After flip-flops, India moves to mandate warning labels on packaged food

India’s food safety regulator has reversed course and proposed mandatory front-of-pack warning labels for packaged foods and beverages, Reuters reported, citing a Supreme Court filing seen by the news agency. Food and beverage majors have been contending that such labels are confusing, while food safety experts and the Supreme Court have batted for such information. India’s packaged food market is valued at more than US$100 billion.

The news agency reported that the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) outlined the proposal in a filing submitted to the Supreme Court. Under the plan, described in the filing reviewed by Reuters, products found to be high in two or more of three key nutrients — saturated fat, sugar, or salt — would carry a red hexagonal warning symbol on the front of the package, flagging categories such as ‘high fat,’ ‘high sugar,’ ‘high salt,’ or ‘highly sweetened beverage.’

Per Reuters’ reporting, FSSAI said the labels are meant to help consumers, particularly children and other vulnerable groups, make more informed choices at the point of purchase.

According to Reuters, the announcement follows weeks of mounting public pressure. Earlier this year, the government had quietly shelved a similar labeling initiative after food companies privately opposed it — a decision that only became widely known after Reuters first reported on the internal industry lobbying, the news agency noted in its latest dispatch.

Reuters said that since its earlier story was published, consumers and health experts have voiced anger on social media, many pointing out that companies such as Coca-Cola and Nestlé already comply with comparable warning-label requirements in European markets.

Citing recordings of a tense meeting held in March, Reuters reported this week that industry executives had lobbied hard against the labeling plan. Per Reuters, a senior Coca-Cola India executive argued that warning symbols were unlikely to meaningfully change consumer behavior, suggesting it would be overly simplistic to assume an icon on a package could inform a consumer who does not already read ingredient lists.

Reuters reported that the executive also contended Indian doctors had already done effective work educating patients about which foods to avoid, and that industry efforts should instead focus on encouraging portion control.

Following that meeting, Reuters reported, FSSAI appeared to align with the industry’s position, telling the Supreme Court in August that matching international labeling standards would be “difficult.”

Court pressure

The regulator’s shift comes after repeated rebukes from India’s Supreme Court, which has been hearing a public interest litigation filed by the non-profit group 3S and Our Health.

As Reuters and other media reports have noted, a bench comprising Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Viswanathan gave the government a final two-week deadline earlier this month to commit to a clear labeling policy, warning that the court would dictate the outcome if the government failed to act. According to those reports, the judges also questioned the government’s reluctance to prioritize public health, particularly for children.

The court had previously suggested India adopt an Israel-style system, under which a red warning label applies if even a single nutrient — salt, sugar, or fat — exceeds a set threshold. By contrast, Reuters noted, India’s new proposal is more lenient, requiring two nutrients to be elevated before a red label is triggered.

The agency cited a recent study published in The Lancet projecting that roughly 450 million Indians could be overweight or obese by 2050.

According to the latest filing on 7 August, as reported by Reuters, FSSAI plans to roll out the new labeling requirements in phases to give manufacturers time to adjust, with single-ingredient food products exempted from the rules.

The regulator had previously floated alternative approaches, including a star-rating system modeled on the Indian Nutrition Rating and numerical nutrition disclosures, though health advocates have argued these are less intuitive for consumers than a clear, symbol-based warning.

Reuters quoted Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi, lead counsel for 3S and Our Health, saying the group’s experts would review the government’s proposal.