerance is 5% per ingredient instead of 0.9%. Companies can disclose with text, a symbol, a QR-type digital link or a text message, and it covers human food only, not feed.

Approach: The datasets I can search hold only the FDA's guidance catalogue for this topic, not the USDA rule, so the legal detail comes from 7 CFR Part 66 (1 January 2025 CFR edition), the 2016 statute (Public Law 114-216), the USDA fact sheet and the 2026 USDA Unified Agenda, all on official US government sites. The USDA FAQ pages wouldn't open for me.

EU vs US side by side

Point	EU (Reg. 1829/2003)	US (7 CFR Part 66)
Legal basis	Labelling is tied to each GMO authorisation	A standalone disclosure standard run by USDA's Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS), separate from safety review
What triggers labelling	Contains, consists of, or is produced from GMOs	Food containing modified genetic material that is detectable; the modification must be made by in vitro rDNA techniques and be impossible to get by conventional breeding or find in nature (§66.1)
Highly refined products (oils, sugars)	Must be labelled ("produced from")	Not a bioengineered food if records show the modified material is undetectable (§66.9). A voluntary "derived from bioengineering" statement is allowed (§66.116(b))
Threshold	0.9% adventitious or technically unavoidable presence, per ingredient	5% inadvertent or technically unavoidable presence, per ingredient (§66.5(c))
Scope list	Event-specific authorisations in the Commission register	AMS List of Bioengineered Foods (§66.6, below)
Wording	"genetically modified (…)" / "produced from genetically modified (…)", next to the ingredient	"Bioengineered food" or "Contains a bioengineered food ingredient" (§66.102). It is a single statement, not marked per ingredient
Format	Text only	Your choice of text, the green "BIOENGINEERED" symbol, a digital link, or a text message (§66.100(b), §§66.102-66.108)
Placement	In the ingredients list or a footnote of equal font size	Information panel next to the manufacturer/distributor name, the principal display panel, or another visible panel if space is short (§66.100(d))
Caterers	Food supplied to mass caterers is in scope	Restaurants and "similar retail food establishments" are exempt (§66.5(a))
Small businesses	No size exemption	Exempt if annual receipts are under $2.5 million. Small manufacturers ($2.5M to under $10M) may also use a phone number or website (§66.1, §66.5(b), §66.110)
Feed	Labelled (Arts 24-26)	Not covered: "food" means food intended for human consumption (§66.1)
Products from animals fed GM feed	(not covered in my earlier summary)	Not bioengineered just because of the feed (§66.5(d))
Meat, poultry and egg products	Covered	Covered only if the most predominant ingredient (or the second, after broth, stock or water) falls under FDA labelling rules (§66.3(b))
Organic	(not covered in my earlier summary)	Certified organic food is exempt (§66.5(e))

Source for the US column: 7 CFR Part 66, govinfo.

US details with no EU equivalent

• List of Bioengineered Foods (§66.6): alfalfa, apple (Arctic varieties), canola, corn, cotton, eggplant (BARI Bt Begun varieties), papaya (ringspot virus-resistant varieties), pineapple (pink flesh varieties), potato, salmon (AquAdvantage), soybean, summer squash (coat protein-mediated virus-resistant varieties), sugarbeet and sugarcane (Bt insect-resistant varieties). AMS reviews the list every year. Companies have 18 months after an update takes effect to change their labels (§66.7(b)).
• Actual knowledge (§66.109): A company that knows a food is bioengineered must disclose it, even if the food is not on the List.
• Digital link rules (§66.106): The link must carry "Scan here for more food information" plus "Call [1-000-000-0000] for more food information". It must open straight to a product page with no marketing content and must not collect personal data. On small (<40 sq in) and very small (<12 sq in) packages, "Scan for info", "Text for info" or "Call for info" is enough (§66.112).
• Records and enforcement:
  • Companies must keep records for 2 years after sale and hand them to AMS within 5 business days of a request (§§66.302, 66.304).
  • Enforcement works through complaints, record audits, a hearing, and publication of a summary of the findings (§§66.400-66.406).
  • The statute gives USDA no recall authority over disclosure failures (Pub. L. 114-216, sec. 293(g)(4)).
• Federal preemption: States may not set or keep any GE-labelling requirement for food or seed in interstate commerce. This includes food served in restaurants (Pub. L. 114-216, sec. 295(b)). This is why there is no state-level layer to check.
• "Non-GMO" claims:
  • A food is not "non-GMO" or "not bioengineered" just because it doesn't need a disclosure.
  • Organic certification is enough to support a claim that a food is free of bioengineering (Pub. L. 114-216, sec. 294(c) and sec. 2).
  • The FDA has final guidance (March 2019) on voluntary labelling of whether foods have or have not been derived from genetically engineered plants ^[5].
  • It also has a draft guidance on the same question for genetically engineered Atlantic salmon ^[6].
• Safety review is separate: The FDA handles GE food safety through its 1992 Statement of Policy and voluntary consultation procedures ^[7]. It issued guidance on foods from genome-edited plants in February 2024 ^[8]. None of this decides the label. Labelling follows only the USDA definition, which turns on rDNA techniques and whether the change could be obtained conventionally. The EU instead uses its new NGT Category 1 and Category 2 split.

Key dates and pending change

• Dates: Mandatory compliance began 1 January 2022 (§66.13(c)). The List was last updated by 88 FR 83311 (29 November 2023).
• Pending change: The 2026 USDA Unified Agenda lists "National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard: Court Remand" (RIN 0581-AE52). This responds to the Ninth Circuit's 31 October 2025 decision in Natural Grocers et al. v. Rollins by addressing deficiencies in the 2018 final rule. A proposed rule was scheduled for August 2026 (Federal Register, 14 August 2026). I found no published proposed rule yet. The agenda doesn't say which provisions will change. The digital-link and text-message options are the ones most likely to be affected.

If it would help, I can map specific EU-authorised events (for example soybean or maize lines) to their US List category and disclosure wording.

In Great Britain the GM labelling rules are still essentially the EU rules, carried over into domestic law after Brexit. Food or feed that contains, consists of or is produced from an authorised GMO must be labelled "genetically modified (…)" or "produced from genetically modified (…)", with the same 0.9% tolerance for adventitious or technically unavoidable presence. Three things now set the UK apart from the EU:

• Separate authorisations: GB authorises GMOs itself and keeps its own register.
• Northern Ireland: it still follows EU GMO law.
• England's precision-bred plants: they have been taken out of the GM labelling and traceability rules. Scotland and Wales have no equivalent.

Approach: The datasets I can search hold no UK GM food or feed records, so everything below comes from legislation.gov.uk, GOV.UK and FSA pages that I opened. I couldn't open an official page setting out the government's labelling policy for precision-bred food, so I don't quote it.

1. Great Britain: assimilated Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003

• Scope (Art. 12): This covers food delivered to final consumers or mass caterers in GB that contains or consists of GMOs, or is produced from them. Labelling is not needed if GM material is no more than 0.9% of each ingredient and its presence is adventitious or technically unavoidable. Lower thresholds can now be set by the UK "appropriate authority" rather than by EU comitology (Art. 12, legislation.gov.uk).

• Wording and placement (Art. 13): These are the same as the EU options I listed last time:

  • The statement goes in brackets in the ingredients list, or in a footnote in the same font size.
  • Category wording: "contains genetically modified (organism)".
  • Loose food, or packs whose largest surface is under 10 cm²: the information goes on or next to the display.
  • Extra statements are required where the authorisation calls for them (different composition, ethical or religious concerns).

  The text was last revised on 27 February 2025, when S.I. 2025/82 swapped in "assimilated" terminology (Art. 13).

• Practical scope, per FSA guidance:

  • GM-derived flour, cooking oils and glucose syrups must be labelled.
  • Foods made with GM processing aids do not, for example cheese clotted with GM enzymes.
  • Meat, milk and eggs from animals fed GM feed do not.

  (FSA, Genetically modified foods)

• Feed: GM content must be indicated on the feed label. The 0.9% exemption applies to approved varieties. Assimilated Regulation (EU) 619/2011 allows a 0.1% tolerance for certain unauthorised varieties whose authorisation is pending (FSA, GM in animal feed).

• Products containing GMOs (assimilated Reg. 1830/2003, Art. 4): Pre-packaged products must say "This product contains genetically modified organisms" or name the organism, and must pass on GMO information through the supply chain (Art. 4).

2. Authorisation: the main difference from the EU in practice

• A GMO must be authorised for GB before it goes on the market there. Ministers (the "appropriate authority") decide, and the FSA keeps the register at data.food.gov.uk. Applicants include their proposed labelling in the dossier (FSA GMO authorisation guidance).
• The 0.9% tolerance applies only to GMOs permitted in GB or the EU (Richmond Trading Standards, a local-authority page).
• Because GB and the EU authorise separately, an event can be authorised in one and not the other. Event-specific label wording therefore comes from the GB register, not the Commission register.

3. Northern Ireland

• Under the Windsor Framework, EU food law on GMOs continues to apply in NI. Businesses follow the European Commission authorisation process, and GM ingredients sold in NI must be on the EU register (FSA GMO authorisation guidance).
• Pre-packed retail goods moved under the NI Retail Movement Scheme can meet GB standards instead (FSA, GM in animal feed).
• In practice, EU rules govern NI. That includes the EU NGT Regulation from 17 July 2028.

4. England only: precision-bred organisms (PBOs)

• Legal basis: The Genetic Technology (Precision Breeding) Act 2023 and Regulations 2025 (S.I. 2025/581). The Regulations came into force on 13 November 2025 and apply in England only (reg. 1; FSA PBO guidance, updated 4 September 2026).
• Out of the GM rules: In England, Schedule 5 takes precision-bred plants out of the GMO definition in Reg. 1829/2003. It also disapplies Reg. 1830/2003 to products containing PB plants and to food and feed produced from them (Schedule 5). So the "genetically modified" labelling and traceability duties above don't apply to them in England.
• Instead, a separate authorisation: PB food and feed needs an FSA marketing authorisation, under Tier 1 (reg. 20) or Tier 2 (reg. 22, with a bespoke FSA safety assessment). Authorisations are recorded in the FSA register, which shows conditions and the nations where each applies (FSA PBO guidance; register guidance).
• No PB labelling duty found: Neither the Regulations' contents nor the FSA's PBO guidance contains a mandatory PB labelling provision that I could find. The guidance says nothing at all about labelling.
• Scotland and Wales: PB food and feed authorised in England can be sold there under the UK Internal Market Act. If it is further processed in Scotland or Wales, though, it falls under GMO food and feed law (FSA PBO guidance).

UK vs EU vs US at a glance

Point	EU	GB (England / Scotland / Wales)	Northern Ireland	US
Legal text	Reg. 1829/2003, 1830/2003	Assimilated versions of the same	EU law (Windsor Framework)	7 CFR Part 66
Label wording	"genetically modified (…)"	Same	Same	"Bioengineered" (text, symbol, link, SMS)
Threshold	0.9%	0.9% (GB- or EU-permitted GMOs)	0.9%	5%
Highly refined derivatives (oils, syrups)	Labelled	Labelled	Labelled	Not if undetectable
Animal products from GM feed	Not labelled (my earlier summary didn't cover this)	Not labelled	Not labelled	Not labelled
Authorisation / register	Commission register	GB ministers, FSA register	Commission register	Not linked to labelling
Gene-edited plants	NGT Cat. 1: no consumer label from 2028; Cat. 2: GM labelling	England: PB plants outside GM labelling; Scotland and Wales: still GM rules	EU NGT rules	Not bioengineered if the change could be obtained conventionally

I can compare specific events on the GB register with their EU authorisations, including the label wording, if that would help.

Short answer: yes in the US and Great Britain, if the claim is true and you can prove it, but bare "GM free" is the weakest wording you could pick in any of these markets. No EU or UK law defines "GM free". Several EU countries instead have their own defined claims and ban other wordings: Germany allows only "Ohne Gentechnik", and France sets thresholds for "sans OGM". In the US, absence claims are policed under the general "truthful and not misleading" rules. Meat, poultry and egg products also need FSIS label approval and third-party certification first.

Approach: I checked the EU Food Information Regulation (consolidated to 1 April 2025) and the FDA's food guidance catalogue. For the FDA, USDA, UK trading standards, German, French and Austrian rules I relied on official government pages and the Federal Register. I couldn't open the full text of the FDA's 2019 guidance (the PDF is no longer online), so I don't quote its recommended wording.

EU (and Northern Ireland)

• No harmonised GM-free claim. The Food Information Regulation has no GM-specific provision. Voluntary statements fall under Article 36(2): they must not mislead (Art. 7), must not be ambiguous or confusing, and must be based on scientific data where appropriate ^[9].
• The main risk is Article 7(1)(c). It bans suggesting a food has special characteristics "when in fact all similar foods possess such characteristics, in particular by specifically emphasising the presence or absence of certain ingredients" ^[10]. A GM-free claim on a food where no GM version is on the market is exposed on this point.
• The 0.9% threshold doesn't make a food "GM free". Falling under it only removes the duty to label; it says nothing about absence.
• National schemes in the country where you sell set the actual rules:

  • Germany: the only permitted wording is "Ohne Gentechnik", under the EG-Gentechnik-Durchführungsgesetz. "Gentechnikfrei" and "ohne gentechnische Zusätze" are not allowed.

    • No GMOs or GMO-derived ingredients may be used, nor additives, processing aids, flavourings, vitamins, amino acids or enzymes made with GM microorganisms.
    • Food control tolerates up to 1 g/kg.
    • Animal products need minimum GM-free feeding periods, for example 12 months before slaughter for cattle, 4 months for pigs and 10 weeks for poultry. Up to 0.9% adventitious GM content in feed is acceptable.

    (BMLEH)

  • France (Décret 2012-128, in force from 1 July 2012):

    • "Sans OGM" on plant ingredients means at most 0.1% accidental, technically unavoidable presence.
    • Animal products use "nourri sans OGM (<0.1%)" or "(<0.9%)", with minimum feeding periods.
    • Honey uses "sans OGM dans un rayon de 3 km".
    • GMO-derived processing aids are banned unless no alternative is commercially available.

    (Légifrance)

  • Austria: the Austrian Food Code guideline on GM-free production applies, and the inspection body's name must appear on the label (Lebensmittelbuch, section 7).

• Northern Ireland: EU food law applies there, as covered last time.

Great Britain

• There is no statutory definition here either, so the assimilated fair-information rules apply.
• Local trading standards advice (Liverpool City Council, updated May 2025) says claims are "currently permitted as long as they can be substantiated" for products "consistently 100% free from genetically modified material", but that "it is best practice to avoid such statements" (Liverpool trading standards).
• I found no FSA page of its own on GM-free claims.

United States

• FDA (most foods): voluntary absence labelling is acceptable if it is truthful and not misleading. A food is misbranded if its labelling is "false or misleading in any particular" (FD&C Act 403(a)(1)).

  • The FDA expects you to back the claim with records and with certifications or affidavits from farmers, processors and others in the supply chain. It says segregation, testing or third-party validation is not necessary (80 FR 73194, 24 Nov 2015).
  • The current guidance is the March 2019 final version ^[5]. Salmon has a separate draft ^[6].

• USDA disclosure law: a food is not "non-GMO" or "not bioengineered" just because it doesn't need a bioengineered disclosure. Organic certification is enough on its own to support such a claim (Pub. L. 114-216).

• Meat, poultry and egg products (FSIS): these "negative claims" need label approval before use. You must:

  • show compliance with a third-party certifier's published standards;
  • print a website address on the label where consumers can learn about the claim and the certification.

  Certified organic products are exempt from the certifier requirement if the claim is linked by asterisk to "Produced in compliance with the USDA Organic Regulations" (84 FR 71890, 30 Dec 2019).

Wording that tends to hold up

• Be specific and verifiable: "made from non-GM soya", or in the US "not bioengineered" or "no GMO ingredients", rather than an absolute "GM free".
• Use the national term for Germany or France, with its criteria met.
• Don't imply the product is better because it is GM-free. The French decree, for example, bans claiming special nutritional, health or environmental qualities on that basis alone (Légifrance).

If you tell me the product type and the countries you sell in, I can work out the exact claim and supporting records you'd need for each.